Elections

Stop Pretending Witness Testimony Doesn’t Qualify as ‘Evidence’ in GOP Voter Disenfranchisement Lawsuits

The MSM secretly distributes talking points, which often come from the DNC.

Published

12 months ago

December 13, 2022

Rachel Alexander

The MSM secretly distributes talking points, which often come from the DNC, instructing its reporters to include statements in articles about voter disenfranchisement and suppression of Republicans declaring that there has never been any evidence of widespread voter fraud. If you’re not a lawyer, you might buy it. But if you know just the tiniest bit about the law, it’s frankly embarrassing to see non-lawyer journalists repeatedly writing this, pretending to be authoritative and objective.

First year law students learn the federal rules of evidence, which have state versions. There are 68 rules of evidence under mostly five broad categories, and one of those categories is “testimonial evidence.” This usually is presented in the form of sworn witness statements, and can come from eyewitnesses or experts. It’s admissible with a proper foundation. For an eyewitness, that their “opinion is reasonably based on their perception,” and it’s “helpful in understanding the facts of the case or the witness’s testimony.” For an expert witness, the foundation is the person “is classified as an expert witness who has specialized knowledge of the evidence presented at the trial.” So it’s easy to get admitted into evidence.

Detractors point out that witness testimony isn’t admissible if it’s hearsay, which is defined as someone discussing what someone else said. But there are several exceptions to this rule that allow the testimony to be admitted, such as if it’s an “admission against interest.” So if a Maricopa County Elections employee testifies about wrongful statements by another employee, since it’s a type of whistleblowing it’s considered an admission against interest.

Previous election lawsuits in 2020 challenging voter disenfranchisement and suppression were stymied due to other reasons, not lack of evidence. It’s dishonest for the MSM to pretend otherwise. Judges found vague technicalities to throw them out, afraid of having their careers destroyed since the left dominates much of the legal system.

It’s a poorly kept secret within the legal system that federal district court judges in particular deliberately look for reasons to throw cases out. Popular reasons that judges can make work in most circumstances include lack of standing, wrong jurisdiction and untimely. These were almost exclusively used as reasons to dismiss the 2020 election lawsuits. Judges found the strangest, narrowest or most distorted interpretations of state statutes to throw lawsuits out as untimely, which is bizarre when you consider serious election fraud constitutes felonies; that kind of crime should not have the equivalent of short statutes of limitations.

Witness testimony alone is used to send people to the death penalty. After Troy Davis was executed in 2011 based on only witness testimony, Al Sharpton and his National Action Network tried to get the laws changed to forbid prosecutors from pursuing the death penalty in cases where there was no physical or scientific evidence, but so far this movement appears to have little success.

If we’re OK with executing people based on just witness testimony, why is it ignored in voter fraud cases, which are often only misdemeanors and civil infractions? Why are thousands of affidavits from people with a lot to lose — getting doxxed, fired, death threats — ignored as if they aren’t even real? Does anyone really believe thousands of people are making these reports up? The statistical odds of it merely being a coincidence are mind numbing.

Trump-endorsed Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake filed a lengthy lawsuit on Friday challenging the results of the state’s botched election, where thousands of Republicans on Election Day in Maricopa County ran into complications voting, and based on what they saw doubt their votes were counted. The complaint cited extensive witness testimony regarding wrongdoing, including 90% of mismatched signatures just swept under the rug and approved instead of being “cured” to ensure they were legitimate. Other witness testimony cited a lack of chain of custody for 298,942 ballots that were delivered to a third-party voter signature verification service. That is a class 2 misdemeanor.

Just because a judge comes up with a bogus technical reason to throw out a lawsuit doesn’t mean there was never any evidence produced. Some of the reasons the 2020 lawsuits went nowhere were because the election attorneys were targeted with disciplinary actions, as in Wisconsin Voters Alliance v. Pence. The attorneys were only too grateful to drop the case to avoid worse discipline. They weren’t just any attorneys either, but part of the respected Thomas More Society’s Amistad Project. The judge who scared them into withdrawing the case was appointed by President Barack Obama, James Boasberg. The 65 Project, which appears to exist in order to drive conservative attorneys out of the practice of law, has preemptively submitted bar complaints against many of the election attorneys filing lawsuits over this election.

Does anyone really believe that the top conservative election attorneys in the country continue to file cases in the wrong jurisdictions, that are untimely, and lack standing? Of course not. But it’s easy to fool the general public which aren’t attorneys.

It’s going to take a brave judge to withstand the pressure to make up a technicality and instead address the evidence. Judges operate mostly out of the public eye and so one major decision could seal their reputation and career for the rest of their life, putting them and their families in financial jeopardy. Who wants to be known until their deathbed as the judge who ignored technical legal violations and enabled J6, as the MSM would spin it? The election lawsuits in 2020 ended up with almost exclusively Democrat and RINO judges, making their outcomes inevitable. In most jurisdictions, the presiding judge of the court gets to choose which judge hears a case, and with the legal system dominated by the left, that presiding judge usually leans left.

