Election 2020

Trump's Lawyers Claim the Conspiracy To Steal the Election Is Both 'Easily Provable' and Impossible to Prove

Seeking to join a last-ditch effort to overturn Joe Biden's victory, the president's attorney says "it is not necessary...to prove that fraud occurred."

|

Rudy Giuliani, who has been leading the Trump campaign's legal challenge to Joe Biden's election, says the vast criminal conspiracy that supposedly denied the president his rightful victory is "easily provable." Yet he and other Trump supporters have not come close to proving it in court, where they have either failed to present credible evidence or failed even to allege the sort of massive fraud that could have changed the outcome of the election. Trump's motion to intervene in Texas v. Pennsylvania, a last-ditch effort to prevent Biden from taking office, continues that pattern.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is asking the Supreme Court to rule that Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin violated the Constitution by changing election procedures without authorization from their state legislatures. Seeking to join that lawsuit, Trump attorney John Eastman acknowledges the lack of evidence to support the president's conspiracy theories.

"Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven," Eastman writes. "But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable."

According to this account, the scheme to fraudulently anoint Biden as the president-elect, far from being "easily provable," was so clever that it was "undetectable." That argument completely contradicts everything that Trump, Giuliani, and pro-Trump lawyers such as Sidney Powell have been saying for weeks.

They claim the anti-Trump plot left many obvious clues, including statistically impossible vote tallies, "thousands and thousands" of clearly phony absentee ballots delivered in plain sight, illegal directives from election officials, and blatant, pervasive irregularities in accepting and processing votes. "The evidence is overwhelming," Trump insisted during the 46-minute rant he posted on Facebook last week. "Everyone is saying, 'Wow, the evidence.'" But state and federal judges have not been wowed, and Trump's own attorney general says the Justice Department has not seen evidence of "fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election."

Never mind all that, Eastman says. The real problem is that state officials illegally changed the rules in ways that made any conspiracy to steal the election impossible to document. "The unlawful actions of election officials effectively destroy the evidence by which the fraud may be detected," he writes.

In response to a lawsuit by the Democratic Party of Georgia, for example, the Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, agreed to change the state's signature verification procedure for absentee ballots. Under the settlement agreement, Eastman says, ballot signatures were compared to signatures on ballot applications but not to signatures on voter registration cards. "Likely as a result of the Settlement requiring that these statutory requirements be ignored," he writes, "the invalidity rate of absentee ballots dropped from the historic average of about three percent to a miniscule rejection rate of .37%, with the result that approximately 40,000 ballots were counted that, based on historical rejection rates, should not have been counted."

That estimate conveniently exceeds Biden's 12,000-vote lead in Georgia. Yet there is no evidence that anything like 40,000 ballots were fraudulent. Eastman nevertheless figures the theoretical possibility of fraud is enough to overturn Georgia's election results. "It is not necessary for the Plaintiff in Intervention to prove that fraud occurred," he writes. "It is only necessary to demonstrate that the elections in the defendant States materially deviated from the 'manner' of choosing electors established by their respective state Legislatures."

When officials like Raffensperger flout the rules established by state election law, Eastman argues, they violate the U.S. Constitution's Electors Clause, which "assigns plenary power for determining the 'manner' of choosing presidential electors to the Legislature of the State." That is also the main thrust of Paxton's argument.

As Case Western Reserve law professor Jonathan Adler notes, that theory seems to contradict the premise of another pro-Trump lawsuit. In that case, Rep. Mike Kelly (R–Pa.) argued that Pennsylvania's legislature violated the state constitution when it allowed people to vote by mail without any special justification. After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected Kelly's lawsuit, he unsuccessfully asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, arguing that the Pennsylvania legislature's alleged violation of the state constitution was also a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Yet according to Paxton and Eastman, Pennsylvania's legislature has "plenary power" to decide how presidential electors will be chosen.

"Whereas other suits complain about state election administrators or state courts altering state election law without legislative approval," Adler notes, Kelly's suit "claims that the constitutional problem is that Pennsylvania state courts failed to overturn changes to state election law made by the legislature. It is almost as if the theories are not based on principled consideration of the underlying constitutional questions, but are instead constructed to ensure the desired outcome."

If one assumes that Paxton and Eastman are right about the Electors Clause (which implies that Kelly was wrong), that hardly means their case will get a friendly reception at the Supreme Court. "I may need to take back what I said about Rep. Kelly's PA suit being the dumbest case I've ever seen filed on an emergency basis at the Supreme Court," Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, wrote after Paxton filed his case. "This is a press release masquerading as a lawsuit."

Hasen summarizes the problems with Paxton's case: "Texas doesn't have standing to raise these claims as it has no say over how other states choose electors; it could raise these issues in other cases and does not need to go straight to the Supreme Court; it waited too late to sue; the remedy Texas suggests of disenfranchising tens of millions of voters after the fact is unconstitutional; there's no reason to believe the voting conducted in any of the states was done unconstitutionally; [and] it's too late for the Supreme Court to grant a remedy even if the claims were meritorious (they are not)."

Leaving aside the merits of Eastman's legal arguments, the most audacious part of his motion may be his preposterous claim that the president is trying to restore public confidence in the election system. "A recent poll by the reputable Rasmussen polling firm indicates that 47% of all Americans (including 75% of Republicans and 30% of Democrats) believe that it is 'likely' or 'very likely' the election was stolen from the current incumbent President," he writes. "The fact that nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen should come as no surprise….When election officials conduct elections in a manner that contravenes of the Constitution of the United States, grave harm is done not just to the candidates on the ballot but to the citizenry's faith in the election process itself."

According to Eastman, renegade election officials are responsible for undermining that faith. In reality, the blame lies with a president who for a month has been making wild claims of election fraud that even Eastman admits he cannot back up.

NEXT: Stop 'Humoring' Trump

Election 2020 Campaigns/Elections Voting Fraud Conspiracy Theories Donald Trump Joe Biden Supreme Court

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

308 responses to “Trump's Lawyers Claim the Conspiracy To Steal the Election Is Both 'Easily Provable' and Impossible to Prove

  1. I am creating an honest wage from home 1900 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year agone i used to be unemployed during a atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis i used to be endowed these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody, Here is I started.. Here is More information.

    1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have receiveded $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earneings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…..work92/7 online

    2. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing KSQ simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office TER job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    3. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even qwe more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good
      earning opportunity.. USA ONLINE JOBS

  2. Fuck off. You wanted Wall Street and War, and you’re getting it.

    1. Trump’s the real warmonger!

      Evil Orange Man negotiates another peace treaty.

      Another Trump Foreign Policy Milestone: Morocco To Normalize Relations With Israel

      1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..work92/7 online

      2. Phew, thank God for that. I was so worried Morocco was going to go through with their planned invasion of Israel. Stop with this nonsense that Trump is an antiwar President. He withdrew the troops from nowhere, just shuffled them around, while increasing drone strike and relaxing the rules of engagement that led to many more civilians being killed, while drastically increasing Pentagon’s budget. Fuck outta here.

        1. At least you’ve gone in on your transition to pathetic lefty beta.

          1. lol “beta”.

            What a “dweeb”.

    2. We just want elections instead of auto-coups.

      I’ll keep saying it, because none of the cult wants to answer it.

      No other policy matters when your guy wants to get rid of elections, to get rid of ballots that aren’t for him. He is a fascist. He is an enemy of the constitution. He is anti-freedom. He is a traitor.

      1. But openly stating the intention to stack the USSC and grant statehood to Puerto Rico and D.C. for the explicit purpose of permanently shifting the balance of power is totes OK though. Right?

        And you should review the standard for treason in the CFR.

        1. You mean these statements without actions that were made in response to the current auto-coup attempt?

          Trump is currently cheating at an election. The DeJoy USPS actions were a deliberate attempt to sabotage mailed ballots. As is the 50 frivilous lawsuits that either do not allege fraud, or do not contain evidence of fraud.

          Trump raised more money after the election than he did before it. You are all being played. The dictatorship will not die with Trump and his cult of morons, though.

          1. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing sck simple work from home. I have receiveded $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earneings are much better than SLI regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…. Visit Here

          2. “The dictatorship will not die with Trump”

            I can hardly wait for President Harris’s benevolent reign.

            1. An outgoing president spied on his successor and tried to frame him for completely fictional crimes.
              He stayed in DC and continued directing his party and media organs. He orchestrated the nomination of his former Vice President to oust the successor he’d been thus far unsuccessful in stopping, then hand picked “the nominee’s” choice for running mate – a woman who’d previously implied that candidate was a racist rapist.
              His associates in government, tech, and media worldwide fomented viral hysteria through misinformation, racial tension/grievance, and suppression of dissenting voices.
              Through massive funding, mass message coordination, and fundamental changes to the electoral process, not to mention the possibility of targeted or widespread fraud, his former VP and chosen candidate looks poised to be installed in power – and is filling his presumptive administration with the former president’s mandarins and minions.

              It will be, already is to a degree (as can be seen in election data and coverage/response), dictatorship… but not Kamala’s.
              She is simply an instrument – one might say: a mask.

              1. What a vivid imagination you have!

          3. You mean these statements without actions that were made in response to the current auto-coup attempt?

            “In response to”, nothing. These tactics were being discussed two years ago, at the very latest, long before the election. That was when they were printed publicly, who knows how long they were being discussed behind closed doors. And the only reason there’s been no action yet to advance these strategies is because Democrats didn’t hold the White House or the Senate. If they ever again control two branches of government, you can get started enjoying the one-party rule you richly deserve.

