In a Facebook discussion Willis Eschenbach makes some excellent points:

Roger Scott said:

===
"And yet you can’t get one Republican judge to agree with you."
===

This, and your claim of over 50 fraud claims losing in court, piqued my interest. I thought the number seemed high.

In response, I asked you to find one of them that found no fraud, rather than it being dismissed on other grounds.

First, you were right. There were 55 cases.

Of these, 40 were either dropped by the plaintiffs (generally for lack of time and money) or dismissed on procedural grounds.

In 6 of them, there is an ongoing appeal. I did love it that in one case the judge said "Come back on Jan 22nd, we'll take up the appeal then."

In 3 of them, there is an ongoing trial ... yeah, like that helps.

That leaves us with exactly six cases where judges actually ruled on them.

Four were dismissed for lack of standing.

One, hilariously, was denied because it was filed too late ... the court said there was plenty of time to file it before the election.

And in the other, the court ruled that yes, despite Democrat claims to the contrary, observers actually had to be allowed observe. Makes a man wonder what they didn't want the observers to see ...

In short ... I find none where the court actually took the trouble to allow the plaintiffs to present evidence of fraud. Yes, in a certain number of cases I'm sure that the plaintiffs' claims might not have been up to normal court standards ... but they had to be prepared and presented in a huge hurry if they were to make a difference.

If you find one where the judges ruled on whether or not there actually was fraud ... please let us know.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:13 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.