the election

You haven't read the rulings, have you? The judges directly admonish the worthlessness of the submitted evidence many times.

The judge in Michigan is said to have "scoffed" at the evidence and "called it heresay." Just like when Trump was trying to threaten that Georgia official over the phone about finding him votes. Everything he offered up as evidence he started with "I heard that..." or "They're saying...."

This is the thing, these guys have spent their whole lives reading articles about "computer IT expert in Delaware pinky swearsies that he's analyzed Hillaries Emails and he can totally prove that she personally ate six babies in the Benghazi attack" and so they assume that's what counts as evidence - because that's what they've been considering as evidence this entire time.

This is probably the first time maybe ever that anything came to a head at the level that a court of law stepped in on something they care about and said "no, see, that's all unverifiable. What have you got that's verifiable?"

you should listen to that phone call in context. he basically says we can get thousands of missing votes, BUT we only need to find _ many.

"We have at least 2 or 3 — anywhere from 250-300,000 ballots were dropped mysteriously into the rolls...a real check of the signatures going back in Fulton County you’ll find at least a couple of hundred thousand of forged signatures...the bottom line is, many, many times the 11,779 margin that they said we lost by... I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state. And flipping the state is a great testament to our country because, cause you know, this is — it’s a testament that they can admit to a mistake or whatever you want to call it."

the way i see it, he was consistently saying something along the lines of we don't have to humiliate you by showing how corrupt your elections were, we can just find enough to prove the point. you could argue that's a threat. i don't see it that way, but its not an unfair argument.

okay so ive been looking into this michigan case. first off, thats a fair point of view. this affidavit was hearsay, but WAS dismissed on procedural grounds. there was also evidence included which was a sticky note which obviously could have been written by anyone but corroborated her hearsay claims. overall i'd say the judge did her job when dismissing that case.

however, i'd also like to point out that her testimony WAS later corroborated by others including Jessy Jacob, and that /this/ evidence was never looked at in court:
"On November 4, 2020, I was instructed to improperly pre-date the absentee ballots that were not in the QVF as if they had been received on or before November 3, 2020. I was told to alter the information in the QVF to falsely show that the absentee ballots had been received in time to be valid. I estimate that this was done to thousands of ballots."

if you can cite more than the michigan case i'm interested in finding the truth.

You're obviously not, otherwise you would have read the rulings. They explain everything about why the evidence was worthless.

if anyone is curious, there's a website dedicated to this that you can poke around in: https://hereistheevidence.com/

Try posting that link a million more times, see if it starts working. None of it was court admissible so therefore it is worthless.