            1. Gee, I wonder what could have prompted gamesmanship in regards to the supreme court? I wonder…geee…hmmm…. this is tough…..

              Does ‘Garland’ ring a bell to you?

              1. Yeah, they seem to forget that point. I actually don’t give a fuck about Garland, personally, especially considering what a copsucker he is. I’ll gladly take Gorsuch over him, so I have no real problem with what McConnell did as such. But, yeah, it’s pretty fucking naive to say this started here.

                BTW, it was actually Biden who first came up with the whole “no appointments during an election year” bullshit, but nothing really came of it. McConnell was just a lot better at it, that’s all.

                1. Same. Garland wouldn’t be my pick, but let’s be honest about what led to the situation we have today.

                  1. Oh fuck off Tubby. Garland didn’t get a vote because they weren’t going to confirm him anyway. You democrat bastards lie, cheat and pull every dirty trick in the book. Then you cry like the bitch you are when a republican dares fight back in any way.

                    1. “Garland didn’t get a vote because they weren’t going to confirm him anyway.”

                      In the sense that he would have been confirmed by a comfortable margin if Mitch had put it up to a vote. Which is why he didn’t.

                      ” You democrat bastards lie, cheat and pull every dirty trick in the book”

                      This is an odd way of referring to Mr. McConnell. (not the lying and cheating part, that’s accurate, I mean I think his parents were probably married when he was born.)

              2. Does ‘Bork’ ring a bell to you?

                And anyway, your attempt to move the goalposts has been noted. But now tell me again how these strategies are a response, formulated at least two years ago, to an event that took place last month. Linear time, cause and effect, how do they fucking work?

                1. “Does ‘Bork’ ring a bell to you?”

                  As an example of someone who wouldn’t have been confirmed if a vote had been held? Sure. How is that relevant to a separate candidate who didn’t even get a vote?

                  1. Alright, that’s just how it’s going to be I guess. The mosquitoes are going to buzz, and make all this noise about Supreme Court confirmations, and completely ignore that I called out DOL’s disingenuous bullshit.

                    The Democratic Party is workshopping strategies to implement permanent one-party rule in this country, and DOL says that’s just fine, it’s justified by Trump’s legal challenges to the election. I point out that these strategies were being discussed at a minimum two years before the event he claims justifies them, and no one can respond to that so “Hey! Look over there!”

              3. The Senate would not have confirmed Garland anyway. What would the circus you wanted have achieved?

        2. Tony’s been calling everyone a traitor today too.
          Media Matters must’ve just updated their fifty-center style guide.

          1. Tony should be out to death for his communist treason. And he has no business’s criticizing anyone’s patriotism. As democrats aren’t capable of it.

            1. Is Reason ever going to ban these trolls calling for other commenters to die or be put to death? I mean, I get this is a libertarian site and free speech and all, but …private property?

        3. The Republicans did stack the Supreme court.
          As for Puerto Rico and DC, not gonna happen because you need all the small states to agree (and water down their own votes).
          Making DC its own state would make it too powerful. It litterally controls things like the airport. “Won’t aprove DC budget request? No flight home for you….” The Federalist papers specifically mention this (which is why DC was created in the first place – by constitution).
          As for Puerto Rico, why would they want statehood? They would loose lots of aid because of it and be expected to be almost autonomous – run their own budget, budget for their own disasters. It would be a crazy move.

          1. “The Republicans did stack the Supreme court.”

            Nope. The SC has been set at nine members since 1869. FDR was the last President to attempt to pack the court and he failed.

          2. There was no stacking or packing of the Supreme Court. If that’s the case, then every President who ever nominated a justice and was able to get him/her approved was “stacking” the Supreme Court.

            1. “There was no stacking or packing of the Supreme Court.”

              Of course not. The Senate observed the McConnell Rule and refused to consider any Supreme Court nominations until after the election.

      2. your guy wants to get rid of elections, to get rid of ballots that aren’t for him. He is a fascist. He is an enemy of the constitution. He is anti-freedom. He is a traitor.

        Just like Clinton, who railed against the EC. Quit pretending they are not all tyrants.

        Oh, and enjoy 100 days of face diapers as mandated by Dear Leader. May he lavish his affection upon us like Lennie and his puppy.

        1. Not just like Clinton. Clinton never tried to steal an election.

          And given that she did actually win more votes than Trump, she might have had an actual case to make. But she didn’t and he is. Stop excusing the evil shit you support by lying about others being just as bad. It’s a weak argument, to say the least.

          1. Oh, so now the primaries are not elections. And stop implying I support Trump when I point out fallacies because you are a partisan hack.

            1. She won the primary legitimately too. WTF?

              1. Keep on pushing those goalposts, you mendacious twat.

                1. What are you talking about? Clinton never did anything remotely improper.

                  Trump, by contrast, received foreign help in 2016, actively sought foreign help for 2020 and was impeached for it, and is currently trying to steal the election he lost.

                  What fucking goalpost was that?

                  1. The first goalpost where I didn’t even mentioned elections, I brought up the last 4 years of endless whining about how the EC is racist. Then your denial that she conspired to get Bernie out of the primaries which was proven.

                  2. Um…ask Bernie how he feels about the primary. Oh and Donna Brazile.

                    1. Bernie probably wishes he would have won. But he didnt. I have no time for whiners on the right or left.

                    2. “ask Bernie how he feels about the primary.”

                      You gotta admire the cojones of a fellow who asked for the nomination of a party he doesn’t even belong to. In other news, he didn’t get the Republican nomination, either.

                2. Got any of that E V I D E N C E?

                  Any at all, for any of the bullshit you guys make up to justify this full frontal assault on the constitution? Like just one piece of evidence that a judge would accept.

                  I can’t reiterate strongly enough how easy this should be, given the wide range of offenses the Trump cult alleges.

                  Just one, accepted by a judge, that shows fraud.

                  Should be easy, right?

                  1. “accepted by a judge”

                    Those state AG handpicked judges won’t even review the evidence so that is a little tough.

                    1. In order to present evidence a plaintiff often must first survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Trump team has been stumbling over that initial hurdle; ergo, no opportunity to present evidence in favor of a disallowed claim.

                    2. citation?

                      Evidence has been reviewed many times over the course of 50 lost cases. None of it shows or supports a case for fraud. 0. Zilch. Nada.

                      Those are the facts.

                      Feel free to provide a citation that refutes that.

                  2. Got any of that E V I D E N C E?

                    Filing lawsuits is not treason, nor an attack on the Constitution you hyperbolic halfwit. You might notice, I have never said a word about the election being invalid but your TDS filled in the fucking blanks with delusion that I did.

                  3. “”Got any of that E V I D E N C E?””

                    You seemed to be fine with hearsay evidence during the impeachment.

                    1. Uh, the fact that the impeachment trial did not include sworn testimony (i.e. non-hearsay) is squarely due to the republicans not allowing such testimony.

                    2. You mean statements made under oath by someone who reviewed the call tape and was present for the doctoring of the transcript?

                      That’s not hearsay.

              2. Lol.

          2. Trump is not trying, either. The election process only begins with the actual votes. They need to be counted and certified according to the laws in effect at that time. Court challenges are legal and part of the election process. The Electors are selected and eventually vote. Congress accepts or rejects the electors.

            The fact is, you want to deny a part of the election process because you’re afraid it may not have the result you would prefer. This is what fascists do, so it’s no surprise.

            1. “The fact is, you want to deny a part of the election process because you’re afraid it may not have the result you would prefer. This is what fascists do, so it’s no surprise.”

              The fact is, the voters didn’t like your guy and most of them voted for the other one. So you want them disenfranchised. Speaking of fascists…. deciding a winner of an election without having the count all the votes is one of THEIR things, Mr. Uncomfortable Bedfellow.

        2. No one will enforce an “executive mandate” from the POTUS.

        3. If tRump would have endorsed masks back in May, the 100 days would be over and economy would be coming back. Instead we have enough ‘leakage’ that the pandemic continues. Nice job anti-maskers, worked like a charm.

      3. Yes, the guy who doesn’t want to sell our country to China is the fascist.

        1. Your brain is so fucking pickled it’s a wonder if you can make it to the toilet.

          Trump has been doing almost nothing but exactly what Putin wanted, including ruining the United States. This country is in a shambles. Do you not see that? Do you think anyone on the planet outside of his cult respects Trump?

          China China China! You don’t even know what the fuck you’re talking about, do you? Not a single fucking specific fact. Just an impression given to you by shitty talk show hosts.

          1. “Trump has been doing almost nothing but exactly what Putin wanted, including ruining the United States. This country is in a shambles. Do you not see that?”

            I hear about small businesses going out of business all the time. But I fail to see how Putin or Trump would benefit from that, let alone accomplish it.

            Maybe Trump knew that by advocating against lockdowns…the TDS victim governors would have no choice but to continue them indefinitely. That evil bastard!

            1. Ok, I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try and engage you in discussion as to why you think small business is going out of business.

              Please state a) the underlying root cause of said businesses closing and b) when this started to happen.

                1. I asked you. I didn’t ask NYT.

                  I want you to tell me what you think is causing small businesses to go out of business and when it started happening.

                  1. I asked you. I didn’t ask NYT.
                    Lol.
                    Fuck, you’re flailing hard, WK.

                  2. Is there a sock sale somewhere?

                    1. On every election article, plethora of names that comment exclusively on threads where the subject is the claim/possibility/denial of election fraud.
                      Tis interesting…

                  3. You’re pretty ducking stupid. He answered your dumb ass.

            2. Try having ideas for helping small business that don’t amount to “lie to people so they die.”

              1. Customers should just step over the small business owner’s corpse when they need to get to the products they need. Like they step over piles of dead cashiers everytime they go to the grocery stores, Target, Walmart, etc that are allowed to stay open.

