 |
| The fact checker skewed data to fit the media's skewed narrative |
On January 24, 2021 I blogged about some of my team's work on election lawsuits. That analysis determined that Trump's legal team and others who were fighting for election integrity prevailed in over two-thirds (15/22) cases.
We were contacted by Politifact and the Associated Press (AP) about the information and explained that our work included all the lawsuits, not just those filed after the election and when those are counted, Trump and associates have done quite well.
I found the AP fact checker, Ali Swenson, particularly amusing. She was concerned because:
"social media users are citing it to make false claims that Trump is winning the majority of lawsuits filed since the election or that Trump still has a chance to overturn the election."
First off, she added the qualification of "filed since the election" -- her words, not ours.
Nothing we wrote and nothing posted by any of the media outlets that have published our work stated that the lawsuits "would overturn the election." Again, her words, not anyone else's.
Obviously, the AP and Politifact are gravely concerned that hundreds of thousands of people are finding out the truth about what has gone on in the courts.
And better yet, some people are pushing back on the fraudulent fact checks.
Here is a letter from an attorney involved in the election litigation. The attorney does a great job setting the record straight.
From: XXX
Subject: Inaccuracies
in your Fact Check of Election Lawsuits
Date: February
11, 2021 at 9:33:49 PM EST
To: Ali Swenson <xxxxxxxxx>
Dear Ms. Swenson:
I am writing about this Associated Press’ post.
To begin with, I am an attorney following election contests. I wrote the Friend of the Court Brief which was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the lawsuit that is STILL PENDING undecided in the U.S. Supreme Court, filed for the U.S. Public Policy Council and several other "Friends of the Court."
Here is my brief, signed by David Carroll as a member of the SCOTUS bar.
The case
of Scarnati
v. Boockvar is still undecided in the US Supreme Court as of this
moment:
Because any dispute of this magnitude is going to end up being decided in the U.S. Supreme Court, either directly or by association with other, similar, cases, only the cases that have yet to be decided in the Supreme Court of the United States are relevant.
Many of the most famous landmark decisions by the Supreme Court were made by reversing the lower courts' decisions
Therefore, counting the lower court decisions is not informative.
If the Supreme Court finds Scarnati in favor of the Pennsylvania Republican Party and Donald Trump, it would make Joe Biden an unconstitutional President. Not illegal. Not fraudulent. UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
It is undisputed that the 2020 Presidential election was conducted in many states in violation of the rules established by the state legislatures in those states.
Article II, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution delegates the authority to set the laws and rules for presidential elections to the State legislatures.
Unauthorized officials and agencies modified the rules on their own, which violates the U.S. Constitution.
If you would
care to understand you can read my attached Friend of the Court brief.
AGAIN, THIS IS IN A CASE STILL PENDING for decision in the U.S. Supreme Court.
--------------
Second, the Supreme Court just decided to
take additional cases.
--------------
Third,
in the normal course of litigation -- which often takes YEARS to
get to the Supreme Court -- additional cases will be heading to the Supreme
Court
--------------
Fourth, you state that " It also includes many cases filed
months before the Nov. 3 election,"
And why would that matter? Why would you exclude those from
the tally?
Many cases were dismissed not on the merits but because they
were filed "too late."
So why would you exclude cases for being filed "too early?"
Like most people, you seem to misunderstand that there are multiple, independent, parallel challenges to the election in various states.
Some cases or parts of cases point out that the changes to the election rules in various states violated the US Constitution in Article II, Section 1.
Some cases or parts of cases point out that the election results and tallies were erroneous.
Some cases or parts of cases point out that voters voted illegally, like 10,315 dead people who voted in Georgia for President.
NOW NOTE: The data obtained from the Georgia Secretary of State's office, and cited by Trump's lawyers, are worded carefully:
10,315 people were DEAD by the TIME OF THE ELECTION.
They may have cast an absentee ballot while still alive, but they were deceased by the time the ballots were counted on election day.
So, those 10,315 votes are invalid even if cast with the best of intentions.
So, those votes are "erroneous" even if not "fraudulent."
I think it was 300+ people who registered to vote at Post Office Boxes.
Those votes are illegal. That does not necessarily mean that those voters intended to break the law. But their votes cannot be counted.
And on and one with votes that add up to more than the margin of Trump's loss in Georgia.
However, the rules were changed and announced BEFORE November 3, 2020, in many cases.
The fact that lawsuits were filed before November 3, 2020, are no less valid.
You apparently believe as most people do (well, if the media reports it, that is a self-fulfilling prophesy) that ONLY fraud is at issue.
That is an error.
And the Associated Press should accurately inform the public.
Fraud is NOT THE ONLY GROUNDS for why Donald Trump won the 2020 election.
Fraud is
only one of several independent, parallel investigations.
---------------
Fifth, you know that most of the court decisions were on stays or temporary injunctions or preliminary injunctions against the certification of the vote.
Many of those lawsuits are still continuing.
A denial of a stay or injunction (very difficult to obtain)
does not end the lawsuit.
---------------
Sixth, you write "None of the cases has proven the presence of fraud in the 2020 election."
That is manifestly false.
For one thing, no lawsuit proves anything until the last day of the trial. Lawsuits do not prove anything at the early stages.
And the proof of fraud in the 2020 election is overwhelming. One must fracture their brain like the computer Hal 9000 in the movie Space Odyssey 2001 to ignore the undeniable, indisputable, massive evidence of fraud on a titanic scale in the November 2020. One has to simply lie to themselves to say that.
You reporters ran with a still-anonymous whistleblower to impeach Donald Trump.
Yet Trump has over 1,000 sworn affidavits documenting fraud, and you say that is not evidence.
Give me 5 of those 1,000 affidavits and I will win a trial in court on any topic.
XXX
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
XXX
Licensed
Attorney in Virginia, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia,
and U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Ray Blehar, February 13, 2021, 7:10 PM EST
No comments:
Post a Comment