Judges Are Not Impressed by Rudy Giuliani’s Evidence of ‘Widespread Nationwide Voter Fraud’
One evening a few years ago, I was approached by a friendly, seemingly rational man outside our apartment on Keren HaYesod in Jerusalem and somehow got sucked into a conversation about “chemtrails.” Try as I might, I could not seem to extricate myself as he spun an elaborate conspiracy theory and assured me there was plenty of evidence to back it up. I thought of that guy while watching Rudy Giuliani’s press conference yesterday, which began with an appeal to fair-mindedness before descending into madness.
According to the tale told by Giuliani and two other Trump lawyers, Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, Democratic election officials across the country conspired to assure Joe Biden’s victory through a “massive fraud” that initially involved tricky election software produced by Dominion Voting Systems. “One of its most characteristic features is its ability to flip votes,” Powell said. “It can set and run an algorithm that probably ran all over the country to take a certain percentage of votes from President Trump and flip them to President Biden.” But because so many people voted for Trump, she explained, “it broke the algorithm that had been plugged into the system.”
That’s when Democrats resorted to Plan B, which involved hurriedly manufacturing phony absentee ballots. “A truck pulled up to the Detroit center where they were counting ballots,” Giuliani said. “The people thought it was food, so they all ran to the truck. Wasn’t food. It was thousands and thousands of ballots, and the ballots were in garbage cans, they were in paper bags, they were in cardboard boxes, and they were taken into the center.” It turned out “these were ballots for Biden” and “only for Biden,” meaning the conspirators did not even bother to mark votes in other races. According to Giuliani, this sort of thing happened not only in Michigan but also in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Arizona, flipping those battleground states to Biden while Republican poll watchers were kept at a distance so they could not see what was happening.
In Giuliani’s view, it defies logic to suppose that Democratic officials in all those states independently decided to sabotage Trump’s reelection: “Isn’t the logical conclusion—that I think any jury would accept if they heard this evidence—that somebody had this plan? Maybe that was always the plan?” Was Biden himself involved? Probably! “I think the logical conclusion is this is a common plan, a common scheme, that comes right directly from the Democrat Party,” Giuliani said, “and it comes from the candidate.”
The conspiracy described by Trump’s lawyers extends even further. “What we are really dealing with here and uncovering more by the day,” Powell said, “is the massive influence of communist money through Venezuela, Cuba, and likely China in the interference with our elections here in the United States. “
By Giuliani’s account, this vast, international, communist-influenced scheme was both incredibly sophisticated and remarkably inept, since it left conspicuous clues, including statistically impossible vote tallies for Biden and shipments of clearly fraudulent ballots, unloaded in plain view. He repeatedly slammed members of the press for willfully ignoring this evidence and falsely reporting that there is no factual basis for the president’s claim that Biden stole the election.
The anti-Trump conspiracy is “easily provable,” Giuliani averred, based on testimony from “hundreds of witnesses, maybe thousands.” But although he repeatedly faulted reporters for not reading those affidavits, he conceded that the vast majority are not available for them to read. “We have a hundred more of these,” he said, referring to statements about alleged fraud in Detroit. “I can’t show them to you because those people don’t want to be harassed….Do you know how many affidavits we have in the Michigan case? 220 affidavits. They’re not all public, but eight of them are.”
While Giuliani is confident that his mostly secret evidence would be enough to persuade “any jury,” judges who have actual
Article from Latest – Reason.com