                Do you realize how ridiculous you sound yet?

                1. Am I advocating letting hundreds of thousands of people die for the sake of small businesses? Then no, I don’t think I sound as ridiculous as you.

                  If the economy can’t handle a crisis like this with your ideas, then we need better ideas.

                  1. hundreds of thousands of people die

                    Now you’re just making shit up again.

                    1. He’s hopeless.

                    2. We are approaching 300,000 here. Not sure where the lie is.

                    3. That’s right Mr. Oppresso, every one of those deaths was because small businesses remained open.

                      You and Tony senpai are so smart. Everyone should by everything from Walmart and Amazon for safeties sake.

                    4. beat that strawman. get him! get him!

                    5. The number of total deaths from COVID in the US is very close to 300,000 that is very true.

                      The cause is the virus itself. How we respond to it is up to each of us.

                      Tonight is the first night of Chanukah. Just one light at the end of the menorah. Tomorrow there will be two. Then another and so on.

                    6. “beat that strawman. get him! get him!”

                      GET HIM, SKEETER, YUCK, YUCK, YUCK!!! *SNORT, LAUGH, FART*

                    7. I don’t think you know what the words “from” or “cause” mean, but you’re certainly doing your part to contribute totalitarian propaganda used to destroy people’s lives and the concept of inalienable rights.

                    8. “you’re certainly doing your part to contribute totalitarian propaganda used to destroy people’s lives and the concept of inalienable rights.”

                      What kind of response did you get when you explained your inalienable right to life to the virus?
                      How many lives are destroyed by not getting them sick?

          2. China China China! You don’t even know what the fuck you’re talking about, do you?

            80 million dead are screaming at you through the veil of history and you are like, “LA LA LA – I CAN”T HEAR YOU”.

            You are covering up for the greatest mass murderers in the history of mankind. Chairman Mao would be proud of you.

            1. Nobody is being soft on China dude. Nobody but Trump, who tore up TPP and apparently has a secret bank account there. You’re just repeating words you heard. You don’t have thoughts. Do you know how to have thoughts? Like, that belong to you?

              1. Tony, you are a vacuous moron who steals perfectly good oxygen every time you inhale. Best you just kill yourself.

                And he’s right about China. The democrats are totally in their pockets. Just like Swallowswell, who was fucking a Chinese soy, or Feinstein who had one in her employ for twenty years. Not to mention the Bidens, who are on the ChiCom payroll tot the tune of millions.

                1. Can you people tie your shoes without being racist? Why does every goddamn thing have to be racist?

              2. You’re just repeating words you heard. You don’t have thoughts. Do you know how to have thoughts? Like, that belong to you?

                People who are not serial gaslighters can’t even imagine this kind of haranguing abuse. You are welcome to emigrate to China for the clean air and freedom. Or you can stay here where you will inevitably die bitter and alone.

                1. You need to stop constantly lying about everything.

        2. Pretty sure that even after four years of trump we are still buying a crap-ton of stuff from China.

          1. But they aren’t buying soybeans from us anymore. Donnie had to use tax dollars from you to make it up to the soybean farmers who used to be able to sell soybeans to China.

            I mean, what the hell are Americans going to do with a soybean surplus? Eat the fucking things? I don’t think so.

          2. Not only that, but Hong Kong has been totally screwed. If Trump gets credit for the positive foreign policy developments in the Middle East, where is the criticism for his failures to stop China’s expansion?

            I’m sure Trump is “hard” on China. Plans to build Trump and Scion Brand Hotels in Chinese cities. Paid the Chinese government more in taxes than he paid the US. Ivanka trademark fasttracking.
            $54M in payments from the Chinese government? https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/10/23/forbes-estimates-china-paid-trump-at-least-54-million-since-he-took-office-via-mysterious-trump-tower-lease/?sh=280f8b5aed11

            Oh but let’s talk about Hunter Biden’s low-level corruption? LOL.

        3. The guy that ran up the debt? Uhm, who is buying up that debt?
          The orange headed guy is actively selling the country right now.

          1. Don’t be an idiot. Running up the debt has been a strictly bipartisan endeavor. If anyone is to blame, it’s voters for not demanding more responsibility and accountability.

            1. ” If anyone is to blame, it’s voters for not demanding more responsibility and accountability.”

              Maybe that’s why we have a major political party taking the position that counting all the votes is not how to pick an election winner.

      4. Trump is pushing The Big Lie, just like Hitler, straight out of Mein Kampf. “Hitler’s biggest lie, among many, many told, was that Germany was not beaten in 1918.” Just substitute “Trump’s biggest lie, among many, many told, was that Trump was not beaten in 2020.”

        The cult will die out. All that matters in America, the drivers of culture, the professional classes, the judiciary (including all his judicial appointees), all the money (even Koch has seen the light) and corporate power, the military that understands what the Constitution says…and oh yeah, the cities, the suburbs, and the MAJORITY OF VOTERS are against this con man piece of garbage. Let his followers fume and rant and continue to marginalize themselves. Besides, this fat POS is going to die soon anyway.

        1. Always projection with the left.
          Which makes sense – leftist dominance of culture and institutions is long established, pervasive, and massive.
          To encounter ideas outside the leftist narrative almost always requires intentional effort.*
          The left doesn’t understand their opposition because the left lives completely within their bubble.
          Thus leftists are incapable of speaking to anything but their own motives and intents.
          It’s truly terrifying if you pay attention – they will tell you their plans directly, ever justified by altruism or defense, such as: nationalization of medical industry (to provide care to the unfortunate), confiscation of property (to require all to contribute their fair share toward equity), Green New Deal (to save the world from the existential threat of climate change), mass censorship (to protect the public from misinformation), etc.
          But the left will also tell you their plans, and their current behavior, implicitly – by what they accuse their opposition of.
          Be aware.

          *Incidentally, Trump was a big threat to that – which is why even FoxNews, despite their role as faux opposition, stopped showing Trump speeches unedited – like Twitter, television coverage would provide editorial commentary over/as he was speaking. Unprecedented behavior, at least in the US…

          1. You’ve correctly identified the problem as projection, but completely misidentified who’s doing it.

          2. “which is why even FoxNews, despite their role as faux opposition, stopped showing Trump speeches unedited”

            The fact that Trump struggles to get two consecutive rational sentences out probably has something to do with that.

      5. I find this “auto-coup” term curious.
        Have not encountered it before.
        Please explain.

        1. The Trump administration and his political allies are currently trying to overthrow the duly-elected head of the US government, before he can even take office.

    3. unreason is super scared. They finally paid attention to what Republicans were doing to prevent Biden from stealing an election.

      unreason had a sad.

      1. 4 more days until you crash hard.

        I wonder what the rationalization will shift to then.

        Whoever is LC’s secret santa, I have a suggestion:

        https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1578988527/reasonmagazinea-20/

        1. It will be good when the civil war comes and democrat pussies like you are hauled away like garbage by the dump truck load.

          1. wishful thinking by losers is not compelling.

      2. So now its Biden stealing the election. I thought Biden was hiding in his basement. Which is it?
        If Biden is such a master of control, maybe we should let him run the country for 4 years. I don’t think we should let any more 4th graders do it.

        1. That was logical.

          1. it ran circles around any of Donnie’s stooges’ arguments.

      3. Watching Donnie scramble to find a way to steal the election, you mean.

    4. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing MKL simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    5. Wall Street? WTF??

  3. “But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.”

    Whether or not this happened, this statement by itself is entirely reasonable. Because that’s exactly what happened. Even if the intent wasn’t “to make fraud undetectable”, that was the warning from the get-go. That ballot validation measures would be so sloppy, so hastily organized, that we would be left with a mess of irregularities that anyone could find a pony in.

    Or do you think that Biden “assembled the largest election fraud team in history” on a whim? Oh and that ‘factcheck’ on the election fraud team completely missed the point. Of course Biden wasn’t going to try to defraud the election by “assembling that team”. He assembled that team because he wasn’t going to concede the election “under any circumstances” and his team was also well aware that this election would be chockablock with irregularities that could be infinitely scrutinized.

    1. “There is no remedy to correct the Nov 3rd election because ballots that did not adhere to election law cannot be identified as separate from those that did. An accurate count of legal ballots that were cast cannot be made. Therefore, as directed in the Constitution, it falls to the legislature of each state to choose electors as has been done in the past. Failing that, each state may determine not to submit any presidential electors.”

      https://www.zerohedge.com/political/everything-you-wanted-know-about-texas-election-lawsuit-were-afraid-ask

      Jacob continues to be willfully ignorant of the actual issues at hand.

      1. ” An accurate count of legal ballots that were cast cannot be made.”

        Over here in reality, an accurate count of legal ballots was made, and your guy was selected on fewer of them than the ones that selected the other guy.
        No, it doesn’t make any difference how much you WANTED it to go the other way.

    2. “Whether or not this happened, this statement by itself is entirely reasonable.”

      It’s intended to sound reasonable, right up until you realize it’s batshit crazy.

  4. If it is so ludicrous, why can’t you stop covering it? If there are no facts, how is this newsworthy?

    The Media doth protest too much.

