Well this is the kind of situation where you declare your hand at the last moment to avoid witness tampering/intimidation. The fact we haven’t seen the evidence doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Equally we haven’t had the chance to evaluate it..... yet. That time will come soon because there is a statutory timetable to meet. It promises to be box office......
If this plays out as I suspect it might, there could be a few folk shuffling their feet insisting they never pre-judged anything. The allegations are far bigger than Trump but go to the heart of whether US democracy has been completely corrupted. Why does every desktop lawyer think they get to have a preview of ‘the evidence’? Most of them don’t begin to understand the process anyway and I wouldn’t pretend to be any better informed. I can however smell and, on this occasion, I don’t think it’s a trump.
I know diddly squid about american court systems or the way that their elections are run. And you may well be correct about the evidence not having been presented yet @Callumity, but from what I have read on many different news outlets (both US and UK) it all would appear to be hot air from Trump. From what I can make out it all needs to confirmed on Monday, so we should see the outcome them.....
Hmmm. Well it might be because if it isn’t a lot of those jokers are looking at long stretches for serious Federal crimes in which they are actively complicit. The enormity of the allegations perhaps, counter intuitively, makes it less likely anyone would make them WITHOUT proof......unless Trump has hired 20+ whackos. But they will be heard through whatever storm of disinformation gets thrown up. And it all has to be resolved for Inauguration on 20th Jan so less waiting for the plot than GoT! Just remember Sky UK and MSNBC share owners, the BBC default is Democrat etc.
Maybe I am wrong but it seems like Trumps lot are hoping for knock downs so he can go to the Supreme Court, a body to which he just recently appointed another Republican Judge to give him a majority!! But the one thing America doesn't have a lot of is democracy, in my eyes; seems to be who ever has most money and influence can buy themselves a big white house anytime they want? The whole thing kind of reminds me of when the Catholic church had more than one Pope, maybe there will be 2 POTUS? Or POTI if thats the plural
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...says-Trumps-lawyers-havent-seen-evidence.html If they have the evidence why not show it? My chocolate raisins are starting to melt waiting for the show to start
Respectfully you are, in my humble opinion , slightly missing the point. Of course money influences and corrupt money influences corruption. However, in a functioning democracy the electorate should always have the decisive vote. Whatever a pretty corrupt media might tell you, that exactly explains Trump. Remember how ‘populism’ - i.e. someone more popular than the establishment - became a dirty word for being popular. I mean, how dare they? Just like attempts to overturn democratic will over Brexit.....but, hey, we were dumb racists just like Trump’s deplorables. And it is all getting lost (or deliberately overlooked) by that same media that electoral law is decided ‘on the balance (UK] or preponderance (US) of evidence i.e. is it more likely than not? It is NOT the criminal standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Not that criminal cases may not subsequently arise......
It’s Sunday I’m a bit bored so I thought I’d see if the allegations made by Sidney Powell and others might have a grain of truth statistically (because all they are looking at is statistics!) So if 7 - 10 million votes were ‘flipped’ that would represent around 4.5% of all votes cast (around 155m going by what the popular vote is reported as) Therefore for a USA wide flipping to have happened we would expect to see a difference between the ballots counted and the ballots declared. There would have to be a hand count to check that the data input agreed to the data output Fortunately we have an example of a hand recount in Georgia where there were some 5million votes - so statistically (if the allegations were true) we would expect an error between the ballots reported and the ballots received of around 225,000 votes In Georgia there was no significant error found, the winning margin was 12,294 votes slightly down from originally reported but nowhere near the 225,000 votes error that would indicate a systemic fraud I still don’t buy the conspiracy theory and don’t believe the allegations of systemic fraud are credible Can anyone show me where I’m wrong?