@moke123 Did you just rely on your darling liars at Politi"fact" or did you follow any of the links in the link I posted? Do you think that the Stanford.edu site is lying to us? That is where the dispositions come from. EACH lawsuit has a citation back to the Stanford.edu site that logs these things and records the outcomes. The only thing I would question about the list is - have more lawsuits been filed that are not on the list since this is a summary of what is on the "big" list maintained by Stanford.
A typical disposition for the cases that were dismissed is:
That means that the judge doesn't care. He is not overturning a Presidential election PERIOD so there is no point in hearing the case. This ruling was made FOUR days after the election. How do you know if there was cheating BEFORE an election? This lawsuit, if filed prior to an election would be laughed out of court. How could you possibly know that there would be cheating when the election hadn't happened yet? If you can't have a hearing AFTER an election that is questionable and present actual evidence, then the cheaters always win because the judiciary won't overrule the results regardless of what evidence might be offered!! Really? When EXACTLY should a suit that questions the veracity of an election be filed? You can't file it before, that's just silly. And apparently, you can't file it after because that might result in overturning an election???
You are listening to talking points and believing ONE source which is known to be biased.
He said, she said. No one took the time to investigate the claim. How do you know who is telling the truth? Would you sign a complaint like this which if proven to be false would subject you to criminal prosecution? Why hasn't the woman been prosecuted if she's lying under oath? Because that would open the case up for fact finding and the government would be forced to make the data public. They can't afford to do that so she and all the others were not prosecuted.
If nothing else, you should question the vehemence with which the wagons were circled around the voting machine companies to PREVENT actual audits. Why did that happen?
If the elections were clean, the audits would show that. But, in no case that I know of were the voting machines sequestered and held so that they could be forensically audited. Dominion and the election commissions in each of the jurisdictions had non-restricted access to the machines and we know for a fact, that in at least one instance, the machines were wiped clean before they could be audited. Why the full court press to prevent any forensic audit of the voting machines? What were they afraid would be found?
If any of the disbelievers are honest people, you should think long and hard about that question. What were they afraid would be found if they allowed the machines to be sequestered and the audit proceed? I'm having trouble myself believing that the corruption included Dominion or any other of the tabulating machine companies. But the more insistent they all became on fighting the audit request, the more I question why. There is absolutely no evidence that would be left at this point. It was all gone as soon as the audits were requested so there is no point at this time in any audit of the voting machines.
But there are still videos and other physical evidence that has never been considered by a court. And you know what, no matter which side wins in 2024, there will be accusations of cheating. The difference will be that if Trump happens to win, the left will unleash the dogs of Antifa and BLM to burn down American cities like they did in 2020.