0This is a broader overview of the situations in these states and I am asking for what everyone hear that is not a Dimocrap to say what they think of the chances of Trumps success.
1) Georgia I think Trump has a probable chance of getting a Republican slate of Delegates or at least disqualifying the certification and not certifying a second one.
SHOCKING: Here's How Many Felons, Dead, and Underage People Voted in Georgia
More damning evidence for the media to ignore.rumble.com
GA illegal votes02,506 felons66,248 underage02,423 unregistered01,043 mail box addresses04,926 expired registration10,315 dead voter00,395 voted in another state15,700 change of address to another state40,279 failed to re-register after movingTotal: 143.5k illegal votes
GA legislature and governor are very upset at Democrats.
Watched Kemp on the Ingraham show and he looked like a smoldering volcano.
He described the GA legislature as feeling lied to and hoodwinked by Democrats and angry after the Giuliani presented his witnesses.
2) Nevada, now in court, has a pile of affidavits and a count of illegal votes that can change the outcome of the election. The case is so strong Trumps team might win at the district court level, but will likely go to SCOTTUS as well from Dimbocrap appeals.
I think this represents a probable outcome in Trumps favor.
Donald Trump attorneys tell Nevada judge more than 85,000 votes were illegal
President Trump’s lawyers told a Nevada judge Thursday that more than 85,000 votes in the state were cast illegally, as the president fights to overturn the 2020 election.www.washingtontimes.com
Nevada illegal votes8,000 fake addresses 20,000 non-residents 1,500 dead people voted42,000 double votes.total 51,000 votes
3) Pennsylvania is being appealed to SCOTUS where Alito is the primary justice to hear appeals, and the Pennsylvania change in law was obviously contrary to that states Consitutional requirements on mail-in ballots.
4) https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2020AP1971-OA.pdf
Wisconsin
"ITIS ORDERED that the petition for leave to commence an original action is denied. One or more appeals from the determination(s) of one or more boards of canvassers or from the determination of the chairperson of the Wisconsin Elections Commission may be filed by an aggrieved candidate in circuit court. Wis. Stat. §9.01(6); andIT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to interveneis denied as moot.BRIAN HAGEDORN, J. (concurring)"After all, that is what the statute says. This section provides that these actions should be filed in the circuit court, and spells out detailed procedures for ensuring their orderly and swift disposition. See§9.01(6)–(8). Following this law is not disregarding our duty, as some of my colleagues suggest."PATIENCE DRAKE ROGGENSACK, C.J. (dissenting)"However, I dissent because I would grant the petition for original action, refer for necessary factual findings to the circuit court, who would then report its factual findings to us, and we would decide the important legal questions presented. I also write separately to emphasize that by denying this petition, and requiring both the factual questions and legal questions be resolved first by a circuit court, four justices of this court are ignoring that there are significant time constraints that may preclude our deciding significant legal issues that cry out for resolution by the Wisconsin Supreme Court."REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY, J.(dissenting). ""The Wisconsin Constitution IS the law—and it reigns supreme over any statute."Wisconsin Legislature v. Palm, 391 Wis. 2d 497, ¶67n.3(Rebecca Grassl Bradley, J., concurring). "The Constitution's supremacy over legislation bears repeating: 'the Constitution is to be considered in court as a paramount law' and 'a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and . . . courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.'BRIAN HAGEDORN, J.(concurring). I understand the impulse to immediately address the legal questions presented by this petition to ensure the recently completed election was conducted in accordance with the law. But challenges to election results are also governed by law. All parties seem to agree that Wis. Stat. §9.01 (2017–18)1constitutes the “exclusive judicial remedy” applicable to this claim. §9.01(11). After all, that is what the statute says. This section provides that these actions should be filed in the circuit court, and spells out detailed procedures for ensuring their orderly and swift disposition. See§9.01(6)–(8). Following this law is not disregarding our duty, as some of my colleagues suggest. It is following the law. Even if this court has constitutional authority to hear the case straightaway, notwithstanding the statutory text, the briefing reveals important factual disputes that are best managed by a circuit court.2The parties clearly disagree on some basic factual issues, supported at times by competing affidavits. I do not know how we could address all the legal issues raised in the petition without sorting through these matters, a task we are neither well-positioned nor institutionally designed to do. The statutory process assigns this responsibility to the circuit court."
Seems this will be refiled in circuit court and the matter then rejected at the Wisconsin SC and then appealed to SCOTUS with Amy Barrett over-seeinig that case.
Trump files new case in lawsuit barrage, looking to Wisconsin's legislature to flip outcome
President Donald Trump late Wednesday filed a new federal lawsuit contesting the vote in Wisconsin, the latest in a blizzard of suits around the country.abcnews.go.com
This latest legal action never alleges that fraud occurred in Wisconsin -- only that the risk of fraud was elevated by measures that state officials took to account for the global pandemic, such as the expanded use of drop boxes and mail-in ballots. The suit alleges that the election was marred by "the purposeful disregard of thoughtful legislative safeguards meant to prevent absentee ballot fraud."The lawsuit also brings a new proposed remedy: throwing the outcome of the state's contest to the Republican-controlled state legislature. The suit asks the court to "immediately remand this matter to the Wisconsin Legislature to review … and determine the appropriate remedy for the constitutional violation(s) established, including any impact upon the allocation of Presidential electors for the State of Wisconsin."The suit argues that voters were afforded access to absentee ballots beyond what the law allowed, saying that the global coronavirus pandemic was not a sufficient reason."There could be no reasonable or lawful contention that the COVID-19 pandemic provided an excuse to avoid Wisconsin's election laws," it states.The suit says these "outright usurpations" allowed "thousands of ballots to be accepted based on the improper and inaccurate claim that the COVID-19 pandemic continued to justify a wide scale failure to apply Wisconsin voting laws."
This case is made for the SCOTUS, where I think it will likely be successful, but how likely? Depends on if SCOTUS agrees to see it. But the law was clearly violated, the only question is if temporary emergency order can be over-ruled by an executive branch in a declared emergency. I dont think that that is the case.
A likely Trump win, but dicey.
5) Arizona's legislature is angry at Democrat cheating, but it remains to be seen if they will actually do anything, though a proposal to rescind certification is being drawn up, but who knows if it will pass. Unlikely to remedy the fraud.
6) Michigan has also proposed rescinding the governors certification of the election and reclaiming the right to name delegates. Unlikely to remedy the fraud.
With this, I think there is enough for Trump supporters to be reasonably optimistic that Trump will pull this chestnut out of the fire.
So on a scale of 1-10; with 1 being no chance Trump holds on to his presidency, what number would you assign to Trump's chances of being President on 1/21/2021? What would the new electoral vote count be?