    1. That is a really odd take. It’s a blog where Reason staff write about current events.

      1. Reason has published at least 2-3 columns a day for the last four weeks on how Trump shouldn’t sue.

        It published:
        Zero articles on the Abraham Accords
        Zero articles on Obama using the FBI and CIA to spy on election candidates.
        Zero articles on the Taliban Peace Deal.
        One article (sort of… kinda) on the Uighur holocaust and slave camps
        Zero articles on the Hunter Biden laptop and the pay to play scandal
        Zero articles on the House Democrats making troop withdrawal illegal

        Don’t give me that horseshit that they write on current events. Just like you they’re driven by the DNC’s agenda.

        1. Yet somehow you know about those things even though you didn’t learn about them from reading blog posts (not articles) on the Reason blog (not newspaper).

        2. I guess one reason they didn’t write about the Hunter Biden laptop is because there isn’t one, or if there is Hunter still has it.

      2. It’s a blog where Reason staff write about current events.

        Really? It isn’t a recipe blog? Are your posts always this substantive?

        There is a media frenzy over what the media claims is nothing. They have paraded a seemingly endless stream of ‘experts’ to confirm that this is nothing. But that is not the way you convince people that this is nothing. Lefties in the media know this better than anyone, as they invented the “MoveOn” movement.

        Refusing to engage is how you disarm people like Trump. Making everything all about him is what he wants.

        1. Baloney. Trump and his allies are making repeated attempts to overturn the election. A lot of people are nervous he will succeed, and cannot do anything but wait to see how each new court filing works out. They are not lawyers; they want to see some analysis of the merits, or lack thereof.

          1. Hint: you should be nervous whether the illegitimate election results adverised are successfully challenged and corrected through the courts, or whether they’re not.

            The former will be safer for you.

            1. Jonesin’ for violence and a destroyed country, eh? Or are you going to move into the bottom bunk at Mother’s house and cheer on the death and horror from the safety of Canada?

              1. Keep thinking you won’t be shot in the gut and left to bleed out while your family looks on… and giggles.

                1. It’s probably more likely you’ll shoot yourself.

          2. Trump and his allies are making repeated attempts to overturn the election.

            OK SQRLSY. Trump is failing and this will all be moot once the EC meets. You are welcome to blather on and on about how perfectly valid legal challenges are crimes against humanity, but that will never make it true. Your fantasy that this is some kind of coup is just more Trumptator fan -fiction.

            It’s really bad too. It should have more Trump on Pelosi sex scenes to make it controversial.

            1. No, the controversial sex scenes mostly involve Trump trying and failing. Much like the rest of his term in office.

          3. Those “attempts to overturn the election” are perfectly legal and are part of the entire process for selecting a new President. The fact you want to illegally deny these court challenges is what makes you and those like you the enemy of democracy and of this nation. You apparently want to replace what we have with a facade of something you’ll claim is “democracy”, but which will be manipulated so your preferred faction is in control. The important thing is to suppress and deny any dissenting opinions, protests, or other actions.

            1. “Those ‘attempts to overturn the election’ are perfectly legal”

              The legal ones are. The others are supposed to stay secret.

              “You apparently want to replace what we have with a facade of something you’ll claim is ‘democracy’, but which will be manipulated so your preferred faction is in control.”

              Odd that you ascribe Trump’s strategy to the opposition.

        2. “Refusing to engage is how you disarm people like Trump. Making everything all about him is what he wants.”

          When he stops trying to steal the election, he can go into his retirement and (ideally) nobody needs to ever give a damn what he has to say about anything ever again.

  5. Reason should just change its name to “We Hate Trump”.

    1. I’m surprised they haven’t picked a colour other than orange for the masthead yet.

      1. The web designer made sure it matched to a different Pantone swatch than “Hitler orange”

        1. Reason is 1505 C, but Literally Hitler is 2025 C.

          1. I think you might be confusing somebody else with Hitler wannabe #1. Hitler could get the trains to run on time. Donnie can’t do anything except spread disease.

    2. Mystics had the chance to change their votes and back freedom. Jo could be gloating over 280 electoral votes and Dems throwing screaming tantrums and begging for faithless electors to change the count. But noooooo… The important thing is to bully girls and have cops shoot kids and strangle people. Remember that…

    3. You should subscribe to the John Birch Society newsletter instead. Or how about The Flaming Cross? The Völkischer Beobachter? All you antichoice bigots accomplish here is to firm up resolve to defeat the Kleptocracy in both its factions.

      1. Hank you love seeing babies murdered. So fuck off.

  6. How hard can it be to understand the difference between “proving fraud”, and “proving illegalities that make detecting fraud impossible”?

    If your accountant burns the books in advance of an audit, do you say, “There obviously couldn’t have been any embezzlement: Look, there’s no proof that the books don’t balance!”

    These states systematically violated election laws, and in a way that often made detecting fraud if it did take place impossibly hard.

    But, so what if we can’t prove fraud? It’s not even difficult to prove the illegalities, and they’re illegal, aren’t they? Doesn’t that mean anything?

    Even absent fraud, if the illegalities by themselves could have altered the outcome that should be enough.

    1. The entire press seems to agree that utter lack of transparency in the election process is no big deal and Trump is a whiny baby for pointing it out.

      We are screwed.

      1. My greatest sadness in all this is we don’t get to see the flipside of this where Trump won and Biden’s “largest election fraud team in history” pointed out every irregularity under the sun… except the irregularities were… pushed by the Democratic party.

    2. Changing signature checking procedures is NOT the same as burning your accounts. Changing minor procedural details does not need full legislative support. The audit trail is still there, however, check the ballot request forms against the voter registration forms. Not only is there no evidence of fraud here, there is no evidence of hiding fraud either.

      If the state legislatures feel that the legislation was not followed, then it’s up to that state legislature to sue. NOT TEXAS! Texas does not have standing. It does not have evidence. It has nothing except “gosh, procedural details were changed to accommodate the national lockdown”. Which is not sufficient to overturn a national election.

      Is there no one in Pennsylvania who can sue Pennsylvania? Oh wait, they did. And they lost. This is just another case of “when dad says no, go ask mom, when mom says no go ask gramma.” The GOP is naively assuming there’s a gramma court out there that will pat them on the head, give them a cookie, and invalidate the national election.

      1. Your citations fell off.

        Changes to election laws DO require state legislature approval.

        Democrats lost and it is hilarious.

        1. Even that were true and it’s not the Republican Trump won states did the same fucking thing. You’re impossibly stupid.

          1. You should commit suicide. As you are the dumbest cunt of all.

        2. Laws rarely specify procedural details. Those details get decided by those who implement the laws.

          1. The Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) positioned hundreds of unmanned illegal drop boxes to collect absentee ballots. (The use of any drop box, manned or unmanned, is directly prohibited by Wisconsin statute. Any alternate mail-in ballot site “shall be staffed by the municipal clerk or the executive director of the board of election commissioners…” “Ballots cast in contravention of the procedures specified in those provisions may not be included in the certified result of any election.”)
            In Georgia The Secretary of State authorized opening and processing mail-in ballots up to three weeks before election day when the law prohibits that until after the polls open on election day. These are straightforward violations of state law not implementing it.

      2. The PA Supremes ignored the constitutional issue of the Legislature (in Act 77 of 2019) adding a third class of electors two the two painstakingly described in the PA constitution.

        Instead they said nanny nanny boo boo, you can’t sue, because (1) Act 77 said any lawsuit pertaining to Act 77 had to happen within 180 days of its passage and (2) because you waited over a year to sue and the doctrine of laches says No.

        Well in the case of (1), how can a law, which is unconstitutional, have a provision in it that is also unconstitutional because it limits the People’s right to a redress of grievances? And in the case of (2), doesn’t that set up a perfect Catch-22: if you sue before the election, you have no standing because there is no injury; and if you sue after the election, you have no standing because you waited too long?

        The absolutely delicious part of the Pennsylvania situation is that Act 77 of 2019, which created the mail-in ballot fiasco, was created by and passed with overwhelming Republican support. They arrogantly passed an unconstitutional law and the Dems found a way to use it to scam the election.

    3. But you guys were saying you have evidence of fraud the whole time. So if you a) say you found fraud (which people did say, multiple times) and then you b) say the fraud is undetectable…

      Don’t those two contradict each other?

      You guys were literally tripping over yourselves putting links in the comments of fraud with Dominion voting systems and all sorts of fraud that you claimed to be your evidence.

      Now you are saying there is no evidence of fraud because its undetectable???

      And you are even questioning yourself now? “…if it did take place …”

      What happened to the claims of mountains of evidence of fraud that Nardz and JesseAZ and all of you others were claiming???

      Throw spaghetti at a wall and see what sticks? I think you guys forgot to boil the noodles first.

      1. Its almost as though the thing you guys accuse us of (aka swallowing media talking points) is exactly what you are doing with Trump talking points. “Ope, Trump changed directions, time to switch, too!”

      2. The state has the burden to show that there was no election fraud. Once a campaign or person exposes election fraud evidence, the state does not get to waive it away.

        1. 1-50.

          50 losses, with at least one more on the way.

          Where’s that Kraken now?

          1. “losses”

            I know you’re here to lie, but let’s unpack your claim.
            First, how are these all ‘losses’?

            1. People would usually call it losing when you bring a case, and it is dismissed and given back, along with a judicial tongue lashing.

              1. And you’re saying that happened in fifty cases, or just one (We’ll get to that one in a minute).
                If the latter, then how were the other “49 cases” losses?

                1. 50 losses as of yesterday. Might be a few I’ve missed.

                  1. You miss a lot of things. You’re a progtard.

        2. You are dead wrong, lc1789. The burden of pleading and proving fraud always rests upon the party positing the existence of the alleged fraud.

        3. Fraud evidence. Is this that undetectable fraud evidence? How did you detect it? If you have it then show it to a court. So far no one has shown any to a court.

