Affidavits can still be false...dishonest people can be author of an affidavit all day long...
The election litigation thread
- Thread starter Dutch Oven
- Start date
Hahaha...no effect on the Biden victory."Discrepancies" cause Clark County, Nevada (the locus of Trump team election suspicions in that state) to order a re-vote in a close Commission race.
Clark County calls for re-vote in commission race decided by 10 ballots; discrepancies outnumber victory margin - The Nevada Independent
Ballot discrepancies prompted a special election in District C as they exceeded the 10-vote margin of victory for Democrat Ross Miller. Read more.thenevadaindependent.com
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just a question of how much fire.
In Canada, at least, there is a limited ability to cross examine on an affidavit. Be that as it may, affadavits are the evidentiary basis for requests for pre-trial relief.
Of course, pre-trial relief is not lightly granted, given the more onerous legal standards for such relief. However, procedural motions, just as demands for production of documents or discovery, are granted on a lower standard that the admissibility standard applicable at trial. As I've said before, I think the primary demand of the Trump team at this time is production of election records and/or an audit of the elections, rather than an order to overturn. That would come only after a finding by the court that the election equipment and software are not sufficiently reliable.
It establishes that where there is sufficient evidence of "discrepancies", a re-vote is appropriate. All that remains is for the courts to determine what that sufficient level is in the context of the Presidential race in that county.
Not sure where you get your view of the law pertaining to cross-examining on an affidavit but you are wrong. A litigant has an almost absolute right to cross-examine an adverse party who delivers an affidavit in support of his/her motion or application. There are also limits on the kind of evidence that can be given by way of affidavit so a judge is entitled to give little or no weight to allegations which are either based upon hearsay or which do not provide for any factual background for a bald allegation.
And you are completely mis-describing the nature of the proceedings which the soon to be former vote suppresser is chief has been bringing.
With the same level of review they chose to certify all other elections save that one. Where's the beef?
The most serious allegation of inappropriate discrepancies is against Lindsey Graham...
Wrong. The "right" to cross examine on an affadavit differs from province to province in Canada and may depend upon the nature of the action. Here's an article discussing the issue in one particular context so you can refresh yourself on the subject:
Pre-Certification Right to Cross-Examination Across Canada
The recent British Columbia Supreme Court case Cantlie v Canadian Heating Products Inc. highlights procedural differences across Canadian jurisdictions with regards to whether a right to cross-examine on an affidavit filed in a certification motion exists. In Ontario, Alberta, and Manitoba, the...
I won't pretend to know the law in every state in the US.
You are correct that a judge still decides what weight to give the evidence set out in the affidavit, just as he would assess the weight of evidence at trial.
The district is Clark county, the most populous county that includes Las Vegas.
If you were referring to the laws of civil procedure in BC then I defer to you. That is certainly not the case in Ontario. In any event if you read the affidavits in some of the cases there is no judge in Ontario that would in many cases consider such allegations admissible and in many, even if admissible, deserving of little or no weight, and highly unlikely sufficient to discharge the plaintiff's burden of proof. That is why most cases have either been withdrawn upon questioning by judge or dismissed. That is from both Dem and GOP appointees.Wrong. The "right" to cross examine on an affadavit differs from province to province in Canada and may depend upon the nature of the action. Here's an article discussing the issue in one particular context so you can refresh yourself on the subject:
.Pre-Certification Right to Cross-Examination Across Canada
The recent British Columbia Supreme Court case Cantlie v Canadian Heating Products Inc. highlights procedural differences across Canadian jurisdictions with regards to whether a right to cross-examine on an affidavit filed in a certification motion exists. In Ontario, Alberta, and Manitoba, the...www.osler.com
I won't pretend to know the law in every state in the US.
You are correct that a judge still decides what weight to give the evidence set out in the affidavit, just as he would assess the weight of evidence at trial.
You're getting annoying...it's district C inside of Clark county, not all of Clark county.
Just now?
Do you think there were no other similar "discrepancies" in other Clark County districts, or do you think they didn't bother to look as closely because the commission vote wasn't as close? I'll go with the latter. Do you think the electoral staff in Clark County all got the same instructions, or different instructions depending on district? What about voters in the Clark County? All the same instructions, or different by district? I'll go with all the same on both counts.
How close does the race in Clark County have to be in order to justify actually identifying the total number of discrepancies in all counties?
I guess since this is the year of "mostly peaceful" protests, why shouldn't it be the year of "mostly accurate" elections? LOL!
Dutchie, Trumpo is 0-98 in election litigation and his attorneys are fleeing his cases. It's over."Discrepancies" cause Clark County, Nevada (the locus of Trump team election suspicions in that state) to order a re-vote in a close Commission race.
Clark County calls for re-vote in commission race decided by 10 ballots; discrepancies outnumber victory margin - The Nevada Independent
Ballot discrepancies prompted a special election in District C as they exceeded the 10-vote margin of victory for Democrat Ross Miller. Read more.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just a question of how much fire.
If there was anything to his complaints, he would be winning a few of these court applications. But no, he loses one and all. The judges just laugh at his shit.
Trumpo and his stooges say shit on the Net and you run around cheering. But what he says is just BS to crank people like you up. Trump can say whatever on the Net, but he has to back it up in court. And when he tries that, he just collapses sadly in a pool of his own turds.
Here is what I propose. That you only report on the court results. If Trumpo wins a couple of cases, I and others will be more receptive to your continual ghibbling about how unfair the election was. Until then, everyone is just going to laugh at you.
Blah blah...the re-vote is for Clark county commission...Biden wins.Just now?
Do you think there were no other similar "discrepancies" in other Clark County districts, or do you think they didn't bother to look as closely because the commission vote wasn't as close? I'll go with the latter. Do you think the electoral staff in Clark County all got the same instructions, or different instructions depending on district? What about voters in the Clark County? All the same instructions, or different by district? I'll go with all the same on both counts.
How close does the race in Clark County have to be in order to justify actually identifying the total number of discrepancies in all counties?
I guess since this is the year of "mostly peaceful" protests, why shouldn't it be the year of "mostly accurate" elections? LOL!
You're not paying attention. Trump has been successful, at least in part, in 3 cases (not 0) (not to mention there's a lot fewer than 98 suits out there, even taking into account some of which are being litigated by parties other than the Trump campaign).
Feel free to laugh, or cry, or invoke demons to descend upon me as you wish. For the most part, I am simply reporting the status of the various cases, offering the occasional explanation of the issues involved, and the odd side story (like the ethics breach by the Penn SOS's law firm).
Contrary to your assumption, I haven't once said that Trump will win, not even in discussing a specific suit. Your TDS must have you reading things that aren't there.
Trump has not been successful in changing his loss into a win in any state, or in stopping votes from being counted.
Total failure.
That's what he gets for Rudy's $20,000 /day.
