kemmer wrote:
Wake up! There is NO evidence. Over 30 cases have been thrown out of court.
On behalf of the Pennsylvania Republican party, the speaker of the Pennsylvania House hand delivered a letter to governor Wolf stating a list of complaints regarding v***r f***d.
The focus of those complaints center on the fact that the Pennsylvania supreme court violated Article I, Section 4 and Article II, Section 1, para 2-4 of the US Constitution and Pennsylvania state e******n law regarding determining the time, place and manner for holding e******ns. Both the CONUS and PA state e******n law prescribe the state legislature as the sole authority for establishing rules for the e******n process. The PA SC ignored the law and unilaterally altered the e******n process to include accepting b****ts 3 days to one week AFTER the polls closed. This opened the door to all kinds of malfeasance.
Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. BoockvarMoreover, Republican observers were not allowed within 100 feet of the counting stations so they were unable to exercise their right to monitor the process.
You don't even want to know what happened in Philly around midnight on November 3rd when president Trump was leading by 700,000+ v**es.Democrats, never Trump republicans, and media mouthpieces are screaming "Where the hell is the evidence?.
It is shameful, but not surprising, how ignorant they are of the law in civil litigation.
To file a civil complaint you need a reasonable basis in fact and law, allegations can be made on information and belief. A motion to dismiss by the defense tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. So, assuming everything in the complaint is true is how the judge looks at it - does it state a claim upon which relief can be granted. So, for a motion to dismiss, everything is assumed to be true and all reasonable inferences are granted to the plaintiff.
Expedited discovery? Expedited discovery can be granted by the court when injunctive relief is sought, such as a temporary restraining order and/or a preliminary injunction. Depending on the need for proper resolution, discovery can be ordered immediately. (Courts have the power to speed discovery along, and very fast.)
People do not file in civil court with reams and reams of "evidence". Reason being, there has not yet been discovery. They are simply trying to gather enough information where it looks like a reasonable basis exists in fact and law for the allegations being made.
It is great if you have sworn affidavits, and the Trump legal team has hundreds of sworn affidavits from witnesses to fraud and whistle blowers, including 3 D******n employees who witnessed improper b****t validation and manipulation of software algorithms. But such affidavits are not necessary in filing a legitimate complaint.
Investigation into D******n v**er system/Smartmatic software revealed
"an unexplained significant deviation from expected results, mathematical inconsistencies supported by experts who filed affidavits and reports should be more than sufficient to suspect fraud and grounds for filing suits."You don't have to have sworn affidavits to file in civil court, and you certainly don't have to have a ton of evidence. The argument is,
"On a reasonable basis in fact and law, I have enough information here to make an allegation, and we want the opportunity to pursue our law suit and conduct discovery - written discovery, document demands, depositions, witness lists, and we want this done quickly." At this point, you can in fact get subpoenas.
Right now, none of that exists, unless a court allows it to exist, and this has not been done. Obviously the judges are not doing their job. This is most noticeable in the western states like Nevada.