In Fulton County, GA this is the set of fraud claims filed in a recent Fulton County lawsuit ( https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/12/05/trump-campaign-files-georgia-election-contest-right-in-the-belly-of-the-beast-fulton-county-n289861 )
"Within the allegations of the 64 page Complaint the Trump campaign claims they have witness …
"Within the allegations of the 64 page Complaint the Trump campaign claims they have witness testimony for the courtroom that will identify “illegal” votes in the following numbers:2,560 felons66,247 underage voters2,423 votes from people not registered1,043 individuals registered at post office boxes4,926 individuals who voted in Georgia after registering in another state395 individuals who voted in two states15,700 votes from people who moved out of state before the election40,279 votes of people who moved without re-registering in their new countyAnother 30,000 to 40,000 absentee ballots lacking proper signature matching and verification"Just because some fraud claims are false, it doesn't mean these fraud claims are false as this data has been accumulated over the course of a month instead of being rushed out. Perhaps these claims are also in error, but court cases that reject hearing evidence based on lack of standing do not evaluate the integrity of evidence. If Shippedwreckcrew of RedState.com is correct (he is a former federal prosecutor), this evidence will evaluated in a court of law, with witness testimony and cross examination:
"Under the Georgia election code, these issues are now subject to a courtroom trial where documentary evidence will be presented, and witnesses will testify and be cross-examined. A Judge will make a determination as to each claim. That outcome can then be appealed through the regular appellate process." My view is that evidence needs to be evaluated before adapting a "nothing to see here, only a small amount of routine election fraud was present in this election. People do get away with murder and just because they are not convicted it doesn't mean the murders didn't take places. The same is true of massive election fraud given the limited time to find it and the ability of election authorities to resist looking at the evidence.
Do you dispute my claim that Raffensperger and the election officials involved have a lot to lose if extensive fraud is found, as at a minimum it would suggest they were incapable of running a fair election. If so, should they not legitimately excuse themselves from evaluating fraud claims to allow an independent investigation? If not, why not? This is not an argument that fraud was present. It is an argument that people responsible for ensuring large-scale fraud was not present should not be investigating (or preventing the investigation) of whether large-scale fraud was present.
In Fulton County, GA this is the set of fraud claims filed in a recent Fulton County lawsuit ( https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/12/05/trump-campaign-files-georgia-election-contest-right-in-the-belly-of-the-beast-fulton-county-n289861 )
"Within the allegations of the 64 page Complaint the Trump campaign claims they have witness testimony for the courtroom that will identify “illegal” votes in the following numbers:2,560 felons66,247 underage voters2,423 votes from people not registered1,043 individuals registered at post office boxes4,926 individuals who voted in Georgia after registering in another state395 individuals who voted in two states15,700 votes from people who moved out of state before the election40,279 votes of people who moved without re-registering in their new countyAnother 30,000 to 40,000 absentee ballots lacking proper signature matching and verification"Just because some fraud claims are false, it doesn't mean these fraud claims are false as this data has been accumulated over the course of a month instead of being rushed out. Perhaps these claims are also in error, but court cases that reject hearing evidence based on lack of standing do not evaluate the integrity of evidence. If Shippedwreckcrew of RedState.com is correct (he is a former federal prosecutor), this evidence will evaluated in a court of law, with witness testimony and cross examination:
"Under the Georgia election code, these issues are now subject to a courtroom trial where documentary evidence will be presented, and witnesses will testify and be cross-examined. A Judge will make a determination as to each claim. That outcome can then be appealed through the regular appellate process." My view is that evidence needs to be evaluated before adapting a "nothing to see here, only a small amount of routine election fraud was present in this election. People do get away with murder and just because they are not convicted it doesn't mean the murders didn't take places. The same is true of massive election fraud given the limited time to find it and the ability of election authorities to resist looking at the evidence.
Do you dispute my claim that Raffensperger and the election officials involved have a lot to lose if extensive fraud is found, as at a minimum it would suggest they were incapable of running a fair election. If so, should they not legitimately excuse themselves from evaluating fraud claims to allow an independent investigation? If not, why not? This is not an argument that fraud was present. It is an argument that people responsible for ensuring large-scale fraud was not present should not be investigating (or preventing the investigation) of whether large-scale fraud was present.