2020 Election Fraud Roundup

Post Reply New Topic

There's an excellent article on the quality of those affidavits here:
Washington Post article

In terms of what-iffery about what-iffery, that's getting too vague to even discuss.

In terms of simplicity, ease of success etc. the simplest solution is to run a good election campaign and beat the incumbent fair and square in the polls. Especially when he's so naturally gifted at shooting himself in the foot. It's just possible - shock horror - that this actually happened. Despite every right-wing Christian nutjob crawling out of the woodwork to take one for the team by lying in Court, chances are there's nothing sinister to discover.

If anything the real surprise is that Trump didn't lose by a greater amount, but as we've already discussed many voters are loyal to their party regardless of who is the current figurehead. Either that, or maybe there was pro-Trump vote rigging going on? I have no evidence, of course, but that doesn't seem to be stopping anyone right now. I think the Democrats have done very well to avoid the whole circus of shit-throwing in the hope something will stick. Nobody really wins out of that, it's just embarrassing and it destroys faith in democracy, and for what?

Oh okay, but I think because of affadavits that there should be perhaps more investigation done before determining an election winner though, shouldn't there be?

Trump and gang are filing spurious suits.

Trump lost by 6 million votes. The man is possessed....he must love the Glory of the Presidency. Too bad he couldn’t live up to the Glory

He hasn’t said one word about COVID that wasn’t self-serving in some way.

So, have there been any legitimate claims of voter fraud so far, or just the same BS that they don't even dare mention in court where there are consequences for lying? I've seen a lot of attempts at generating fear, uncertainty and doubt from the usual suspects but nothing resembling a valid claim so far.

Depends if they'll make the blindest bit of difference, or whether it's just deliberate timewasting so he can do as much damage as possible in the short time he has left (and raise some more cash to avoid bankruptcy).

So far I don't believe any of the Court cases actually have the ability to change the course of the election. The current state of play is outlined here:
Chicago Tribune article

So note that investigations are ongoing, but in many cases the affidavits have been declared worthless (people declaring personal opinions rather than giving meaningful evidence, for example). They're not all of the quality necessary to be admissable and valid in Court.

I'm not sure if the US legal system has a mechanism to instruct serial litigants to piss off and stop wasting their time, but if it does I suspect that might come into play once one or two of the bigger cases have been rejected, which looks very very likely.

He's not doing very well at the moment:
Financial Times article
Independent article

and the longer this goes on, the more likely Giuliani is to face some sort of "contempt" charge for time-wasting and poor quality evidence.

Oh okay. Well reporting a crime and then signing an affadavit to it is not really contempt in itself. If they made it contempt, then I think that would be a bad idea, because that would discourage victims of crimes in future cases to report them, out of fear of contempt.

That's not what I meant. Individuals who have submitted "evidence" are unlikely to be punished if it turns out to be useless. But Giuliani is a professional lawyer and he should only be submitting documents that are actually worth submitting, and he knows which those are and which aren't because that's his job.

Lying in court is something that will get you hit with a contempt ruling. The goal should be to discourage lying in court and punish those who use lies to make a case.

If he's lying to the court with the goal of wasting their time, that's obviously treating the court with contempt.

There was a confrontation when Trump supporters made that recent rally, but I wouldn't call it a riot.
The BLM and antifa created a scuffle because they decided to counter-rally.
Common sense would tell you it takes 2 to tango, btw.

Oh okay, I thought there was rioting outside the where the votes were coming in. And yes if there is lying going on that is contempt, but I thought this was a case of the witnesses not explaining enough, rather than lying.

Oh okay, I see.

Well that's rather simplistic, isn't it? One group opposed to discrimination vs. one group all in favour of it. Some principles are worth taking a stand about, some really aren't.

No need to call out over-entitlement, racism and bigotry if there isn't any. But if there is, then there is.

It's a shame more Italians didn't stand up to that nasty Mr. Mussolini in the early 1920s, but they probably just thought he was being a bit melodramatic to get more attention. Ooops.

Well let's say Biden is the President and is sworn in next year. Will all these rioters go home and be satisfied, or are they going to keep on doing what they are doing, and nothing will satisfy them?

By your Canadian standards we have always been rioting for centuries.

Oh? I didn't think it was for centuries in this case. I just thought it was since George Floyd, and they have been rioting since, but then it was all about the election instead of Floyd somehow. But I thought that's where the rioting started more so.

The NAACP has now filed a lawsuit against Trump and his campaign at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia:
https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/upl ... plaint.pdf

In this case, it is thus Trump who is the accused of electoral fraud, not the accuser.

The core of the complaint is that attempting to block certification of the vote in Michigan is a violation of section 11(b) in the Voting Rights Act - and an attempt to disenfranchise black voters by specifically targeting areas with a high percentage of black voters:

Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/10101

Note that "voting" is defined thus under the Voting Rights Act (my emphasis, same link above):

I wouldn't exactly say any of us in north America are a dense enough population to riot nonstop that much.