Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Do Trumpers even bother to read the decsions and transcripts of any of the lawsuits lost by the Trump Campaign?
One example from Philadelphia.
In one of the most-cited examples, U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond of Philadelphia questioned campaign lawyer Jerome Marcus about claims that GOP observers weren’t allowed to watch the ballot count in Philadelphia. ....
Under questioning, Marcus conceded there were “a nonzero number of people in the room.”
“I’m sorry, then what’s your problem?” Diamond responded.
Lots more than one anonycoward
"“Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,” said Judge Stephanos Bibas, who was appointed to the court by Trump."
a
nd
"The judge replied: “I am asking you a specific question, and I am looking for a specific answer. Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?”
“To my knowledge at present, no,” Goldstein replied.
The judge pressed on. “Are you claiming that there is any undue or improper influence upon the elector with respect to these 592 ballots?”
“To my knowledge at present, no,” Goldstein replied.
In a recent Pennsylvania federal case, Giuliani alleged “widespread, nationwide voter fraud” in his opening remarks. But under questioning from the judge, he retreated. “This is not a fraud case,” Giuliani later admitted. In the same case, Trump lawyer Linda Kearns said explicitly that she is “not proceeding” on allegations of fraud.
Anonycoward it is obvious you are talking out your anal sphincter and didn't bother reading any decisions or transcripts.
9 Answers
- ?Lv 53 months agoFavourite answer
The point of filing all those lawsuits was not to win them. The point was to rely on the general public ignorance among Trump's supporters to make the argument that the election was stolen from Trump, AND that the justice system was rigged against them as well. Of course a lot of the judges who rejected those suits were Trump's own appointees, but that doesn't matter to his followers either.
- DocLv 63 months ago
To Trump supporters "nonzero" is the same as a creationist saying to an Atheist "you can't prove there isn't a god"
The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Trump supporters are fine with rumors, why should they have to prove they're not true ?
- ?Lv 63 months ago
In my opinion we pay millions if not billions to people to investigate the law. But as we all know as good as our justice system is people make mistakes. We now have governors of states making decisions to over ride the justice handed out by releasing people before the debt to society is paid. So why should I believe what one judge might decide according to the left they made thousands of mistakes putting people in jail. So I guess we need to fire all the judges and close the courts and let the dictatorships hand out the punishment to all.
And in the case stated it’s not up to the lawyer to judge but to present the information to the courts to decide.
- Anonymous3 months ago
Yes, some of us do, and no court made any attempt to look at evidence. We saw a lot of excuses to not get involved. You’ve grasped a one specific straw, which is weak at best. Tell me how you’re supposed to observe improprieties on a small of paper from 50 feet away? Having observers in the room is irrelevant if they’re kept from functioning as observers. What about when observers were sent home when they pretended to stop over pretend plumbing problems?
- Simon TLv 73 months ago
No.
Since when have they bothered with facts or reality?
If they went of facts and reality, then they would never have elected a racist, misogynist, snake-oil con man as President on 2016.
- DzeLv 73 months ago
it was legality, but proving fraud after it was 'allowed' to happen isnt easy in anything .. its clear the fraud happened i watched it myself, doesnt take a rocket scientist .. they failed to stop the cheating mechanism which were 'paper' ballots that cant be verified lol, and they allowed them to stop the counting and lock the doors in key states for several hours ... so .. if trumps team allowed that then that is their error and was niave on their part .. the legality though, theres nothing to figure out there sport .. your trying to comprehend fraud in the worng place lol ..
- ArtemiscLv 73 months ago
Nope. Try a fun experiment, ask a Trump Supporters how many of the 60+ cases alleged fraud. Your average trump supporter will say all of them, when in actuality, the number is about 2.