All eyes are on Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson, who was assigned to Lake’s lawsuit. Will he withstand the immense pressure and acknowledge the massive statutory violations, or will he succumb to the bullies on the left and their comrades in the MSM?

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Up Next

Analyzing the Strange Coincidences in Maricopa County During the 2022 Midterm Election

Don't Miss

Election Integrity: Paper Trails and One-Day Voting Work Best

Elections

The Trump Bullet Train to Nowhere Good

Published

2 months ago

October 4, 2023

Terry L. Paulson, Ph.D., CSP, CPAE

It’s becoming increasingly clear that President Joe Biden is unlikely to run in 2024. There are signs already that the Democrats are ready to cut him loose. His legal problems will continue to grow as the impeachment inquiry secures more evidence of possible corruption in the Hunter Biden influence scandal. His mental capacity is slipping, which is an embarrassment to his party, our country, and our allies. His stories don’t even need a fact-checker; most are obviously made up. His stance on open borders, his clean energy pipedreams, and the continuing high inflation are enraging many who are having trouble making ends meet.

Yes, the Democrats have more problems than Biden. What do they do with Kamala Harris? Kamala may very well be less popular than Biden. The Democrats are vulnerable if they stay with either Biden or Harris. The GOP seems set on an easy victory in 2024, but the Democrats are hoping that the Republicans again find a way to turn a sure victory into a painful defeat.

As a loyal and issue-driven conservative, if Donald Trump makes it through the GOP primary gauntlet and wins the Republican nomination, I will vote for him and hope for the best. To his credit, his first term ushered in needed changes that must be applauded. But his egotistical, abrasive style has earned him many committed enemies with Democrats and independents alike.

It’s also clear that the Democrats are doing everything they can to put Trump behind bars. Their numerous indictments are certainly politically driven, but that’s not say that one or more of the charges might actually result in a conviction or a drawn-out trial. Trials take time away from campaigning. Trials give the illusion of guilt whether you like it or not. For those looking for a reason not to support Trump, such legal troubles provide all the reasons they need. His legal status is clearly a liability for his campaign.

As a result of his hatred on the left, with independents, and the media, optimism for a Trump victory may be a bad bet unless a compromised Joe Biden actually ends up being the Democratic candidate. Let’s face it. In 2020, Biden didn’t secure the victory because they wanted him to be President. Biden was elected because a majority voted AGAINST that “evil” Donald Trump. Democrats voted in record numbers, not because of love for Biden, but because of their hatred for Trump.

Unfortunately, the left’s hatred appears to have grown. Add to that the many Republicans who would rather stay home than see Trump win, and his victory is even more in jeopardy. In short, the odds of him winning against any other Democrat they put in to replace Biden are not good. Let’s count some of the reasons that Donald Trump should not be the GOP candidate in 2024.

His demands for loyalty from the GOP ring hollow. He wants their loyalty but refuses to promise his support if the eventual candidate is not him. Not only has he refused to participate in any of the debates, he went to speak to striking auto workers to compete with the second GOP debate coverage. In his mind, his high poll numbers mean that he should be “anointed” as the candidate and the rest of the debates should be cancelled.

His failure to engage in the competition or to support the eventual winner brings up an option no one seems to be talking about. If he does not become the GOP candidate, will Trump run anyway as an independent progressive candidate? Even if he doesn’t run, his disdain for the other candidates who don’t even deserve to be considered for his vice president makes it likely that the party would be torn apart by his divisive comments.

He not only wants to sideline the Republican competition, he wants to focus the GOP campaign on what is wrong with Biden and his administration. Of course, If Joe Biden runs, he will now have a record he will have to defend–a steady stream of illegals crossing an open border, limits on fossil fuels impacting the cost of gas, diesel, and natural gas, and record inflation putting America’s middle class on life support.

But his obsession with belittling Biden is what cost Trump in the last election. In his first election, he focused on what he promised to do, and then he delivered on those promises. Now, he seems obsessed with Biden. There seems to be no effort to work with the party to define a united party platform. America is primed for reasons to reject the Democrat’s agenda. Give them what they want, and they will elect a Republican. Trump seems to have no interest in driving what would unite the party.

There is no question that President Trump had been treated unfairly. The personal attacks and indictments must hurt and enrage him personally. As a result, rather than focusing on the future and what America needs to ensure its future, Trump seems focused on revenge against his many enemies and the deep state forces committed to destroy him. The rearview mirror is smaller than the front window for one reason–the action and critical choices are all out the front window. We don’t need a president that will only add to our nation’s polarization. Oh, how we need a leader with a clean slate and future focus driven by priorities America desperately needs.

President Trump has his loyal MAGA Republicans ready to fight for his reelection. But the polls indicate that the nation’s general voting population have concerns about Trump. They don’t want Biden, but they also express major concern over Trump’s many indictments and their impact on his ability to be elected and to serve.

Many of the younger candidates, including DeSantis, Haley, and Ramaswamy, have made the case for a younger candidate who will support GOP priorities and be able to serve two terms. Does not electing Donald Trump stand in the way of a longer, strategic focus that can cement GOP leadership for two terms and beyond? His attacks on the competency of other candidates speaks volumes about his ability to nurture future leaders who can ensure GOP victories for years to come.

