Has Donald J. Trump overturned the Election result today?

They have a lot of sworn affadavits. For one example, Jesse Jacob, a long time Detroit election worker, has signed an affadavit stating that she was instructed along with the other workers to backdate mail-in ballots to show that they came in on time.

https://www.wbap.com/news/detroit-elections-worker-says-she-was-instructed-to-change-ballot-dates/

So, in your universe, witnesses in trials never testify to things they personally witnessed? Funny, I thought taking sworn affidavits from witnesses was a routine part of law suits and trials.

The article I linked in about Jessy Jacob said in part:

"A Detroit city worker who was assigned to the election has sworn in an affidavit that she and others were ordered to change mailing dates on ballots"

To give another example of the evidence Trump's lawyers have, they have the names of about 15,000 in Pittsburgh who upon appearing to vote were told, falsely, that they had already voted by mail-in ballot.

...No evidences has ever been provided other than here-say. Maybe in your universe that's sufficient but in a Court of Law, direct evidence is required.

neptuneblue wrote:

...No evidences has ever been provided other than here-say. Maybe in your universe that's sufficient but in a Court of Law, direct evidence is required.

Heresay is when a witness can only testify as to what someone else witnessed, not something that he personally witnessed. In this case, the woman is testifying as to what she personally witnessed. An affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury is evidence.

The problem is that when these claims are being investigated, they are not holding up. Courts are rejecting claim after claim. Judges appointed by Republicans are getting frustrated by the increasingly ridiculous claims being dug up by these lawyers.

At some point they need to stop.... and this point needs to be in dayss not weeks.

No other losing candidate has played these games. The only one who came close is Gore and he lost only by one state by mere thousands of votes. Trump lost soundly, it wasn't close. That is why his slash and burn behavior that is hurting the country is so frustrating.

Brandon9000 wrote:

neptuneblue wrote:

...No evidences has ever been provided other than here-say. Maybe in your universe that's sufficient but in a Court of Law, direct evidence is required.

Heresay is when a witness can only testify as to what someone else witnessed, not something that he personally witnessed. In this case, the woman is testifying as to what she personally witnessed. An affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury is evidence.

You're acting like you have never heard of what a Court of Law actually does. Your Motion to Show Cause will only get you so far. That's where actual EVIDENCE comes into play. Real, no kidding, EVIDENCE of wrongful, criminal action is a requirement. This is your hang up. NO evidence has been provided. Ever.

Affidavits might get you in a Court room, but Evidence is the key to success. Since there is NONE, the case fails. The Burden of Proof just isn't there.

Puffing of chests and belligerence isn't how things work in the Court of Law.

Game Over.

trouble in PA was that the "Sworn affidavits" were presented by the attorney and the affiants were not available to cros examine. THAT is still hearsay.