Barnes on the law and the election fraud cases
This video is long. But Barnes knows a lot about election law, which is more than I can say for most people – and that includes me. I have no idea whether he’s correct with his evaluations of Powell and Giuliani et al, the cases, and the future for Trump. But he’s always interesting and if you’ve got the time and inclination I suggest you watch at least some of this video:
Barnes says that challenges to signature matching for the mailed ballots will be key, because the rejection rates in the big cities were suspiciously low. I’m not sure exactly how signature matching is done. I assume that signature matching procedures and rules are different in the different states, but right now the lawyers are concentrating on Georgia. Usually there’s a typical rate of rejection of mailed-in ballots, and if a district has a much much lower rate it becomes likely that a lot of ballots there were accepted that should have been invalidated. In the case of Georgia, for example, Barnes says the low number of rejections in certain districts was probably enough to swing the election without any other type of fraud having to be alleged.
Signature matching is the crux of a suit brought in Nevada specifically rates of rejection and the method used (it was an automated system – confusers were involved).
https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/11/25/nevada-is-ground-zero-for-the-battle-against-mail-ballot-fraud-n285068
This stuff is obviously outrageous and may very well have cost Trump but we will never know and I live in Realville and Biden is going to President. Sucks but it is the truth. The focus needs to be on Georgia and making sure those two races are fair and then on future elections. That is why the challenges need to pushed all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
Griffin: I have already mentally prepared myself for a Biden inauguration but I won’t say it’s over until the last deadline has passed. I think the equal protection argument is a strong one for the Supreme Court (and prevailed in Bush v Gore). You had so many cases of different ballots being treated differently and reasonable fraud protections being thrown out with no constitutional basis. I just don’t understand why the Trump legal team seems so scattered and unprofessional.
Gothamite,
Yeah, I agree the whole thing just stinks but it just seems like it’s too many fronts to fight on and to big an ask for judges.
The response to COVID was the greatest gift to the left ever. It allowed all this to happen and to many in positions of power were too afraid to fight because ‘people were dying’.
Gothamite:
Why is the Trump team so scattered? I don’t know, but I think part of it – maybe a large part – is that most lawyers and most election lawyers are partisan Democrats, and the ones who are Republicans have been threatened (and their families threatened) if they take these cases.
Whether Biden makes it to inauguration or not –
his presidency will be as false as his store-bought teeth.
A great swath of the public knows his election is illegitimate – kraken or not.
Neo: I understand the problem with talent being threatened away from helping Trump. However, he seemed to telegraph that he knew what to expect in terms of fraud. He implied that “we caught them”. So why can’t his team present a coherent argument of what happened and what they intend to do about it? That doesn’t require revealing in detail every bit of proof they have. And both Rudy and Sidney come off as a little unhinged. They always seemed to be capable, methodical actors. Maybe the wackiness is an intentional distraction but time is running out in the court of public opinion.
“…scattered and unprofessional…”
This thing is just so incredibly huge.
The corruption is HUMUNGOUS.
How does one REGROUP against such an onslaught? How can one effectively assess the various options and alternatives when operating at such a huge disadvantage: against state governments, state attorneys general(!), state governors, JUDGES, and the entire Mainstream Corrupt Media?
How does one counter-attack where time is running out and the walls are closing in; and the criminal, mendacious Democratic Party machine—with its legions of media lackeys constantly repeating bogus boilerplate in cacophanous crescendo—blasts away with its carefully-planned and finely-honed lies “ad nauseum”, playing out this obscene charade on not only the national but the global stage?
Creating “facts on the ground”.
Flooding the ZONE with absolute bulls**t.
Yes the Democrats, those champions of bluff and masters of mendacity, who fervently believe that they can TAKE WHAT THEY WANT. (And if you resist, you deserve to be destroyed.)
Thugs extraordinaire.
Thugs, Inc.
I’m wondering at this point whether the whole decision to “jettison” Sidney Powell was a feint to throw everyone off balance.
“We’ve got them now!!”, said “the Big Guy” and his most impressive team of moral degenerates. “Neither that Orange-haired fascist nor his team of drooling idiots has a clue!! HA! Trump’s right hand doesn’t know what his left hand is doing!!!”—as he proudly announces to the world which of his fellow thugs and criminals will be filling which positions in the upcoming DREAM TEAM CABINET, with the Mainstream Corrupt Media salivating in Pavlovian anticipation as each name is mentioned.
