Valfusk under USA-valet 2020? Rapporterade incidenter.

Nej.

after limited discovery, through statistical analysis, Plaintiffs intend to show

Vet inte varför du hela tiden insisterar på att sammankoppla mig med den påstådda Frankfurtservern? Jag har aldrig yppat ett dugg om den där. Resten av ditt inlägg (som jag klippt bort här) verkar vara vara rent orerande med en massa flamsiga retoriska frågor så det finns inget värt att bemöda sig att svara på där.

Jo. Se fetstilade.

Du fokuserar på några ord och tror det är Giuliani som presenterar bevis? Du får läsa och översätta allt

after limited discovery, through statistical analysis, Plaintiffs intend to show


Men det här är alltså dagen efter han stod framför en domare och sa "this is not a fraud case". Varför tog han inte tag i saken när han hade chansen?

Du klipper alltså bort resonemanget om bevisvärden. Jag utgår därmed att du är enig med den absoluta majoriteten, att det inte finns några bevis för valfusk och att Frankfurtserven aldrig funnits.

Tack för ditt klargörande!

Ja? Och där det du ju svart på vitt att bevis finns tillgängligt!

Det påstås kunna bevisas genom ”statistisk analys”? Ja vad hindrar Rudden från att publicera sina analyser utanför rättssalen?

Det påstås kunna bevisas genom ”statistisk analys”? Ja vad hindrar Rudden från att publicera sina analyser utanför rättssalen?

Det här hittade jag i en överklagan till The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 23 november -20 (Giulianis storslagna skrivelse till rätten är daterad 18 november -20)

”Prior to any hearing, if granted expedited discovery, Plaintiffs will examine these envelopes to determine the percentage of mail ballots that were illegally counted – of which Biden won approximately 75% and Trump 25%, a 50% margin for Biden. Plaintiffs, through statistical expert analysis, will then extrapolate this percent to the 1.5 million mail ballots. This simple exercise will determine whether Plaintiffs can prove their case – i.e., that sufficient illegal ballots were counted that changed the election result.(9) If so, the District Court should set aside these votes and declare Trump the winner. In the interim, the legal effect of any certification should be stayed until the District Court can rule if this appeal is granted.

(9) For example, if 10% of the 1.5 million mail ballots were improperly counted because they lacked signatures, dates, or inside security envelopes, 75% x 150,000 votes should be deducted from Biden, and 25% x 150,000 votes should be deducted from Trump, a margin of 75,000 votes for Biden which would be sufficient to overturn reported results.”

”Plaintiffs have sought expedited discovery to obtain access to the 1.5 million mail ballots cast in the Defendant Counties – or a statistically significant sample – in order to prepare their evidence, including expert evidence, to determine the number of defective mail ballots which were counted”

”statistical analysis is expected to evidence that over 70,000 mail and other ballots which favor Biden were improperly counted – sufficient to turn the election – a remedy expressly applied in Marks v. Stinson, 1994”

”The Trump Campaign believes that statistical analysis will evidence that over 70,000 mail and other mail ballots which favor Biden were improperly counted – sufficient to turn the election – a remedy expressly applied in Marks v. Stinson”

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-3371_Documents-1.pdf

Giuliani och resten av Trumps team verkar inte kunna publicera bevis på grund av att dom inte har några bevis

att man säger att man har bevis är inte samma sak som att ha bevis. Hoppas du förstår skillnaden.

Det här hittade jag i en överklagan till The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 23 november -20 (Giulianis storslagna skrivelse till rätten är daterad 18 november -20)

”Prior to any hearing, if granted expedited discovery, Plaintiffs will examine these envelopes to determine the percentage of mail ballots that were illegally counted – of which Biden won approximately 75% and Trump 25%, a 50% margin for Biden. Plaintiffs, through statistical expert analysis, will then extrapolate this percent to the 1.5 million mail ballots. This simple exercise will determine whether Plaintiffs can prove their case – i.e., that sufficient illegal ballots were counted that changed the election result.(9) If so, the District Court should set aside these votes and declare Trump the winner. In the interim, the legal effect of any certification should be stayed until the District Court can rule if this appeal is granted.

(9) For example, if 10% of the 1.5 million mail ballots were improperly counted because they lacked signatures, dates, or inside security envelopes, 75% x 150,000 votes should be deducted from Biden, and 25% x 150,000 votes should be deducted from Trump, a margin of 75,000 votes for Biden which would be sufficient to overturn reported results.”

”Plaintiffs have sought expedited discovery to obtain access to the 1.5 million mail ballots cast in the Defendant Counties – or a statistically significant sample – in order to prepare their evidence, including expert evidence, to determine the number of defective mail ballots which were counted”

”statistical analysis is expected to evidence that over 70,000 mail and other ballots which favor Biden were improperly counted – sufficient to turn the election – a remedy expressly applied in Marks v. Stinson, 1994”

”The Trump Campaign believes that statistical analysis will evidence that over 70,000 mail and other mail ballots which favor Biden were improperly counted – sufficient to turn the election – a remedy expressly applied in Marks v. Stinson”

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-3371_Documents-1.pdf

Giuliani och resten av Trumps team verkar inte kunna publicera bevis på grund av att dom inte har några bevis

Hälften av alla amerikaner anser ännu att Biden vann medelst valfusk:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/stuck-most-still-say-biden-cheating-beat-trump