This is a straight up lie - "the early stages" aren't evidentiary hearings. There aren't partial evidentiary hearings - "well, let's hear *some* evidence to see if we can proceed". Every case was dismissed on procedural grounds.
-
-
Dude, you're just blatantly lying now. I don't even see the point, as anyone who googles these cases and goes directly to the trial summaries (especially for the Ga case) can easily see how full of crap you are.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Should be no problem for you to post a quote from one of these judgements about there being insufficient evidence if you've read the cases, right? Wonder why you didn't start with that instead of a vague "courts dismissed the cases". (because you're lying is why)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I really don't understand why you'd be so stupid as to make a claim like that knowing that I'd be able to, unless you're just completely ignorant about the topic outside of Newsmax segments. https://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-judge-dismisses-trump-campaign-case-in-chatham-ballot-dispute/YKBA6IYQKBB4JCSQEIJBQQT6QI/ …pic.twitter.com/ddpirLNC83
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
First, link to the case and not a media report - the important part isn't the words - it's the actual evidence. Second - some (D) judge throwing out a case has as much weight as saying that (D) poll workers counted the ballots and found, yep, their own count was correct.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
lol Way to move the goalposts. You literally asked for a judgement that dismissed the evidence. Sad! And that quote is a direct excerpt of the judgement, genius. Quit embarrassing yourself.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
So you're not going to link to an actual decision Again, the important part is the basis for rejecting the suits - this specific suit was very narrow about like 40 ballots *based on the media write up that is your only source* and seems to have been dismissed with no real basis
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
lol, I did link to the decision--specifically, the relevant excerpt that the plaintiffs presented no actual evidence whatsoever, in a case speficially about including invalid ballots. But, sure, keep pretending.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You linked to a news story. Do you not know what a court ruling is? It's not published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
1. You asked for a decision where a judge ruled on the evidence. 2. I post a story where the decision was quoted verbatim, literally decalring that the plaintiffs presented no evidence after testimony, etc. were submitted. 3. You pretend the decision doesn't exist.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
"the decision" wasn't "quoted verbatim" - first because you have no idea what was in the decision because you never linked to it - second is that it's a disconnected sentence.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.