          1. There is no evidence that brandybuck was murdered by his wife, despite brandybuck’s absence from the world and video of her pointing a gun at him and pulling the trigger, because she disposed of the body and the gun.

      3. ‘I think you guys forgot to boil the noodles first.’

        joins my growing list of things I wish I’d have said…

    4. There’s simply no way that the Supreme Court is going to disenfranchise entire states without compelling evidence. It’s not enough for Texas to say, “We know it’s rotten and those tricky bastards in Pennsylvania covered their tracks.” They need proof. Oh, and pro tip: The Pennsylvania legislature has Republican majorities. It’s some next level trickiness to have Republicans change the voting laws so Democrats can steal the election in an unprovable way.

      1. Such faith by Jose that Top Men will give him exactly what he wants.

        I must admit that I lack such faith in Top Men to do the right thing, uphold the constitution, and act with integrity.

        Fortunately for Jose, and unfortunately for our nation and all who value freedom from tyranny, what he wants is in direct opposition to those things I’ve listed.

      2. I figured this from the start. I’m hoping something will get done with regard to improving establishing and improving election laws the the election process. It’s important to have an election where the results can be trusted for some other reason than “because we won”.

    5. Well said Brett. Excellent post.

      1. If you accept that train of “logic” then wait until you hear about the Mueller report!

        1. I actually read the Mueller Report.
          All of it.
          And I’ve made notes I just happen to have on this computer.

          Shall we get into that?

          1. I can’t wait.

            1. Pedo Jeffy, quit pretending to be other people, including your valor theft, and just commit suicide. You are without any value, and no one could ever possibly love you.

      2. 10 counts of obstruction. Trump said he would go under oath. He lied.

    6. “How hard can it be to understand the difference between “proving fraud”, and “proving illegalities that make detecting fraud impossible”?”

      Since the Trump legal team and his witless supporters can’t do either of these things, what real difference is there?

  7. “As Case Western Reserve law professor Jonathan Adler notes, that theory seems to contradict the premise of another pro-Trump lawsuit. In that case, Rep. Mike Kelly (R–Pa.) argued that Pennsylvania’s legislature violated the state constitution when it allowed people to vote by mail without any special justification. ”

    I don’t necessarily agree with the Trump team, but this is a crazy formulation. It is not contradictory to say that 1) The US Constitution restricts election law to the State Legislature and 2) The State Constitution limits what laws the Legislature may make.

    There is no contradiction to that at all.

  8. I think the Republicans think what happened in big Democrat-controlled cities recently is a lot like the Lois Lerner IRS non-event. Dozens of left-wing groups were quickly granted tax-free status while scores of TEA groups needed years of study to be considered for the same, and most were never granted. A statistical look at what happened gives a very fishy look to the whole thing, but conveniently destroyed hard drives will prevent any possibility of proof.
    Since poll watchers were not allowed to be close enough to see anything, no proof can be presented.
    Let’s hope the Registrar of Voters in Fulton County will allow the watchers to either be close enough to use video recording equipment or even to sit alongside the vote counters.

    1. They are quite similar. They’re both fake controversies manufactured by rightwingers.

      1. Fuck off, fascist.

        1. Mommy’s Little Hitler here could have voted for Jo and with a little help from its buddies, left the Dems crying in the dust with 258 electoral votes. But freedom ain’t on the Nationalsocialist agenda.

      2. No, Tony, they’re not. You’re just a disingenuous sociopath that will never accept responsibility for your actions.

        Just like every other filthy democrat traitor.

    2. Luckily, the case against Democrat fraud is so strong that there are multi pronged legal claims that survive Democrats trying to hide evidence.

      The media tried to ignore this and now they are attacking the election fraud claims because they know Biden lost. Biden lost once Trump didnt concede.

      1. You’re a fool who believes every conspiracy theory he reads.

        1. Fuck off. You’re an idiot.

          1. If this complaint came from someone whose opinion was worth anything, it might really sting.

  9. So get rid of all doubt and end mail in ballots and absentee ballots except for military personnel.

    Ah but they don’t want that. Democrats don’t want an honest election. They want to have mail in ballots so they can stuff the ballot box. Don’t give me the line about signature verification. It’s nonsense. They want everyone to have a ballot so they can harvest them. They want to get rid of the electoral college so California a one party state can be the deciding vote. Add a few more states for the senate and pack the courts and there will be no reason to vote anymore.

    Republicans either better start being good at this ballot scheme cooked up by democrats or they need to end mail in and absentee ballots. Because a one party state is gonna get awful rough and tumble.

    1. How about the majority gets its way in an election? Do you have some sort of problem with that?

      1. I though Democrats were the “majority”. Democrats tried to cheat and got their face smacked for it.

      2. A majority of states or counties vote in the presidential election. A majority of yokels vote in the down-ballot elections. You can move to any of 200 looter satrapies with no electoral college or Bill of Rights–if they’ll have you.

    2. Democrats want more people to vote. Republicans want fewer people to vote.

      Make of that what you will. I find the conclusion to be drawn is rather obvious.

      1. Let the whole world vote in our election! What could go wrong?

        1. Reductio ad absurdum, and not even properly executed. Tsk tsk.

          1. “Woman with a penis, and males who menstruate are not abnormal”
            “2+2=5”
            “New normal”

      2. People who are so informed and dedicated to public policy that they’ll come out to vote on their own, is a good thing.

        When you start fishing votes from people who are either lazy or don’t care, then you start getting less informed decision making in the election outcomes.

        So yes, it is good to want fewer people to vote because you’ll get a higher proportion of highly informed votes versus what the average Democrat voter contributes.

        1. If it is only good to have votes from people dedicated to public policy, that would rule out all trump voters…

          1. You progtards are stupid and tiresome. You’re also willfully ignorant.

        2. “So yes, it is good to want fewer people to vote because…”

          You could stop right there.

        3. In this post, el gato outs himself as a fascist constitution hater.

          1. I’m opposed to mob rule. Mobs tend to ignore pesky things called “constitutions.”

    3. Florida has had mail in ballots for a long time and no one has ever complained. Since I moved here I haven’t once done in-person voting…

      1. That’s because one good think Jeb did as governor was fix election procedures after the butterfly ballot debacle that resulted in bush v gore

        1. Maybe I should move to Texas and help that state turn blue!

    4. The biggest problem is that Republicans will see Democrats as cheating and succeeding, which will justify Republicans cheating, which in turn will justify Democrats cheating, and so on. We really don’t want things to spiral down that hole. Any honest Democrat would want a complete and thorough investigation into any alleged voter fraud or an other irregularities to head this off. Any honest Democrat would want a fair, transparent, auditable, and secure election. However, over the past couple of decades they seem to have been heading in the direction of less secure elections and more easily manipulated results. They are much more interested in the what political power can be gained in the short term. I don’t claim Republicans are much better and the roles may be reversed in the future, but this is now.

    5. “So get rid of all doubt and end mail in ballots and absentee ballots except for military personnel.”

      Let’s get rid of anything that helps people vote, unless it’s helping people who vote the way we like to vote.

      Here’s a crazy notion Republicans could try: Support things that the majority of voters like.

  10. Still no comment from Reason about the affidavits attached to the Texas AG’s filing, alleging various violations of election laws and rules in the four states mentioned in the suit.

    1. Why would there be comment on them? Perhaps to note that many of these same affidavits have already been judged in other courts to be unreliable or irrelevant.

    2. If you mystics had voted Libertarian instead of clinging to the idea of bullying women and shooting kids over leaves, Biden’s party would have 258 electoral votes and be begging electors to NOT let Jo Jorgensen have the 280 electoral votes. You mindless brutes handed Biden the election, and now come crying to us to change the laws and your diapers. Man up and wise up.

      1. I hereby agree that many republicans ought to start voting Libertarian!

        1. Or just stay at home on election day.

  11. From what I have been hearing what is going on in the elections if just half of it is true then, YES, I could agree that there is election rigging going on. If there is a possibility of election rigging then it needs to be investigated. Neither state courts nor federal district courts are willing to get involved. Now I hope this is not because these judges are not just anti-Trump. Now if these charges of election rigging proves to be untrue then all is well and good, but if these chares are true I would none of these judges would support the idea or the fact that a president was selected because of felonious votes. Our elections need to be a reflection of the voters of the nation and not of a manipulated election where the outcome has been predetermined.

    1. Frankly, there doesn’t seem to be an actual avenue to investigate fraud. The entire system seems designed to declare a winner within a few hours and then destroy any sense of accountability. Recounts, audits and court challenges can’t possibly address the allegations.

      We should view election interference the same way we look at how Hillary destroyed evidence about Benghazi and her private server. People don’t destroy evidence for no reason. We need to amend future election procedures so that elections can be fully challenged and individual votes can be verified. At this point, the majority of votes cannot be verified in any capacity. You just have to trust the process and that’s exactly what is being challenged.

      1. It will be too late.
        THIS is the hill to die on, because it’s the last chance The People will have.

    2. “From what I have been hearing what is going on in the elections if just half of it is true then, YES, I could agree that there is election rigging going on.”

      There ABSOLUTELY was some attempted election-rigging going on. Done by and for the people currently whining about election-rigging.

      Trump had 3 and half years to run the country in such a way that people would WANT him to keep the job, and most of them did not want him to keep the job, so he isn’t. Quit bitching about being less than half of the voters.

  12. Still waiting on a good answer to this question: given that it is an alleged conspiracy, how exactly would outsiders with no investigative powers prove it? How could they hope to obtain such information when it is concealed?

