Because evidence MUST have a verified chain of possession before it can be entered into discovery in a court case. If it is just released to the public, there is no way to ensure chain of possession.
If that was the reason, then why couldn't it have been released in relation to any of the multitude of election fraud cases that have taken place already?
I think the general idea is that Trump could have proven Election Fraud back then but chose not to. Think back to the rhetoric around 2020. It was still Covid. BLM Riots were like a threat. Corporate media was already setting up the narrative of another round of coordinated riots in every city if Trump was re-elected. “Sure is a nice country you got there, it would be a shame if someone BURNED it down.” Probably an immediate impeachment with RINOs in the Senate now thinking they have the cover to vote against Trump. And more Covid Covid Covid on all the news channels.
It was like they had it all gamed out for Trump to either win or to prove the fraud and win it in the courts. So when he stepped aside, it was like they didn’t see that coming. It forced them to start rolling back Covid. It forced them to shut down the riots. And now they had Biden and Harris to represent them, when both of them were probably meant to lose. And with the dirt on both of them - Biden and Hunter/Burisma and Harris and Jussie - military courts might have flipped them.
By released, do you mean to the public? I am not an attorney, but I have learned a few things through the decades of following lawyers and court cases. The election fraud evidence WAS submitted to many courts, but most of the courts refused to hear the case saying it was due to no legal standing. They never saw the evidence and didn't rule on the merits of the cases. The 3 or so courts that did hear it, Trump won 2 of those cases. But because this evidence is still subject to being presented as discovery in future cases, it cannot be released to the public. As you know, best practice is to not release your evidence outside of a court. Sometimes the public finds out about the evidentiary details after those details have been presented in court.or if someone leaks it (this causes problems)...in a case that is being HEARD. But If there are any pending court cases, the evidence cannot be released. Chain of custody, tainting the jury pool and other concerns about evidence being in the public. I feel that there is massive evidence that we may not even fathom. 2000 mules was an anecdotal display of how it was done and that it is known. But imagine how much evidence there is for elections across every county in the US. Massive.
Because evidence MUST have a verified chain of possession before it can be entered into discovery in a court case. If it is just released to the public, there is no way to ensure chain of possession.
If that was the reason, then why couldn't it have been released in relation to any of the multitude of election fraud cases that have taken place already?
I think the general idea is that Trump could have proven Election Fraud back then but chose not to. Think back to the rhetoric around 2020. It was still Covid. BLM Riots were like a threat. Corporate media was already setting up the narrative of another round of coordinated riots in every city if Trump was re-elected. “Sure is a nice country you got there, it would be a shame if someone BURNED it down.” Probably an immediate impeachment with RINOs in the Senate now thinking they have the cover to vote against Trump. And more Covid Covid Covid on all the news channels.
It was like they had it all gamed out for Trump to either win or to prove the fraud and win it in the courts. So when he stepped aside, it was like they didn’t see that coming. It forced them to start rolling back Covid. It forced them to shut down the riots. And now they had Biden and Harris to represent them, when both of them were probably meant to lose. And with the dirt on both of them - Biden and Hunter/Burisma and Harris and Jussie - military courts might have flipped them.
Dang, I already knew all of what you said, but I had never heard it put together quite like that. Excellent explanation, thank you!
By released, do you mean to the public? I am not an attorney, but I have learned a few things through the decades of following lawyers and court cases. The election fraud evidence WAS submitted to many courts, but most of the courts refused to hear the case saying it was due to no legal standing. They never saw the evidence and didn't rule on the merits of the cases. The 3 or so courts that did hear it, Trump won 2 of those cases. But because this evidence is still subject to being presented as discovery in future cases, it cannot be released to the public. As you know, best practice is to not release your evidence outside of a court. Sometimes the public finds out about the evidentiary details after those details have been presented in court.or if someone leaks it (this causes problems)...in a case that is being HEARD. But If there are any pending court cases, the evidence cannot be released. Chain of custody, tainting the jury pool and other concerns about evidence being in the public. I feel that there is massive evidence that we may not even fathom. 2000 mules was an anecdotal display of how it was done and that it is known. But imagine how much evidence there is for elections across every county in the US. Massive.
What were the outcomes of the 2 cases?
I know that Trump won, but I am unfamiliar with the aspects of the case. I will try to find them out and come back to you here with information.
OMG Jenna ellis plead guilty! Trump is going to prison forever!!! shilllllll