The election litigation thread

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
21,361
16,036
113
Poor Dutchie! I hope you've been sending funds to Trumpy for all these legal challenges. He needs your help, America needs your help to protect the right from getting ripped off and never ever holding office again! $$$$$$$ send it NOW and make a difference!
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
32,685
60,881
113
Rather than dancing, let me ask you one serious question. Today at the Arizona hearing, a person with the appropriate credentials, put forward as expert witness, presented an analysis of the security vulnerabilities of the Dominion voting equipment, software, and associated protocols used in that state. A similar analysis is set out in affadivits which support various emergency motions before the courts in Arizona and other states, most of which have not yet been determined. The thrust of this testimony is that the systems employed were vulnerable to tampering, that statistical analysis of ballot and vote reporting information supports a reasonable inference that tampering actually occured, and that other circumstantial evidence supports the same inference (evidence of internet connection and data transfer, contrary to state policy). I am not an expert in IT, and I assume you aren't either. Do you know of any reason why this evidence as to the unreliability of the vote tallies produced by these systems is not supportive of at least the emergency relief of an independent audit and cessation of the certification and elector appointment process, and/or why this evidence, if uncontradicted, would not support a legislative decision to de-certify the vote and/or halt the appointment of electors?
A serious answer, then.

1) I will spot you the "appropriate credentials". So far, that hasn't held up much in the people the lawsuits have brought forward, but let's give you this one. I am giving you this because voting systems having vulnerabilities is a known thing, going back years. It really is a problem that needs to be fixed.
2a) That the system is vulnerable to tampering does not mean there is evidence of tampering.
2b) "A reasonable inference that tampering has occurred" isn't very convincing. Not having seen the Arizona presentation, I cannot say how compelling that collection of circumstantial evidence is.
3) How compelling that evidence is plays into whether the relief asked is reasonable. Compelling evidence of discrepency bringing relief of an audit doesn't seem outrageous. It depends on the laws involved in Arizona. (So far all the mandated audits have shown no sign of tampering.) Cessation of the certification process is a harder lift. De-certifying without extremely strong evidence seems unlikely. Declaring the state has to declare Trump is the victor is a remedy that would require massive proof.

So it all depends on this "statistical evidence", really. That the machines are theoretically vulnerable doesn't get you very far. "My door was unlocked" isn't actually proof that someone stole something from my house.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
93,091
23,049
113
A serious answer, then.

1) I will spot you the "appropriate credentials". So far, that hasn't held up much in the people the lawsuits have brought forward, but let's give you this one. I am giving you this because voting systems having vulnerabilities is a known thing, going back years. It really is a problem that needs to be fixed.
2a) That the system is vulnerable to tampering does not mean there is evidence of tampering.
2b) "A reasonable inference that tampering has occurred" isn't very convincing. Not having seen the Arizona presentation, I cannot say how compelling that collection of circumstantial evidence is.
3) How compelling that evidence is plays into whether the relief asked is reasonable. Compelling evidence of discrepency bringing relief of an audit doesn't seem outrageous. It depends on the laws involved in Arizona. (So far all the mandated audits have shown no sign of tampering.) Cessation of the certification process is a harder lift. De-certifying without extremely strong evidence seems unlikely. Declaring the state has to declare Trump is the victor is a remedy that would require massive proof.

So it all depends on this "statistical evidence", really. That the machines are theoretically vulnerable doesn't get you very far. "My door was unlocked" isn't actually proof that someone stole something from my house.
The only issue with humouring bud is that it misses the big picture.
Polls projected 7-8% Biden lead but the numbers came back 5-6%.
So if there was any electoral fuckery statistically its way more likely to have been in Trump's favour already.

Other than that, going to court based on your feelies that something is making your pants itch about the election only works on Fox and Newsmax.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,947
6,848
113
...

You are so totally wrong about what defense counsel can/cannot do that it does not deserve a response!...

Perry
Sorry but you are so wrapped up in what lawyers consider professional ethics that you are unable to see what the general public views things. It's not a matter of what is legal or what fits the standards of practice within the profession but what the public sees.

Most people are willing to understand why a lawyer will take on a disgusting client who is charged with a crime but Trump's lawyers pursuit of a case with zero evidence and zero chance of success makes them earn the designation of ambulance chasers.
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,900
1,210
113
There is no election fraud everyone knows it, even Dickstain Donald knows it now.
The farce of still going on with the election fraud claims is so that Dickstain Donald and the Klan can pocket some money from constant fundraising, they’ve been fundraising for almost a month now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: toguy5252

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
93,091
23,049
113
There is no election fraud everyone knows it, even Dickstain Donald knows it now.
The farce of still going on with the election fraud claims is so that Dickstain Donald and the Klan can pocket some money from constant fundraising, they’ve been fundraising for almost a month now.
Who cares if Rudy and Powell gets disbarred!
Trump has already pocketed $150 million from crying fraud.
Why would he stop now?

 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
7,047
2,536
113
MIchigan hearing before Michigan Senate:


Michigan House Oversight Committee hearing will be today (at 6 pm, I believe).
 
Last edited:

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
7,047
2,536
113
Technical testimony before Michigan Senate on vote technology vulnerability, and circumstantial evidence of tampering:

 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
7,047
2,536
113
The theory of the Amistad (another election litigant) cases, including statements by USPS contractor whistleblowers:

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
93,091
23,049
113

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
7,047
2,536
113
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts