Categories
Quick Analysis

Ignoring Evidence, by Pretending it is Not Evidence

This article was submitted exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by the distinguished jurist Judge John H. Wilson (ret.)

If you paid attention to the mainstream media and their supporters, you would believe there is no evidence in existence whatsoever that voter fraud occurred in the 2020 election, or that voter fraud even exists on anything but a minor level.  Before the election even occurred, the Brennan Center for Justice issued a report claiming that, “(s)ensationalist claims have circulated this election season about the extent of voter fraud, with some politicians going so far as to tell voters to fear that this November’s election will be ‘rigged’…putting rhetoric aside to look at the facts makes clear that fraud by voters at the polls is vanishingly rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to that necessary to “rig” an election.” 

After the election, other statements were made in the same vein.  “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised,’ according to a joint statement issued by the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council.”

According to Newsmax, “(t)here is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election. In fact, election officials from both political parties have stated publicly that the election went well and international observers confirmed that there were no serious irregularities.  The issues Trump’s campaign and its allies have pointed to are typical in every election.” 

According to the New York Times, “(e)lection officials in dozens of states representing both political parties said that there was no evidence that fraud or other irregularities played a role in the outcome of the presidential race.” 

Well, that must be the end of the issue – if the New York Times says so, then it must be true!

Yet, why do allegations of fraud continue to surround this election?  More important, is there any actual evidence of fraud, or could the mainstream media be telling us the truth this time?

Kamagra is a one trusted name available buy viagra in the form of Shilajit Gold capsules worldwide, the rare herbal concoction is an affordable elixir for health. You should be able to choose the sildenafil professional packaging according to your requirements. There can be a blood clot formed in the major blood cialis cipla vessel supplying blood to the liver. Other influences on your ability for getting a viagra properien reasonable market in the competitive market.

To understand the disconnect between the left and the right on this issue, we first need to comprehend what actually constitutes evidence that would be admissible in a court of law.

According to the American Bar Association, ‘(t)he heart of (any) case is the presentation of evidence. There are two types of evidence — direct and circumstantial.  Direct evidence usually is that which speaks for itself: eyewitness accounts, a confession, or a weapon.  Circumstantial evidence usually is that which suggests a fact by implication or inference: the appearance of the scene of a crime, testimony that suggests a connection or link with a crime, physical evidence that suggests criminal activity.  Both kinds of evidence are a part of most trials, with circumstantial evidence probably being used more often than direct. Either kind of evidence can be offered in oral testimony of witnesses or physical exhibits, including fingerprints, test results, and documents. Neither kind of evidence is more valuable than the other.” 

Based upon this definition, there is clearly evidence, both direct and circumstantial, for the allegations made regarding voter fraud in the 2020 election.

According to Newsmax, “Republican National Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel told Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo that the RNC has collected 12,000 incident reports of election-related irregularities and malfeasance.  What might constitute even stronger evidence are the 400 affidavits submitted by eyewitnesses in swing states whose vote results are in dispute. These affiants have placed their observations on paper, from the fishy to the fraudulent.”   

These affidavits have been gathered at a website called Here is the Evidence.

Judge Wilson’s analysis concludes tomorrow

Photo: Pixabay