cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The ONLY reason


@r3020 wrote:

We don't know if there was fraud or not. The evidence has yet to be presented to a court of law. All we have are allegations and denials.

 

Sure....


Tucker Carlson calls out Sidney Powell, saying he asked her for evidence to support her election fraud claims, but "she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page."  "When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her."

Fox News aired Giuliani's presser in its entirety -- here's what their correspondent had to say about it afterwards Fisher: "Certainly a colorful news conference, but it was light on facts. So much of what he said was simply not true, or has already been thrown out in court."

1 W and 29 L in court, trump lawyers when pressed for facts and evidence of fraud unequivocally respond,  we have none. 

 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The ONLY reason


@KNAPPer wrote:the Associated Press reported Thursday, citing an unnamed source.

 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The ONLY reason


@r3020 wrote:

We don't know if there was fraud or not. The evidence has yet to be presented to a court of law. All we have are allegations and denials.


You would never reveal your witnesses before putting them before the court.  No different than if it was a mob trial.  You put your witnesses in harms way.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The ONLY reason


@sam1wiseone wrote:

@r3020 wrote:

We don't know if there was fraud or not. The evidence has yet to be presented to a court of law. All we have are allegations and denials.


You would never reveal your witnesses before putting them before the court.  No different than if it was a mob trial.  You put your witnesses in harms way.


And it's disengenous to say they haven't said what the evidence pertains to.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: The ONLY reason

The problem is the courts so far refuse to hear the case.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The ONLY reason

That is OK with me 3020 (commendable IMO), but I might add that there is some considerable proof there was no fraud if you believe some state Attorney Generals and Election Commissions. In addition, there are few, if any accusations in the red states, which would have had mass fraud, if it existed.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: The ONLY reason

Why do you claim red states would have mass fraud if it existed? Every place the fraud takes place is in dem run cities. There is evidence. It has been laid out for the media. The media denies it's existence. Not once in the last 4 years did the media deny the existence of Trump/russian collusion even after the FBI/CIA admitted there was no collusion. Trump's team will eventually have to lay their evidence out for the American people if the courts fail in their duty to hear the case. I will with hold my judgement until I see the full extent of their evidence. If they fail to produce the evidence they claim to hold they will be no better than Adam Bullschiff.