    This isn’t the first time voter fraud has occurred, or at least signs of voter fraud have been ignored by the powers that be. Are all these investigators, witnesses, statisticians and experts lying partisan hacks? Are they destroying their careers and reputations for personal gain? No, they seriously believe something is afoul based on the information and you honestly have to be delusional to ignore the evidence thus far. The statistical irregularities are troubling on their own, but combined with procedural changes and failures in chain of custody and signature verification, you simply are not acting in good faith if you think everything is fine as is.

    1. Answer: With evidence. So you think a vast conspiracy can rig a national election of 50 states and a shit ton of local governments and leave zero evidence? And these are the same people who run the federal government? Evil or not, I’d love to see that kind of competence at any level of government. I don’t know that anyone is saying the election was perfect or even “fine.” I think it’s fucking ridiculous to wait in line for hours to vote. That’s almost Comcastic. But delusional is imagining this is the result of the greatest conspiracy in human history.

      1. That’s the thing. Who defines what evidence is? Did you watch any of the hearings? It’s not like they bloviated for hours on end about mere nothings. Data was presented about how the turnout and vote data from large, Democrat majority cities with a history of single-party control and corrupt politics doesn’t comport with national demographics. Video evidence and testimony from ballot watchers was presented, showing suspicious activities that couldn’t be explained. Procedures and legal interpretations were questioned that make verifying a significant number of votes impossible at this point. The most egregious example of irregularities is what we have seen so far in Fulton County, where a supposed water main break that had zero impact on election integrity was used as the impetus to send counters and observers home, only for counting to resume once Republicans were gone.

        Worst of all, we see a targeted effort from mainstream media and their “fact checking” surrogates parroting the same narratives, rife with omissions. We’re just supposed to believe that because the board of elections says so that it is so. Of course they’re not going to incriminate themselves and at this point, it’s their word against ours. They say nobody was forced to go home, yet they had no problem allowing the Republicans to leave and resume counting. Republicans say they were told to go home. The fact that we even have to rely on hearsay is insane and the rest of the world is laughing at us for our election procedures. We’re told that this same media has “independently” verified all this information and they’re gaslighting us into thinking they’re nothing more than the propaganda arm of the Democrat party. These are the same people who parroted Russian collusion for four years with even less evidence and now they won’t give a presidential election more than five minutes. Do they care about spreading the information far and wide? No, they’re going full censor mode. YT is deleting everything. Twitter and FB will continue to brand our claims as fake.

        If there was no fraud, or at least no fraud widespread enough to alter the outcome, then these people could not possibly be handling the situation any worse. I worked in municipal government for a period of time and during an ethics training, we were taught that the appearance of unethical behavior is just as bad, if not worse, than actual behavior. Everyone involved in this election should be as transparent as possible, yet the current winners remain silent and legitimate questions are met with censorship, not enlightenment. If there’s nothing to hide, this is not how you show it.

        You know why there are still Nazis today? Because some countries like Germany criminalize Holocaust denial, which is free ammo to anyone looking to dispute the authenticity of the best documented event in world history. If it’s so obvious and so easy to prove, just prove it.

        1. The most egregious example of irregularities is what we have seen so far in Fulton County, where a supposed water main break that had zero impact on election integrity was used as the impetus to send counters and observers home, only for counting to resume once Republicans were gone.

          This is wrong, and you need to go back and check the timeline.

          The water leak issue was in the morning.

          The counting without observers was at night, over twelve hours later.

          And the ballots that were counted without observers had been opened in view of observers earlier in the day, and were then under video surveillance the entire time. There is no reason to single those ballots out as suspicious.

          That whole incident was a fuck up, but there is no reason to think it was more than that.

          1. There is plenty of reason to suspect it was more than that, starting with contemporaneous press reports quoting the director of elections as stating that counting would be/was stopped at 10:30 pm.

        2. So the appearance of killing someone in cold blood is worse than actually killing them? You know who watches hearings? The judges presiding over them. The simple reality here is that no amount of evidence ever disapproves a conspiracy theory to the conspiracy theorists. Five minutes? This could be investigated for five years. The 9/11 Truthers think the rest of the world is nuts. So do the Flat Earthers. And seriously, I don’t think I’ve heard anything dumber than the reasons there are Nazis today is because some countries criminalize Holocaust denial. I’ve bumped into Neo-Nazis in Germany on their way to a march or some such thing. Apparently, they didn’t get the memo. The rest of the world is laughing at Americans because 1) it is the most arrogant country on the planet (and that’s going up against the French); 2) it is one of the dumbest nations on earth.

          1. ” The simple reality here is that no amount of evidence ever disapproves a conspiracy theory to the conspiracy theorists.”

            This is true. At a certain point, the absence of evidence just shows how powerful and well-connected the conspiracy “really” is.
            This is why people committed to reality mostly just ignore the conspiracy theorists and their wackadoodlery.

        3. “That’s the thing. Who defines what evidence is?”

          Gosh, it’s a pity that there’s never been a legislature who ever set down to write a statute book on the subject, and never been any court cases that tried to define evidence law.

    2. given that it is an alleged conspiracy, how exactly would outsiders with no investigative powers prove it

      A good starting point is for them to present the things that they think point to fraud. And then we can go from there.

      I haven’t exhaustively investigated every single claim, but I have tried to look into a lot of the claims of statistical irregularities, and so far all the ones I have looked at are either a) wrong or b) can reasonably be explained without invoking fraud. In the case of b), I’ve tried to ask for additional arguments for why fraud is more likely than other explanations, and generally been met with silence.

      Another option is for people without investigatory powers to contact people who do have investigatory powers, such as the US Department of Justice. The DOJ has, in fact, openly expressed willingness to investigate these claims, but to-date I’m not aware of any of those investigations confirming the allegations of fraud. I admit that some may still be ongoing.

        1. I can actually explain this quite easily, because it is one of several flawed analyses that rely on the data set scraped from the website of the NYT, which is in turn supplied by Edison Research.

          The Edison Research dataset contains a time series for the cumulative total vote and the current fraction of the total vote for each the candidates, for each state. Note that it’s unofficial data, but that is unimportant for our purposes here.

          In order to get the number of votes for Biden and Trump for each individual update, it is necessary to multiply the total number of votes by the fraction of the total number of votes for Biden and Trump, and then compare that to the same calculation from the previous update.

          We can write a formula for this. Let “v” by the total number of votes at some time, “fb” be the fraction for Biden, “ft” by the fraction for Trump, “vb” be the actual number of votes for Biden, and the subscripts “1” and “2” denote a particular update and the one that follows it.

          The number of votes for Biden in given update is
          v_2*fb_2 – v_1*fb_1

          Similarly for Trump, it is
          v_2*ft_2 – v_1*ft_1

          Then, the ratio of Biden to Trump votes for a given update is

          r = (v_2*fb_2 – v_1*fb_1)/(v_2*ft_2 – v_1*ft_1)

          This ratio is what is being plotted vs time in the plots with axes “D/R Ratio of Batch” and “Batch Reporting Time”

          So far, this is all perfectly fine. BUT, there is one big issue with the data set that is being used. fb and fv, that is the current fraction of the total vote for Biden and Trump, is only reported to three decimal places.

          Very early in the night, when the total number of votes counted is small, any given update is likely to cause a big swing in the margin for Biden or Trump. This is simply because each update is a significant fraction of the total votes. But as time goes on, the updates are a small fraction of the total number of votes, and at some point they are so small that any one update cannot change the margins in the first three decimal points. This is equivalent to a bunch of updates where fb and ft doesn’t change.

          What happens to our formula for r when fb_2 = fb_1 and and ft_2 = f_1?

          It simplifies to the fb_2/ft_2.

          In other words, at some point, you are not actually plotting the ratio of Biden to Trump votes in each batch. You are simply plotting the ratio of Biden’s fraction of the total vote to Trump’s fraction of the total vote at that time.

          In states that moved more towards Biden as mail-in ballots were counted, that ratio moved steadily more in favor of Biden.

          But what about the weird jumps?

          Those are simply when fb or ft, rounded to three decimal places, finally turned over in the third digit (alternatively, it could be an update large enough to change things in third digit, but once the updates got smaller than the total number of votes/1000, that didn’t happen). But it takes lots of cumulative updates for that to happen, so you see steady, steady, steady, and then boom, the third digit turns over. It’s like only looking at your odometer down to the mile, instead of the more smoothly varying 1/10th of a mile.

          If the numbers in the Edison Research data set were reported to high enough precision, these effects would disappear.

          Why was the Edison Research data not reported to higher precision? Because it was only formatted to be used in graphical displays on the NYT website that reported the total number of votes counted and the current percentage for Biden and Trump (along with things like the total fraction of precincts reporting, which is also in there but not used in the analysis you linked to).

          The analysis you link to is trying to do something sensible, but the data set they are using simply isn’t precise enough to be used for this task.

          That’s really all it is.

          BTW, this is the exact same issue (manifested in a slightly different way) that was reported as “impossible vote ratios” by Gateway Pundit (they used the same data set).

          1. “In states that moved more towards Biden as mail-in ballots were counted, that ratio moved steadily more in favor of Biden.”

            It shouldn’t. It should stay where it was, like it did in states like MN and Florida. Or, conversely, you should see something similar in other states except moving from Biden to Trump, and I haven’t seen anything like that (not that it doesn’t exist, I just haven’t seen it).

            Beyond that, the weirdness didn’t start in most of these examples until roughly half way through the chart, not really early as you just said.

            And your explanation of the weird jumps would only move the numbers very VERY little. It would also be seen in the other States, and it wasn’t.

