24 Responses

1. Evidence? Hearsay is inadmissible and many of these suits so far have been denied by the courts for this reason. A laundry list is just that.

2. In yet more shocking news that will change the course of history, Rudy Giuliani has now confirmed, during a live broadcast with Steve Bannon’s “Warroom” program, that Dominion software witnesses are stepping forward and blowing the whistle on the massive vote theft fraud:
   Yesterday, sources told News Max that the CIA was in charge of running the vote theft operation, with Gina Haspel deeply involved in straight up treason. On election night, President Trump and hand-selected DoD personnel were sitting in secure command room, watching and documenting the entire election theft taking place in real time.
   All the vote theft was recorded in detail, and this vote theft was allowed to take place so that deep state treasonous actors could be caught in the act.
   Big Tech, the mainstream media and the CIA are all conspiring to try to gaslight the nation and falsely claim that Biden won, even as they all know the election was stolen via voting machine software theft. This is why they are rushing to remove Trump from office right now, with John Brennan, Obama’s former CIA director, practically crapping himself on live TV and demanding Trump be immediately removed via the 25th Amendment. That’s because Brennan and the other deep state actors know they’ve been caught. Trump has all the evidence. In fact, he has a detailed transaction log showing the fraud playing out in real time.

   In the coming weeks, this information will be presented to the U.S. Supreme Court. We anticipate SCOTUS will invalidate the presidential election and kick the outcome back to Congress, where each state gets one vote to choose the next President. Republicans have a strong majority in the number of state legislatures they control, and they will easily win that vote. (Nancy Pelosi may refuse to allow the vote to take place, but if she does, she will be arrested for treason.)
   Trump has fired former Defense Secretary Mark Esper and is cleaning house at the DoD in order to get the Pentagon ready for military arrests of the traitors who carried out this engineered election theft.
   Hundreds (or thousands) of people will eventually be arrested and charged with various crimes, including conspiracy and sedition. Many of the deep state players who worked under Obama will go to prison once this is all said and done.
   The website EveryLegalVote.com shows the real election results once you remove all the vote theft.
   Without vote theft: Trump wins with 307 electoral votes.
   With vote theft: Biden wins with 304 electoral votes.
   Fraud has been detected and documented in nearly all the swing states, including PA, MI, WI, GA and VA.

3. One thing to make such claims on social media another to go before a judge and under oath make these claims. So far, seems that every one of these garbage claims was tossed out by judges on every side of the political spectrum. When Trump or the GOP comes up with real evidence of widescale fraud or valid legal arguments let us know, until then you are spreading Fake News. In the meanwhile, Joe Biden is President-elect. Frivolous lawsuits are no basis to question that.

4. Disinformation campaign. It is so odd, you would think that in 2016 the democrats would have been able to use the same tactics and win Michigan. Maybe they could have also cheated to get more democrats elected to the House. Left out affidavit where the person didn’t like the way someone was looking at her. Or the one who complained the PA system was too loud, or the one that couldn’t understand why the military were voting for Biden, must be a mistake. Mr. Goldstein Trump’s lawyer told the judge he did not see fraud. Trump is 0 – 12 in his lawsuits. The postal office that signed a false affidavit was offered over 100,000 to make the claims he recanted. Stop the nonsense. You do a disservice to your readers when you selectively post information.

5. Snell & Wilmer withdraws from election lawsuit as Trump contests Arizona results
   11/11/20 REUTERS LEGAL 23:32:03 • Copyright (c) 2020 Thomson Reuters • David Thomas
   REUTERS LEGAL • November 11, 202O
   FILE PHOTO: Sign directs voters to a polling station on Election Day in Tucson, Arizona, U.S. November 3, 2020. REUTERS/Cheney Orr/File Photo
   (Reuters) – The largest law firm representing the Trump campaign or its allies in post-election litigation challenging votes in key states has withdrawn from an election lawsuit in Maricopa County, Arizona.
   Associate Presiding Civil Judge Daniel Kiley on Tuesday granted Snell & Wilmer’s request to withdraw as counsel of record for the Republican National Committee. The RNC had teamed-up with the Trump campaign and the Arizona Republican Party in the case, which alleges that Maricopa County incorrectly rejected some votes cast on Election Day.
   Snell & Wilmer partners Brett Johnson and Eric Spencer first moved to withdraw on Sunday, a day after the case was filed. Johnson and Spencer did not respond to requests for comment. Snell & Wilmer chairman Matthew Feeney said the firm doesn’t comment on its client work.
   Two other large law firms that have represented the Trump campaign in election litigation, Jones Day and Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, have faced an onslaught of online criticism this week from critics who say the cases erode confidence in the democratic process, sparked by a Monday New York Times story focused on the firms’ roles.
   President Donald Trump has refused to concede the election since major news outlets called it for Democrat Joe Biden on Saturday.

6. May Hashem help us all.

7. Can YWN perhaps include a link to the source of this info? From the affidavits I can find online, it seems that most of the complaints were along the lines of, people were very mean to me. I couldn’t find these particular complaints among the ones I read. Here’s one example: “They made all GOP challengers wear their credentials on a long narrow white piece of paper when democrat challengers only had a small lime green circle sticker.” I get that this can be pretty rough and unfair, but that doesn’t indicate voter fraud. Or not more than when GOP poll-watchers intentionally scare away legal voters (a famous such case in the early 80’s resulted in a federal decree which barred the GOP from engaging in “election security” campaigns, which were designed primarily to scare aware voters).

