Trump is winning election lawsuits, in case you haven’t heard

submitted by Questionable from (lifesitenews.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Moreover, one has to locate the PDF in the blog, download it, select a link in it and get this:

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm

Here we see that the concept of "winning" a case is not really at issue. There are some partially successful cases among the numerous unsuccessful cases.

So typical for anything related to Trump: all hat and no cattle, or makes about as much sense as tits on a turtle.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I don't get why Trump just bumbled his way in the end where he was strong in the beginning and delayed the NWO plans.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

It wasn't him. Legal teams had no reliable evidence to submit. He's also pocketed much of the money sent to him for his lawsuits.

[–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Reliable is relative to what the powers at be want to here. You think when the Jews went to courts against the Nazis and their cases were thrown out they had no viable evidence?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

This:

Reliable is relative to what the powers at be want to here.

Is unrelated to this:

You think when the Jews went to courts against the Nazis and their cases were thrown out they had no viable evidence?

Jewish families had records of what the Nazis took, and wanted it back.

Giuliani and associated morons had no reliable evidence of election fraud. Instead he hired a circus of gossipy lunatics who said they knew people who knew people who saw stuff that didn't seem like proper vote counting for a few hundred ballots here or there.

[–]TheEvilNick 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

They actually had proof but no courts would even let them present it. You can't say "no widespread proof", you're already admitting to proof. Dominion tried to gag order everyone to stop accusing them but literally no one even batted an eye and kept pushing because they knew if it goes to court dominion would be biting their nose to spite their face. They're going to continue to push and the mainstream will continue to deny Hopi g it will just go away. Right now they're already winning a case in AZ to deep search dominons machines and servers there. Too had just like hillarythat shits wiped. There have been multiple cases in lower courts and lower elections where Dems have already been caught using illegal means to win, such as dead votes. Two elections have been overturned due to it. More will come. Shits gonna get weird and those who think Russia is the problem are blind to China and the fact every other country in the world wants us fighting among ourselvss. Why do you think every other country pushed for us to take so many immigrants yet takes a smidgen of what we do?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

OK - I agree these are good points. And I genuinely hope Dominion goes out of business and we return to paper ballots and simple counting machines, rather than electronic voting machine options.

But we do know something about Giuliani's evidence because he was permitted to submit the eyewitness accounts at Michigan Hearing. And the star witness was this unhinged, entirely onconvincing person: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2f3aw9rk30

[–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

what makes her unhinged? just asking.

[–]johndenverjr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

she is a transgenders.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Trying to push a narrative for which she has no real evidence, lecturing others about what she say, pushing an agenda that is unfounded, getting really excited about this unfounded information, trying to manipulate the process, focusing on her situation as a victim, etc, etc.

[–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

so how many people believed the russia hoax without real evidence? it was built on a fake dossier from a hack. How many people clung to the NYtimes story about russian bounties on American soldiers with literally ZERO evidence. How many people jumped on the Ukrainian phone attack hit from nothing but a narrative built from someone who wouldnt even show their face?

Testimony is what is supposed to initiate investigating for truth. Its how cases are built. People are put away for life or even death row on nothing but eye witness testimony. The woman was a dominion employee. You cant get much more eyewitness that an employee. It should have been enough to halt any actions on their machines and servers but they couldnt wait to pull their machines out and wipe/alter their software.