            It looks like you’re reaching to me…

            1. If your voter base is homogenous, then it won’t change as different groups get counted. If they’re not, then counting the votes of groups that like one side better than the other will give you more votes that like one side better than the other.

              Republicans, as a whole, showed up to vote in person, so when you stick to counting votes that came from people who showed up to vote in person, you get a lot of Republican votes. If you wait to count the votes of people who preferred to vote by mail until after you’ve counted all the in-person votes you would expect to see an edge for Trump initially, followed by more and more votes that were not for Trump. This is not evidence of fraud, it’s evidence that Democrats successfully convinced a lot of their supporters to vote by mail. Disenfranchising everybody who voted by mail is great for Trump, but very, very bad for our country and for general notions of fairness, which is why it appeals so much to Republicans, who’ve sold their souls to Trump and no longer care about the good of our country.

        2. “I’ll listen, I’m reasonable.”

          There’s always the common-sense approach. Start by assuming that a vast and powerful conspiracy of Democratic-leaning people exists. Now, explain why these people who want the Presidency in the hands of the Democrats didn’t bother to arrange for a Democratic edge in the Senate. (Maybe they aren’t strong enough to arrange for 66 Democratic seats in the Senate, or even 60, but why fewer than 50. Apparently, this huge conspiracy wants President Biden to be blocked from doing anything. Alternative theory: This conspiracy was run by Mitch.

          1. I assume that the Presidency is worth Trillions of dollars to certain groups. I assume they have no outside force that impels them to be honest (like God or something). I assume that lots of people do believe what they are told, that Trump is the worst person ever (to be fair, he’s a really bad person, so I understand that one).

            I also have been paying attention to politics for several decades, and some Democrats cheat. Having Trump in the Oval office is akin to Satanists taking over the Vatican. It’s an attack on their “god” (the State).

            I would have happily believed that Trump lost fairly, except I keep getting all this evidence to the contrary, and those arguing against it usually:
            A. Ignore it
            B. Call people names
            C. Appeal to ridicule

            That’s not the behavior of people on the side of truth (usually).

            BTW, I didn’t vote Trump, because he’s evil.

            -An An-Cap

            1. “I assume that the Presidency is worth Trillions of dollars to certain groups. ”

              But you assume the Senate is worth $nil???

              Trump lost because a majority of voters want him out.

  13. “Texas doesn’t have standing to raise these claims as it has no say over how other states choose electors.”

    Exactly. This case is a non-starter and wasting the Supreme Court’s time and the taxpayers’ money. It should be dismissed in one line.

    1. I thought you fags loved frivolous litigation.

      1. What does this have to do with whether or not the shitlords love frivolous litigation?

        1. Hypothesis:
          the group “you fags” includes Mr. Shitlord, as well as many of his woodchipper followers and friends.

    2. This case was filed because somebody in the Texas AG office is hoping to receive a pardon by next month, and they want it badly enough to waste some Texas taxpayer money.

  14. If the idea were to defeat the commie dems and reinstate a democratic free-market plutocracy, the GOP could have made their platform more libertarian–like the Dems did. If the idea were to preserve freedom despite missing that boat, Republicans could have voted for Jo Jorgensen and gotten 280 electoral votes to Biden’s 258. A clear defeat for communism. It looks as though GPª fanatics figured bullying girls and shooting kids over plant leaves were more important than winning the election to keep America free. The Libertarian Party won by causing the Dems to change their platform. There is a lesson in that.

    1. If Republicans wanted to win in 2020, they would have nominated somebody without a toxic cloud associated with their name. They didn’t and got what they deserved.

      The obvious example of 2016 and the Democrats escaped them utterly.

  15. Where is Eric Coomer?

  16. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is asking the Supreme Court to rule that Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin violated the Constitution…

    Has Reason reported that 18 other states have joined Texas’ lawsuit? Seems germane,

    https://www.thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/529614-18-states-join-texas-case-seeing-to-overturn-biden-win%3famp

    1. When someone cites the states that have joined the suit, I would always point out that the rest of the states (a much larger number) did not join the suit.

    2. It turns out that 17 submitted briefs supporting Texas, but only six actually joined Texas motion.

      And Ohio filed a brief arguing against the relief sought by Texas.

      https://reason.com/volokh/2020/12/10/are-some-of-the-state-attorneys-general-supporting-the-texas-election-suit-getting-cold-feet/

      1. Thanks for clarification

        1. Thank you but the civil response! It does not go unnoticed 🙂

    3. “Has Reason reported that 18 other states have joined Texas’ lawsuit?”

      I would guess that Reason has not reported this, on the technicality that it is not true.

  17. It was unconstitutional when he taxed the American people by EO. It was unconstitutional when he banned bump stocks by EO. And what the states did was unconstitutional by not operating under republican (not the party) rule and changing election laws by dictates. Perhaps if he had spent more time actually draining the swamp and returning us to a constitutional republic then perhaps he’d win this case. As it stands we no longer live in a constitutional Republic and that started happened before Trump but he could have changed the trajectory; instead he furthered the decline.

    I’d laugh if it weren’t so fucking depressing

    1. You could be relieved that at least we’re not going to have a president who a sizable majority of voters rejected twice.

      1. What? But look at all his accomplishments! We got that new, better-than-Obamacare health care system back on Day One, and Mexico paid for building that beautiful, beautiful wall.

    2. Enjoy leftist tyranny then.
      You won’t have a choice.

      1. Thing is, the leftists in the US aren’t any better at tyranny than was the Donald, so no big deal, eh?

    3. “we no longer live in a constitutional Republic”

      That change occurred in 1865…get with the times man!

    4. ” Perhaps if he had spent more time actually draining the swamp”

      Trump had no interest in “draining the swamp”, he wanted a way to get himself in line for a percentage.

      He didn’t want to be President, he wanted (and wants) to be King. Fortunately for him, we allow unre-elected Presidents to retire and don’t give them the Louis XVI treatment.

  18. My favorite comments are where trump humpers get all scary and start telling us poor libs how we are going to get what we deserve. Big tough words from internet heroes!

    1. Come to Jacksonville.

      1. Are those more tough words from a tender man?

      2. “Come to Jacksonville.”

        Why would ANYONE want to do that on purpose?

        1. My grandparents had car trouble there once, they said it was a horrible place they would never revisit.

          1. AFAIK, the only reason to resettle in Florida is because you think you’re going to be indicted if you stay in New York.

  19. Jesus christ you motherfuckers are fucking sad. I mean, it would be laughable except for the part where millions of goons like you idiots are going to swallow the “fraud” line and there will be a general degradation of trust in elections even though there’s absolutely no evidence of fraud whatsoever.

    Cling on, you fucking chumps.

    1. At the end of the day, you are forced to deal with us whether you like it or not. You ass eaters brought this on yourselves.

      It appears you got your pyrrhic victory, but you still got caught and failed to convince half the country to trust you. This is the last gasp of a wounded and dying swamp creature; mortally wounded by Trump!

      Enjoy your joke of a sleepy “president” for the next four years…and all it cost you was Trumpism raging stronger than ever going forward. I hope it was worth it.

      1. Denying reality doesn’t change anything about reality, but you go on being you, because nobody cares.

        1. You cared enough to read my post & respond.

          And there are enough tens of millions just like me, so we can force you to care, just by our collective mass of righteous outrage.

          1. Your put-on “we wuz wronged!” wail was, is, and will continue to be laughable, so if your goal is to provoke laughter, keep on with it.

  20. “ The fact that nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen should come as no surprise….When election officials conduct elections in a manner that contravenes of the Constitution of the United States, grave harm is done not just to the candidates on the ballot but to the citizenry’s faith in the election process itself.””

    And “mainstream” social media stooges censor the evidence.

    Censoring evidence propagates conspiracies.

    1. “Censoring evidence propagates conspiracies.”

      Declining to advance your wackadoodle theories is not censoring evidence, but I’d agree it probably propagates your conspiratorial thinking.

  21. He hasn’t even taken office and already there’s Biden Derangement Syndrome. The illiberal Right and the illiberal Left should both fuck off.

  22. 60% of Republicans and around 20% of Democrats believe that this election lacked a certain integrity of process. Biden and Harris will have to live with that legacy.

    1. That there are a significant number of Republicans unmoored to reality is not a new revelation.

  23. For Exam Preparation you can download soft Books free by clicking below link:
    https://testpreparation.pk/imtiaz-shahid-books-pdf-free-download/

  24. Trudeau wants mail-in ballots now.

    Scammers see a good scam when they see one.

    Thanks for nothing America.

    1. know a good scam.

      1. Get yourself an election observer job and a good camera.

        Your time in the Reason comments arguing with trolls was practice for the inevitable poll worker bullying.

    2. Do you have a single sentence of evidence that mail-in ballots are less secure? Do you even have a theory about it?

      1. Ya; Theory — What would make a person believe mail-in orders are more prone to fraud than holding up a gas-station in person????

        Uh………………. Common-Sense?

        1. “Theory — What would make a person believe mail-in orders are more prone to fraud than holding up a gas-station in person????

          Uh………………. Common-Sense?”

          Great. Write back when you have some.
          Trump’s conspiracy theory doesn’t pass the common-sense test. He hypothesizes a giant, well-connected conspiracy of people out to give the Presidency to the Democrats using any means necessary… except that is conspiracy apparently has no interest whatsoever in delivering the Senate to the Democrats, as well. Yeah, that sounds likely.

    3. No comment from Mother’s. It’s Canadian politics, so doesn’t interest him.

    4. Dominion is a Canadian company, so they helped too.

    5. “Trudeau wants mail-in ballots now. ”

      They work well, except for people disinclined to respect reality.

