Meme THIS

But who is “they”

Here 👉🏻 imgflip.com/i/54kdji

If no court reviewed the proof, then "they" haven't proven it, have "they"?

Did they qualify as an expert witness in court?

No. The courts didn't even come CLOSE to admitting them as an expert witness in court. So why should we believe their credentials if a judge wouldn't?

Youre implying some judge determined they were NOT experts. Wrong. There was no judge who made any determination. Are you claiming only judges can evaluate whether someone has expertise? GA Senate Hearings (full of lawyers) admitted them as experts starting here: https://youtu.be/u5ZP_HpBKos?t=16708
And given my background I would never think judges and lawyers are better at determining who is an expert on a topic like this than I am.

Yes there were. Read the rulings.

If you watch some of that video from 4:38:25 youll see experts. Courts havent heard them. Total failure of GA courts

The point about an expert witness is that they are the only people who are allowed to give an opinion in a trial, but they're not allowed to present new evidence. The idea being that you submit your evidence, and then get an expert witness to present an expert opinion on it. If you don't have admissible evidence, you don't have anything to give an expert opinion on, and the judge concludes you don't have a case.

And make no mistake: you did not have a case.

Yeah I know. Youre right in that summary. The problem is they presented at senate committees but havent had a chance in court. NOT because a judge decided they werent experts. Stupid stuff like standing and jurisdiction. One way or another courts should have heard evidence. They still have not.

You say you know, but then you show that you haven't understood. NOBODY DECIDED THAT THEY WEREN'T EXPERTS: they decided that there was no evidence for the experts to opine on. Because the case presented to the judges was garbage. Read the rulings: plenty of times, the judges saw the evidence and ruled that it was inadmissable.

So we finally agree that no judge ever decided these people with job titles like “data election analyst” and “data scientist” are not experts. Good.

No, actually it was that in a few cases. Which is obviously bs. They heard no evidemce but decided no merit?!? Wtf. In majority of decisions it was standing or jurisdiction or in michigan there WAS a court finding of vote switching and another judge wouldnt admit because dominion had “proprietary tech” to protect. You dont have proprietary tech if running free elections. The fact is there has been no day in court. That much you cant argue with. You can claim that there shouldnt be or that in a few cases they decided they wasnt enough to even listen, but you cant say any evidence has been heard, other than a songle case where they found yes there was switching. So no, no judge ever claimed these experts werent expert

Look, if you want to argue majority and minority of cases, frankly, even if one case ruled that the evidence is inadmissible garbage, that should be enough to tell you that something's wrong with your beliefs.

That kinda depends on what I meant by they huh

Definition of “they”

data scientists testified on Wednesday during a state Senate hearing.

Lynda McLaughlin from the Data Integrity Group, along with data scientists Justin Mealey and Dave Lobue, presented the results before the Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Elections.

Mealey worked as an electronic warfare technician in the U.S. Navy for nine and a half years and was a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) contractor as a data analyst and programmer for the National Counterterrorism Center. He currently works for one of the “Big Four” accounting firms as a programmer.

Lobue is a data scientist with over a decade of experience in a number of industries.