Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

[acbytesla]

That's a far more obvious answer than any I thought of. The attorneys want money. The clients have unrealistic expectations which the attorneys feed.

I've seen clients have realistic expectations only to see lawyers try to raise them mostly to keeping litigation going. Their fees end if you drop the case.

Tough to pay for that new Tesla if you don't have clients.

 

[Bob001]

The question is more "What do the people paying these attorneys think will happen?"
....

Everyone involved except the donors realizes that this is another Trump money-making scam. Donations don't have to be spent on legal fees.

President Trump isn’t really trying to overturn the election. He’s simply running one more scam before he leaves office that would enable him to enrich himself.

That’s the way it appears, at least, from the scores of fundraising emails his campaign has sent out since the election. He seems to be asking for funds to challenge the election, but the fine print shows that the money could let him line his own coffers. The tin-pot-dictator routine looks more as if it’s about passing the tin cup.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...n-challenge-looks-like-scam-line-his-pockets/

 

[catsmate]

Anyone here familiar with Benford's Law?

Yes. More so than you I suspect.

Election results also generally follow Benford's Law. But according to this source, the results for votes for Biden in a number of key cities... doesn't.

Bollocks. They do not generally follow BL.
You're either talking nonsense about matters you don't understand or parroting right-wing lies.

 

[Darat]

One affidavit could be 232 pages....

How many actual unique affidavits are you referring to with your claim of 232 pages? 70?

We’ve now learnt that at least some of these many pages of affidavits were collected via an online page which anyone could fill in with anything!

 

[Nessie]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...sults-news-live-biden-trump-map-b1721639.html

"Donald Trump’s lawyers in Arizona have pulled out of a suit challenging part of the US election vote counting process in Arizona’s Maricopa County.

A judge granted Snell & Wilmer’s request to withdraw as counsel of record for the Republican National Committee, which together with the Trump campaign and the Arizona Republican Party had brought legal action alleging the county incorrectly rejected a small number of votes cast on election day."

 

[Darat]

Or they are not in fact putting forward cases that are about electoral fraud but rather objections to a certain procedure or how something was handled or the instructions given to the voters.

And another one:

....snip...

Trump campaign attorney says that their theory of the case isn't fraud: "This is not a fraud case."
"It is not a stealing the election case."

He says he's alleging flaws in the system.


...snip...

 

[bonzombiekitty]

Right away, I see that last bit. What can I infer from that? Well, what I can infer is that the complainant is obviously prone to hyperbole and exaggeration. Nothing but fraudulent actions? Really?

This is the thing that gets me. They are witnessing all this obvious fraudulent activity, but don't say anything at the time?

 

[Meadmaker]

I’ve been through all the links in the thread and none seem to tie in with one? I’m not from the USA so my lack of knowledge of which city/town/county is in which state may mean I’ve mentally assigned one of the cases to the wrong state.

I live right here in Michigan, in the suburbs of Detroit, and I still have trouble keeping track of even the ones in Michigan. There's at least one filed in Wayne County, where most of the disputed votes were counted. The judge in that case promises a ruling by tomorrow. Since it was only filed yesterday I can only imagine that his ruling delivered tomorrow will be, "Buzz off."

Meanwhile there is another one filed in the Western District of Michigan, but is about votes in Wayne County, but it's filed in the Western District because that's where the state capital is.

And I don't know much about the ones outside of Michigan. There are lots of lawsuits, but so far they haven't won any.

 

[The Atheist]

The left are vile.

Yeah, I agree.

That whole trying to reduce inequality - especially for *******, women and minorities - is truly disgraceful.

Luckily, there are very fine people on the other side.

 

[Meadmaker]

I mentioned that you would have to be literally insane to expect to get the results that one of the Michigan lawsuits is asking for, so I wondered what they were really trying to accomplish.

One set of answers revolved around the "they don't care as long as the money flows" theory, which makes sense.

Another element of the answer is that their ultimate client, Donald J. Trump, is literally insane. I think he is.

 

[pgwenthold]

I mentioned that you would have to be literally insane to expect to get the results that one of the Michigan lawsuits is asking for, so I wondered what they were really trying to accomplish. .

AT BEST wouldn't the result be, "count them again, and do it correctly"?

Throwing them all out is not an option that would even be on the table

 

[Meadmaker]

AT BEST wouldn't the result be, "count them again, and do it correctly"?

Throwing them all out is not an option that would even be on the table

I would think so.

 

[Vixen]

Interesting piece this... it seems that lawyers who support Trump's frivolous lawsuits could find themselves in front of their relative Bar Association Ethics Committee submitting to "please explain" hearings.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trumps-lawyers-election/617064/

Most, if not all, of Trump's lawsuits are frivolous and evidence-free - and there are rules about that...