  25. This is fucking lunacy. Covid must be burning up what was left of Giuliani’s brain. You would think as a former tv reality show star trump would understand that shows do really get cancelled.

    1. His ratings are down.

  26. “Seeking to join a last-ditch effort to overturn Joe Biden’s victory, the president’s attorney says “it is not necessary…to prove that fraud occurred.””

    We all know that’s not what Trudy, opps I mean Rudy is really thinking. He’s thinking, “God Damnit. Why didn’t I think of that.”
    😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

    1. He’s thinking, he works for Trump. He doesn’t actually have to accomplish anything. He just has to say he’s accomplishing something.
      Rudy once thought he was Presidential material. Now I doubt he could win his old job back again.

  27. The Bohemian waxwing is a medium-sized melodic bird with a separate head and black masks. It is brown-gray on the body, while its fins have a white and yellow border. Thus, the Bohemian Waxwing is one of the most beautiful birds in the world.

    These birds live in the northern forest throughout North America and Eurasia, mainly in Canada and Alaska. In winter they migrate in large flocks to the northwestern United States. They nest on tree branches. Both male and female Waxwings are known for their high notes. They feed mainly on insects and berries.
    The Bohemian waxwing

  28. Let the high court do their job, every birds live in the northern forest throughout North America and Eurasia, mainly in Canada and Alaska. In winter they migrate in large flocks to the northwestern United States.
    Fakaza

  29. The presidency is worth trillions of dollars and absolute power to certain parties who have been demonstrating their fanaticism and by-any-means-necessary commitment to seizing that power, who have egregiously and knowingly lied to the public in attempts to frame a new administration and destroy the lives of tens of millions of people.

    Election results – 83% of counties, 17/18 “bellwether” counties, Ohio+Florida+Iowa, 27/27 “toss up” house seats, incumbent gain of 10 million votes going Trump’s way – are internally inconsistent with a Biden victory. Inexplicable counting stoppages in the middle of the night, as Trump was ahead big, in only a few locations followed by massive spikes in favor of Biden are suspicious. Expulsion of poll watchers, refusal to audit software or signatures, censorship by mass media and tech justified as maintaining trust in elections is counterintuitive.

    But there’s no reason to doubt results?

    Do we have a new, never before seen (except in dictatorships) paradigm of voting? Will candidates who campaign tirelessly now lose to those who appear frail and hide away from the public and press? Will we now see all losing candidates appear to win by the end of election night only to lose in the days that follow, while the media holds out on calling states won by several points by the eventual losing candidate and proves prescient by calling, immediately after their polls close, states won by a fraction of a percent? Will all campaign money now be spent in just Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and maybe Arizona?

    1. Boy, you are really losing your shit. Take a break for a while and reconnect with being a human being. Or connect with being a human being.

    2. “Election results – 83% of counties, 17/18 “bellwether” counties, Ohio+Florida+Iowa, 27/27 “toss up” house seats, incumbent gain of 10 million votes going Trump’s way – are internally inconsistent with a Biden victory.”

      More Americans wanted Trump to get lost than want him to keep the job. That’s flatly inconsistent with a Trump victory.

    3. ” Will all campaign money now be spent in just Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and maybe Arizona?”

      This looks like somebody can’t name any cities in Arizona. Hint: Phoenix and Tucson are in Arizona.

    4. I note none of the responses actually tried to tell you why your evidence is wrong.

      -An An-Cap

      1. When all you have is imaginary evidence, arguing that it’s wrong doesn’t do anything.

        1. Ah, so I just imagined all those testimonies, statistical anomalies, and videos.

          Good to know.

          1. Pretty much.

            1. Hint: Try to keep the wishful thinking to a minimum. It’s why they won’t let you start spending your Powerball winnings until after you can manage to produce a ticket that had the right numbers on it.

      2. Of course not.

    5. “The presidency is worth trillions of dollars and absolute power to certain parties who have been demonstrating their fanaticism and by-any-means-necessary commitment to seizing that power, who have egregiously and knowingly lied to the public in attempts to frame a new administration and destroy the lives of tens of millions of people.”

      Right about now, Donnie’s realizing that not only did he not manage to get trillions, he still hasn’t been able to generate any actual billions. That’s why he thinks he needs 4 more years. That, plus the value of free Presidential healthcare was recently made clear for him.

  30. You have a great website
    I liked this article, thank you

  31. This agony will follow us next year also…

    1. Hope it will not last for a lifetime

  32. So did I get the story correct in GA video pulling ballots under the table. There’s no evidence because the election official said, “Oh, that’s normal…”

    1. This. That’s the crutch. I “appears” that fraud happened, but you can’t actually “prove” that those ballots were for Biden.

      1. the thing is, it only “appears” that fraud happened to people who desperately want to believe that it happened. Most of us see the less popular candidate getting his butt kicked in an election that was run fairly.

  33. Here’s the deal:

    There actually IS a poorly-concealed conspiracy to try to fraudulently steal the election. But it isn’t working, and Don’s lost the job. He’s fired.

  34. The Texas suit’s statistical arguments are trash:

    From Ohio State University analysis:

    “The suit uses statistical arguments that experts called ‘comical.’

    Mr. Paxton’s filing repeatedly cites an analysis by an economist in California that statisticians have said is nonsensical. Mr. Biden’s chances of winning the four battleground states in question, the analysis says, were “less than one in a quadrillion.”

    The economist, Charles J. Cicchetti, who donated to Mr. Trump’s campaign in 2016, arrived at the minuscule probability by purporting to use the results of the 2016 election as a backstop. His flawed reasoning was this: If Mr. Biden had received the same number of votes as Hillary Clinton did in 2016, he wrote, a victory would have been all but impossible.

    But Mr. Biden, of course, did not receive the same number of votes as Mrs. Clinton; he received over 15 million more. Nor would any candidate be expected to receive the same number of votes as a previous candidate.

    That one-in-a-quadrillion figure has echoed across social media and was promoted by the White House press secretary. But an array of experts have said that the figure and Mr. Cicchetti’s analysis are easily refutable.”

    From Harvard:

    “The analysis omitted a number of obvious, relevant facts, he said: “the context of the elections are different, that a Covid pandemic is going on, that people reach different conclusions about the administration, that Biden and Clinton are different candidates.”

    By the same logic and formula, if Mr. Trump had received an equal number of votes in 2020 as he did in 2016, there is also a one in a quadrillion chance that Mr. Trump in 2020 would outperform his totals in 2016, said Stephen C. Preston, a professor of mathematics at Brooklyn College. “But that doesn’t prove Trump cheated, it just shows that the numbers are different,” he said. “It’s like finding a low probability that 2 equals 3.”

    Mr. Cicchetti also wrote that votes counted earlier in the process and votes counted later favored different candidates, and that there was “a one in many more quadrillions chance” that votes counted in the two time periods were coming from the same groups of voters.

    But that is exactly what was expected to happen: Democrats tended to prefer voting by mail, and those ballots were counted later in the four battleground states, while Republicans tended to prefer voting in person on Election Day, and those ballots were counted earlier.”

    Of course the “always Trumpers” will argue that other university statisticians should not be believed and their particular Trump-donor economist is flawless.

    1. “Mr. Biden’s chances of winning the four battleground states in question, the analysis says, were ‘less than one in a quadrillion.'”

      Since he was running against the most unpopular President in history, Biden’s chances of winning were approximately 1 in 1. Even Hillary could have won in 2020.

  35. Sound bite journalism much?
    This analogy shows the idiocy of the headline:
    It is not necessary to prove that a bartender served under age drinkers in order to prove that the bartender was negligent by not asking for proof of age.
    If the bartender is not asking for ID, she is negligent, and MIGHT have served underage drinkers.
    —–
    Back to voting, if a state’s process was lax to the point that it might have allowed fraudulent voting, then it is unacceptably flawed and should be disallowed

    1. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple DFJ work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    2. You don’t get to disenfranchise millions of people because you’re sad that your guy lost.

      So sorry the pajama boy snowflakes won. Try not to soil yourself in grief, alpha males.

      1. All you’re doing is telling the Republicans that they’ll have to find better reasons for disenfranchising people.

        1. I’m perfectly well aware that Republicans are a menace to modern civilization. I’ve know that for decades. I will spend time telling Republicans they are evil and seditious, and I will spend time telling progressives to shut up about the United States of Denmark because Grendel is at the gates. For all intensive porpoises my sole political position has been to do whatever it takes to keep Republicans out of power.

          I’m just not willing to advocate disenfranchising people or dispensing with the rule of law, unlike them, and that’s why the game theory is the way it is. They’re willing to go over the edge because they care more about power than stability or decency. If you know how to beat that kind of powerful insanity and keep it beat, I am all ears.

          1. So adjust your messaging from “You don’t get to disenfranchise millions of people because you’re sad that your guy lost.”
            to
            “You don’t get to disenfranchise people. full stop.”

    3. If you’re claiming that the bartender served underage patrons, then yes, you need to show some signs that the bartender served underage patrons, or at least name some underage patrons who might have been served.

      (Keep in mind that when Rudy was in court, he was very careful NOT to claim that there was any fraudulent voting, because making spurious claims in court gets you (and your client) sanctioned.) On the other hand, all Twitter can do is keep pointing out that Trump’s claims are shit and that Trump himself is full of them.

  36. Read your papers. Trump’s done.
    Bwaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Haaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Merry Christmas and don’t kill grandma

  37. A lot of statically impossible things happened.
    You can’t prove a negative.

Comments are closed.