Under Presidents Trump and Biden, our national deficit has ballooned to 33 trillion, and it’s growing every day. Some GOP candidates could effectively attack Biden’s reckless spending and share their history of maintaining budget restraint. But Donald Trump contributed $7 trillion of that national debt. It’s clear, his tax cuts would normally have produced more federal revenue if the American economy had not been blindsided by COVID epidemic, but cutting spending was never a priority for his administration. With Trump as the candidate, the deficit ceases to be a viable campaign issue.

For these and other reasons, anointing Donald Trump as the GOP winner is not only short-sighted; it is unfair and unwise. Anointing him the candidate is a bullet train to nowhere good. Let the people in the states experience the campaigns, hear from the candidates, and make their own choices. Let Donald Trump earn the nomination like all candidates have had to do. To act otherwise is dangerous to securing this vital presidential victory in 2024.

Elections

Lawfare, Coercion, and Intimidation at the U.S Department of Injustice

Th DOJ fraudulently claims this mission: “Uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights”

Published

2 months ago

September 18, 2023

Jeff Davidson

Lawfare is impacting society in horrendous ways, many of which ultimately impact your life and your experiences. What is lawfare? Derived from combining the words “law” and “warfare,” it is the employment of legal approaches to delegitimize, damage, or destroy an opposing party or to hinder their ability to employ their own legal rights.

While lawfare has been used among nations seeking to resolve military conflicts, hamper an opponent’s strategies and tactics, or accuse others of serious crimes, here I am only focusing on domestic issues.

The U.S. system of justice has become overtly contentious, straying from the original mission and objective of our legal system. Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of Justice adopted lawfare tactics en mass during the Obama Administration, under the sordid leadership of Attorney General Eric Holder.

Long Term Damage

Lawfare was employed against individuals whom the DOJ had targeted, to damage or disparage their character, waste their money and time, or triumph over them for public relations purposes. Today the DOJ persecutes, coerces, badgers, and prosecutes Americans, mainly conservatives, time after time.

The agency’s conviction rate is 93%, or 14 out of 15 cases. Yet, in countless instances, DOJ lawyers pursuing cases do not have sufficient evidence or even legal grounds. How do they prevail? Repeatedly, these government attorneys intimidate defendants to confess to “process” crimes, much like what the special prosecutors under Robert Mueller did with many of Donald Trump’s associates.

If no real crimes existed, DOJ attorneys, well-versed in lawfare, pushed for prosecution in one way or another, HUNDREDS of times. Conviction represents career bonus points for eager DOJ attorneys.

Garland: Corrupt Beyond Belief

Bill Barr, appointed by Donald Trump, was utterly corrupt – a swamp creature of the highest order. He sat on the Hunter Biden revelations. He ignored voluminous evidence of worldwide bribes taken by Joe Biden. He covered for Jeffrey Epstein’s clients, and likely lied about Epstein’s demise. He had insider knowledge of the numerous bogus plots against Trump and said and did nothing.

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, now head of the DOJ, has raised lawfare to justice-destroying heights. The DOJ has become the chief agency of injustice. Under Garland, Catholics, parents concerned about the education and welfare of their children, peaceful protesters, and legions of others have had their rights violated.

We know that both the FBI and DOJ have sought to lay heavy crap on Rudy Giuliani, Matt Gaetz, Don Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, many of Trump’s advisors, and so many others.

Injustice on Demand

Garland’s DOJ implements lawfare in virtually everything it does. The agency has no qualms about incarcerating people for indeterminate lengths, staging show trials, bleeding defendants financially dry, and threatening them with jail sentences unless they capitulate. These are perilous times, especially for anyone who is opposed to the Biden Administration or speaks up in ways that the DOJ does not approve.

It is not difficult with the vast databases to undertake intense snooping and other nefarious methods. In record time, the “Department of Injustice” can ruin a person’s reputation, even after a lifetime of accuracy in their work, in their claims, and in how they comport themselves.

The DOJ can destroy reputations in less than 24 hours, particularly if that person is vulnerable with relatives or children. They raid homes with guns drawn when a simple knock on the door would suffice. The Democrats of today, can get to anyone they want, and will shake their targets to the core.

The GOP Must Win in 2024 or We’re Doomed

Everything described above should have no place within the U.S. Department of Justice. Lawfare should have no place. Meanwhile, the DOJ fraudulently claims that its mission is to “Uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights.” In actuality, it fails miserably on all three counts.

Claiming independence and impartiality, the agency states, “We work each day to earn the public’s trust by following the facts and the law wherever they may lead, without prejudice or improper influence.” Yes, Hunter Biden will verify that. The DOJ claims, “Our employees value differences in people and in ideas and treat everyone with fairness, dignity, and compassion.” Not exactly.

The only tenable solution to vanquish the runaway DOJ and their insidious practice of lawfare, intimidation, and coercion is for a Republican to win the 2024 presidential election, replace Garland, and quickly reverse the serious damage that has been done to our nation.

If Democrats successfully re-cheat their way to victory, may God help us all.

– – – – – –