Rule 3.1 of the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct stipulates that a lawyer shall not bring an action unless a basis exists in law and fact for doing so. This rule implies that lawyers must do due diligence to inform themselves of the facts of the case and reasonably determine that a good-faith argument can be made in defense of the client’s legal claim.
Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure—many of which are designed to serve as “gatekeepers” against frivolous lawsuits—requires lawyers to ensure that their arguments are not frivolous, and that factual contentions either have or are reasonably likely to have evidentiary support. Although the courts do not often exercise their discretion to enforce it, Rule 11(c) provides judges with the authority to impose sanctions against lawyers who have violated Rule 11(b).

Rule no.1 .1

Client-Lawyer Relationship
A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.

You don't even need to look beyond this. Simply getting US postal workers and 'poll observers' to jot down their observations doesn't constitute particularisation, nor does it specify which law has been broken. There is not even prima facie evidence.

 

[xjx388]

I mentioned that you would have to be literally insane to expect to get the results that one of the Michigan lawsuits is asking for, so I wondered what they were really trying to accomplish.

One set of answers revolved around the "they don't care as long as the money flows" theory, which makes sense.

Another element of the answer is that their ultimate client, Donald J. Trump, is literally insane. I think he is.

I've read some stories where the real goal is to get some States to stop certification of the votes so that the GOP controlled State legislatures can select their own slate of electors.

IOW, the goal is to usurp the voice of the people in those States. To be sure, there's little chance of this occurring but that's the actual thing they are trying to do.

 

[Vixen]

Because I'm assuming none of us have the power to to interview the witnesses, or audit the election ourselves.... so given that we have no power to make the facts come out, we have to wait and see if people who do have that power deliver. If you want to not wait and go get some of this information yourself, I will be as pleased as anybody.

Imagine someone reports a car crash and you are a cop. You go to look at the car crash for yourself and then you appeal for witnesses. What you don't do is appeal for witnesses asking them if they have seen a car crash. Anywhere? Pretty, please?

Would you take it to the prosecutor on the grounds of some callow youf ringing up in response to your plea, 'Yeah, I saw someone scraping a wing mirror. Honest guv, I can sign an affidavit if it helps you find a car crash somewhere. Anywhere.'

 

[Darat]

I've read some stories where the real goal is to get some States to stop certification of the votes so that the GOP controlled State legislatures can select their own slate of electors.

IOW, the goal is to usurp the voice of the people in those States. To be sure, there's little chance of this occurring but that's the actual thing they are trying to do.

Let’s face it there is no over reaching plan being implemented, this isn’t some grand strategy from Trump.

 

[Vixen]

These aren't Trumps claims. We aren't relying on Trump's word. The claims are being made by witnesses who claimed to have observed fraud and other issues. I'm happy for the purposes of this discussion to assume Trump lies with every breath he takes. It doesn't matter since none of this relies on testimony or evidence from Trump.


OK. Well, the best approach here then might be for the Democrats to pull a judo move and rush this to court as quickly as possible so that the Republican lack of evidence can be revealed.

Like the tango dancer who claimed that when he casually chatted with a few ballot counters he discovered to his horror they were all far left loonies - why, he saw one wearing what looked like a Biden shirt? That one?

Or the female observer who was asked to moved back by someone who covered her name badge with her hand? Or this one?

How credible do you think these witnesses are, outside of a junior school class-room playing tell-tale-tit?

 

[I Am The Scum]

Would you take it to the prosecutor on the grounds of some callow youf ringing up in response to your plea, 'Yeah, I saw someone scraping a wing mirror. Honest guv, I can sign an affidavit if it helps you find a car crash somewhere. Anywhere.'

Thanks, lad. Here's your 25-thousand dollars.

 

[Vixen]

Because it wasn't falsified, that's a lie being put out to discredit him. It may be strongly stated, but he makes it clear that he believed backdating was going on, believes he heard backdating being discussed (just not using the word backdating) and that the ballots were handled in a way that he did not believe was the proper process. The agents who interview him confirm, though they could well be lying, that there will be an investigation.

Also, he is standing by his story and saying that claims of a retraction are a lie.

Personally, I think there should be an investigation of the USPS handling of this. Just from a labour point of view, handling a whistle blower like this is appalling.

No he didn't.

He was being mischievous.

I suggest you don't go into the police or law as you seem unable to sniff out ********.

 

[Vixen]

So far the whole thing is hinged on the word of Giuliani, shuttit and Project Veritas. Couldn’t be in better, smarter, more capable hands.

FIFY