{"id":1181,"date":"2021-02-08T12:27:00","date_gmt":"2021-02-08T19:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/?p=1181"},"modified":"2021-02-08T12:28:19","modified_gmt":"2021-02-08T19:28:19","slug":"2020-presidential-election-lawsuits-the-facts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/?p=1181","title":{"rendered":"2020 Presidential Election Lawsuits \u00e2\u20ac\u201d the Facts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This is from a study done by a Physicist named John Droz. He and a group of scientists and engineers looked at all the court cases about whether there was fraud in the 2020 election. Here’s the link<\/a> and here’s the text of his summary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s beyond exasperating to keep hearing the cacophony of chicanery about the 2020
Presidential election-related lawsuits.
The Left\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s message to the public is that there were no consequential 2020 Presidential
election malfeasance, irregularities or illegalities \u00e2\u20ac\u201d supposedly because the courts
objectively and thoroughly investigated those claims, and ruled them to be unfounded.
Neither element of that assertion is even remotely true.
To counter the later part of that false narrative, a team of independent volunteer
(unpaid) scientists and engineers recently put together a List of Lawsuits involving the
2020 Presidential election. In it we identified the issues at stake, how each case was
treated by the courts, what evidence was objectively analyzed, who won and lost, etc.
We tried to walk a narrow line of not only having a comprehensive list, but also
information easy enough for the public to understand. (For example, since none of
us are attorneys, we consciously tried to avoid unnecessary legal jargon.)
To further assist in the understanding of this important list, we simplified 20+ pages
of filings and decisions on each case into a one or two sentence summary. (If we
didn’t do justice to any of these, please let me know and I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll issue an update.)
Another idea we implemented was to color-code the decisions \u00e2\u20ac\u201d to make it easy for
the reader to segregate the various outcomes.
Lastly, we passed this list by over a dozen lawyers involved with election-related
lawsuits. The typical response we received was \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Excellent!\u00e2\u20ac\u009d.
So what are the takeaways?
To begin with our list shows that there have been eighty-one (81) lawsuits filed that
are relevant to the 2020 Presidential election. (Note 1: we are counting an original filing,
plus additional appeals as one single case. Note 2: other lawsuits are possibly undiscovered.)
The results to date are:
a) Eleven cases have been withdrawn or consolidated. (These are not wins or losses
to either side.)
b) Twenty-three cases have been stopped from proceeding (dismissed) due to legal
technicalities (standing, timing, jurisdiction, etc.). These have nothing to do with the
merits of the case and should also not be considered wins or losses for either side.
That more than a third of the lawsuits were not allowed to proceed to an
evidentiary hearing is more of an indictment that many judges appear to be
afraid of opening this pandora\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s box. Considering the importance of election
integrity to our country, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a shame for them to hide behind subjective legal
technicalities. How is that in the interest of the citizens in our country?
In any case, this leaves us with forty-seven (47) lawsuits relevant to the 2020
Presidential election where a judge has ruled (or hopefully will rule) on the merits. The
results so far are:
c) Twenty-two cases are completed (adjudicated). These are where the court heard
arguments, considered evidence (where applicable), and then formally ruled on
statutory issues (e.g. the legality of a state\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s election process), etc. Of these:
i) Fifteen cases were WON by Trump, et al, and
ii) Seven cases were lost by Trump, et al.
d) Twenty-five cases are still active and have not yet been decided \u00e2\u20ac\u201d so the
ultimate winner and loser of these cases has not been determined.
So, Trump (et al) have WON the majority of 2020 election cases fully heard, and
then decided on the merits! Is that what the mainstream media is reporting?
Note that despite all the noise about fraud, only three (3) of these lawsuits materially
dealt with voter illegalities (citizens voting twice, votes from deceased persons, etc.).
Interestingly, all three of these cases are still open.
Further, just three (3) lawsuits addressed voting machine inaccuracies (purposeful or
accidental). One of these was dismissed (due to jurisdiction), one was ruled against
(although no discovery was granted), and one is still open (discovery was granted).
The likely explanation for so few cases in these two areas is that legally proving
fraud or voting machine manipulations are very time-consuming processes, that
require substantial investigative work and documentation. There simply wasn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t
enough time to do this prior to key points in the process (like the Electoral
College). Additionally, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s likely that any machine algorithms would be erased
by the time a forensic investigation takes place.
Our view is that the public needs to be much better educated regarding the election
integrity issue \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and having a more accurate understanding of the lawsuit component
is a key part of that.
John Droz, jr. Physicist North Carolina 2-5-21 (rev a)
PS \u00e2\u20ac\u201d Here are some other 2020 Presidential election analyses by the same team:
Pennsylvania Report, Michigan Report, and Voting Spikes Report.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is from a study done by a Physicist named John Droz. He and a group of scientists and engineers looked at all the court cases about whether there was fraud in the 2020 election. Here’s the link and here’s the text of his summary. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s beyond exasperating to keep hearing the cacophony of chicanery […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1181"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1181"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1181\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1183,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1181\/revisions\/1183"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1181"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1181"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/donlafferty.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1181"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}