8. who is voting dem after all this.
   i have a friend from phily who asked rav shmuel kaminetzky if he should go back to philly and vote even though he was not in yeshivah there and rav shmuel said yes and made sure that he was voting for trump

9. That includes the postal worker who said he lied about his affidavit?
   Even if all true, it does nothing to change the results in any state in any significant way. The degenerate adulterous loser lost the popular vote, again!, by five million votes!

10. Amil Zola, you are an idiot who probably did not pass past 3rd grade. Sworn testimonies and affidavits are not “Hearsay”.

11. Why Marxist Democrats on this form act so defensive and nervous? Are you afraid of discovering of massive fraud committed by Democrats? Do Democrats have something to hide?

12. 15 Judges agree that these claims are without evidence.

13. Dominion computer systems that were used in mo than 30 States to “count” the votes was partially developed in Venezuela using Chinese programmers. The software was used to “elect” and “reelect” Hugo Chavez (ym) and later Maduro. Currently the company is headquartered in Canada is partially owned by Nancy Pelosi’s former chief of stuff.
    No wonder 2.7M (and counting )votes were switched from Trump to Biden by Dominion machines.

14. Amil Zola, your 15 Judges agree that these claims are without evidence made their statement without looking at any evidence.

15. We must be living in Mashiah’s time. More than 120,000 dead people were resurrected in Michigan to vote for Biden.

16. MoisheinGolus………………………….
    You are the IDIOT and owe Amil Zola an apology
    Sworn statements and affidavits are hearsay because they are out of court statements and noit subject to cross examination, They may qualify under Hearsay Exceptions in the Federal Rules of Evidence,

    I’ll put my J.D. and 40 years of practice and membership in the Bar of 4 states behind this.

    Hearsay evidence, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible unless an exception to the Hearsay Rule applies Thus a witness reading these statements or affidavits while on the stand is presenting Hearsay evidence. The opposing counsel does not get to question the maker of the statement.

    The fact that something is sworn to and/or notarized as a statement or affidavit does not: #1 make it admissable, #2 prove its truth

17. @the truth is
    we have not seen a since prosecution in 4 years, not even the most obvious cases such as uranium1, bengazi, email server, spying on trump campaign, and lately burisma corruption.
    why do you think this time it’s all different with the election fraud?
    It also seems there were many other kinds of fraud of rank and file democrats, how much of an effect did that have on results in proportion to the software fraud?

18. > Amil Zola

    These are sworn statements subject to perjury. It is called “eye witness testimony”.

19. > emes nisht sheker

    So let us try a little “emet”.

    These are not criminal charges being presented to the court. These are election questions, and the court first needs evidence that the number of affected votes would make a difference in the final outcome of the election before even accepting to review any election case. Seeing as vote counting is still going (and now you can see another reason why the Democrats are dragging out the vote counting) it is all but impossible to prove that the voter fraud allegations would actually make a difference to final outcome. So the court waits until the count is over, which will be dragged out by the Democrats for as long as possible – or a few weeks – as by mid-December it will be too late to challenge the voting results.

20. > AO

    > “you would think that in 2016 the democrats would have been able to use the same tactics and win Michigan.”

    So you have no memory of 2016? In 2016 I remember that the Democrats (along with their media enablers) were so way-over-confident that they would win that they only cheated where it would be easy to cheat and where it risked very little chance of being uncovered. This time they put an all out effort. BUT they still understood how easy it is to be detected so they kept their focus sharply on the President, focusing all their energies and resources on a single goal. They felt that was rational because they had experienced the so-called BLUE WAVE in 2018 – they felt they were safe there and shouldn’t waste resources (and risk detection) when the more important goal was the President. Every extra cheating is that much extra chance of being detected, that much extra chance of leaks, and so forth.

21. > AO N
    > “Snell & Wilmer”

    Well, seems the threat of the self-named Trump Accountability Project has had some affect here. They are publicly listing EVERYONE they can find who has in any way joined with or helped Trump, and “warned” of (meaning threatened) the consequences of any employer who dared employ any of them or anyone who does business with them.

22. > rt
    > “That includes the postal worker who said he lied about his affidavit?”

    You must mean the postal worker who has come out denying that he lied about the affidavit. A video of his denying that he lied is on the web. I watched it myself. It is the leftist news media that lied when they “reported” that the postal (allegedly) retracted.

23. Re comment by “the truth is”: This comment does not sound like a genuine YWN reader’s comment. The presentation is orderly and well-written, with a complete absence of Yiddish, Yinglish, Yiddishisms, spelling and punctuation errors or other characteristics of most YWN comments. It is lengthy and does not sound like an impulsive and angry response more typical of YWN comments.

    I would respectfully ask the YWN editors to check the source of this comment and satisfy itself that it does not come from a paid online influencer. Even if YWN did an initial check, I think a deeper check would be advisable.

24. @Mosheingolus

    Again insulting people that have different views to you.

    Grow up.