(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Show me in the transcripts of the 62 court cases claims & decisive evidence of the same [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags'] Date: 2023-04-01 I am just done with the conspiracy theorists about the 2020 election. I don’t care what you say in a podium or on Fox “News” because you don’t have to prove statements to any standard or face consequences in front of a podium or on Fox “News”. Your claims mean nothing if you can’t prove them and we need an independent, nonpartisan agency and people to evaluate the claims and the evidence. If you want to make a credible claim that anybody who is not MAGA should accept these claims, then this is how you have to do it. Otherwise, you have not shown sufficient objective evidence to convince an objective agency or person or group of people that there was sufficient voter fraud to alter the outcome of any one state, much less alter the outcome of the entire presidential election. First, if you lose based upon standing, you should have lost because it means that you don't have any real, organic connection to the event or issue being litigated. Should I be allowed to file a wrongful death suit against a company that may or may not have some liability for the death of a person whom I don't know, have never met, am unrelated to, and have no actual ties to? Of course not. Standing simply means you have a real and organic connection to what is being litigated and it was defended by no less a legal conservative than Antonin Scalia. The 2020 case was not right after President Obama had nominated and had confirmed many qualified judges and justices to the federal courts. No, it was after Donald Trump had spent four years packing the courts with right wing hacks, zealots, ideologues, many of whom the ABA considered "unqualified". Now, I don't give a fuck what the liars claim at a podium or in front of the conservative press because they won't have to prove and provide persuasive and probative evidence for their claims. No, I care about what they proved in court. If they didn't make a claim in court, then ipso facto, they could NOT defend the claim. So, show me from the transcripts of the 62 cases where I can read their claims of a crime or a combination of crimes which would have been sufficient to alter enough votes in each of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin so that the winner of each of these cases would be altered. Show me where the crimes they allege altered enough votes to change who won each of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. Then show me the evidence, the proof, that they had to back the claims, sufficient to convince either a federal judge or a jury. More than HALF the judges and justices before whom they presented the cases were nominated by a republican president and confirmed by a republican Senate, often nominated by Donald Trump himself. So where do his lawyers even CLAIM, let alone prove, that there were enough election crimes to alter more than 10,000 votes by giving Joe Biden 10,000 fraudulently cast votes or take away more than 10,000 validly cast votes that Donald Trump earned or switch more than 5,000 votes from Trump to Biden in Arizona ? Show me that in the transcripts of the 62 cases. Show me where they provide decisive, probative evidence that such election crimes had actually taken place in Arizona, evidence sufficient to convince the judge or a jury in the transcripts of the 62 cases. Show me where they made a claim, much less provide proof of or for, of sufficient election crimes to alter enough votes so that Biden won 10,000 more than he actually did win or Trump won 10,000 less votes than he actually won or some combination thereof or how 5,000 votes were switched from Trump to Biden in Georgia. Show me compelling, decisive, probative evidence for sufficient election crimes such that Biden was given 10,000 votes he did not earn or Trump was given 10,000 fewer votes than he actually earned or some combination thereof or how 5,000 votes were switched from Trump to Biden in Georgia in the transcripts of the 62 court cases. Show me where in the transcripts of the 62 court cases a judge or a jury found that the evidence presented by Trump's legal team was sufficient to convince them that these election crimes in which either Joe Biden was given more than 10,000 votes he did not earn or Donald Trump had more than 10,000 votes he did earn taken away or some combination thereof or more than 5,000 votes were fraudulently changed from Donald Trump to Joe Biden actually happened in Georgia. Show me where in the transcripts of the 62 court cases that Trump's legal team made claims that Biden was awarded 20,000 more votes than he actually earned or Trump was given 20,000 fewer votes than he actually earned or some combination thereof or more than 10,000 votes were fraudulently switched from Donald Trump to Joe Biden in Wisconsin. Show me where in the transcripts of the 62 court cases Trump's legal team provided decisive and probative evidence sufficient to convince a federal judge or a jury that 20,000 votes were awarded to Biden that he didn't earn or that Trump was given 20,000 fewer votes than he actually earned or some combination thereof or 10,000 votes were fraudulently switched from Donald Trump to Joe Biden in Wisconsin. The easiest way to flip the electoral college vote in the 2020 presidential election from Joe Biden to Donald Trump is to flip Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin from Joe Biden to Donald Trump. That's the fewest amount of votes that need to be changed in order to alter who won the 2020 presidential election, slightly more than 40,000 votes. If you can't show such election crimes in these three states in the transcripts of the 62 court cases, then it is not realistic to think that you would find evidence of sufficient election crimes elsewhere. In fact, if you don’t find evidence of sufficient election crimes to overturn a single state’s outcome in the transcripts of the 62 court cases, then Trump’s legal team has never proven it. Rather, Trump’s own legal team had so little faith in proving sufficient voter fraud elsewhere that they didn’t even try to bring it to court. . Trump’s team has brought forth 62 lawsuits since the 2020 election, which resulted in 61 losses and a single victory, which California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren said would not have affected the outcome of the election. In her questioning of GOP election lawyer Ben Ginsberg (pictured here), he explained that he’s looked at those 62 lawsuits “that include more than 180 counts” and “about half of those cases were dismissed at the procedural stage.” The reason for the dismissals, Ginsberg said, was there was “no credible evidence of fraud produced by the Trump campaign or his supporters.” On top of that, he added, in cases that were not immediately dismissed, “in no instance did a court find that the charges of fraud were real.” . . Of the 62 lawsuits filed challenging the presidential election, 61 have failed, according to Elias. Some cases were dismissed for lack of standing and others based on the merits of the voter fraud allegations. The decisions have came from both Democratic-appointed and Republican-appointed judges – including federal judges appointed by Trump. The lone victory for the Trump team was a small one. A Pennsylvania judge sided with the Trump campaign, ruling that voters could not go back and “cure” their ballots if they failed to provide proper identification three days after the election. The ruling affected few votes and did not change the outcome in Pennsylvania, which Biden won by 81,660 votes. . They’ve published a report called “Lost, Not Stolen,” which re-examines the lawsuits filed by Trump and his supporters calling for election results to be overturned in six tightly contested battleground states: Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin. The ‘Lost, Not Stolen’ report says Trump’s failed legal challenges should inspire more trust in our election security. David Hoppe contributed to the report. He served as former chief of staff to two Republican Congressional Majority Leaders and has decades of legal experience in D.C. “I’m certainly not a ‘Never-Trumper.’ I voted for Donald Trump twice for President… if the evidence had said there was something wrong with this election and it was stolen, we would have said that,” Hoppe said. “We looked through the evidence and it didn’t add up. It was woefully deficient, as a matter of fact.” . [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/1/2161509/-Show-me-in-the-transcripts-of-the-62-court-cases-claims-amp-decisive-evidence-of-the-same Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/