Quote:
Originally Posted by G13
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Which case actually allowed evidence and wasn't punted on a "technicality"?
If you have a link I'd love to see it
Here is an example of a case being rejected because of a technicality:
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-c...in-and-Ord.pdf
Most if not all were rejected for this reason. Evidence never saw the inside of a courtroom
But that's why we have audits. So we can get into those machines and verify everything was on the up and up right? |
Here's the summary from SCOTUS Blog
Quote:
|
Issues: Whether a policy by the secretary of state of Michigan extending the deadline to receive absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day until 14 days after Election Day violates federal law and the U.S Constitution.
|
This demonstrates why "forensic audits" are retarded. The "fraud" you're looking for was procedural and very legal, very cool!