Lesser beings would cave instantly against such a blitzkrieg.
Fortunately, Trump does have people he can rely on. Can trust. Excellent, even formidable people in their own right.
While we clamor understandably—clamor desperately—for GOOD NEWS, for hope—for JUSTICE—as we wonder, as we obsess, as we despair “why the Trump legal team seems so scattered and unprofessional.”
Onward.
Barry Meislin:
I think the time factor is a big problem. That, and the fear, because lawyers have been doxxed and threatened. The left is very dangerous. At this point, they feel less need to hide who they are.
It seems to me Sidney has discovered and was ready to reveal plenty of fraud in both camps so the GOP told her to pound sand. They will try to make her look as loopy as possible so she will be mocked by the media. She wants to pull the whole thing down. I don’t blame her after her battles with Sullivan, who she had praised in a book she wrote. There is the rub with the Supreme Court. Will they be willing to stick a fork into our uniparty system and hope that the American Public is up to the task of rebuilding from the rubble? Barr (aka Dropcloth), Durham, et al have run out the clock on any indictments of the scores of bad actors in the DOJ, FBI and CIA.
“…doxxed and threatened…”
Absolutely, per the THUGGISH M.O. of the Democratic Party, its leaders, its politicians and all too many of its supporters.
Our “betters”. Our “leaders”.
Our “GREAT HELMSMEN”….
…Our fellow Americans…(sigh…)
(BTW, seems I have an “immoderate” post—with, admittedly, too many links—in “moderation” limbo….)
Gothamite:
Rudy has always been very excitable and rather histrionic, but Powell has not in the past. This time, she really has been over the top. My personal opinion is that they are exhausted and overwhelmed by the magnitude of what happened. That makes them emotional, plus the scope of it is difficult to organize in such a small amount of time. They need an army of lawyers who specialize in election law (neither of them do), and I think they have a great deal fewer than an army.
We don’t know if their arguments are coherent or not because they haven’t yet made them in a venue that matters. All of these state court scuffles are just the wickets they have to go through to get to SCOTUS; and that is where it is going.
Maybe my middle name should be Pollyanna, but I will not be surprised to find that they are not even shooting their big guns yet. Why give the opposition a preview?
I admit that much of my reasoning relies on the belief that Giuliani is not senile; and that Trump has not gone off the deep end.
BTW, there are stories percolating that indicate that Sidney Powell could actually be onto something; but, that there just isn’t time to develop it before the election is decided.
Oldflyer:
I think when people say their arguments have been somewhat incoherent they are referring to the press conference and other PR messages. They are not “important” in the sense that they have no legal force, but they are important in the sense of public opinion. Also, in the video, Barnes (who is an election lawyer) criticizes the Trump team as being disorganized and not as knowledgeable as it should be on election law.
is that most lawyers and most election lawyers are partisan Democrats,
My knowledge of the business is limited to one city 30-odd years ago, so caveat lector.
There is an election law, but there is no such thing as an attorney who is an election law specialist beyond the law committees of your local party organizations (who are, I believe, working pro bono). The mid-law firm my family used had a couple of attorneys who knew something about election law, but the key to election law practice is to know the process and know how to get the evidence you need rapidly. If you haven’t done it before, you’re in danger of failing your client. I can give you the name of a well-connected local political figure who hired a general practitioner to represent her in election cases in 1993. It was a mess because he just had never been through the process before and neither had she; if she blew it any ordinary aspirant will blow it. There was a family of dissident Democrats named Regan which encompassed a number of lawyers; one of whom might take a case for a fee. If anyone else who knew the business would represent a paying client, I don’t know their name, and there were around 1,600 working lawyers in town at that time. I can recount incidents for you of local pols having to ask a half-dozen lawyers to represent them in order to find one that would take the case. And the lawyers who take these cases do not make their living off them. At that time, a couple thousand in fees once a year.
Art Deco:
Election law specialists don’t only deal with election law, but they are especially experienced and well-versed in it. Barnes certainly seems to think they exist.
For example, this group advertises itself as election and political law specialists. (I also happen to recognize the name as the group that at one point represented Flynn, and who had a conflict of interest when they represented him because they had helped him with legal matters when he was a lobbyist.)
Here is an example of some other election law specialists who came up in a quick search. There are plenty of others.
Griffin,
“I live in Realville and Biden is going to President.The focus needs to be on… future elections. “
If so, it will be a very brief Presidency. And Harris, Biden’s successor, the most leftist of Senators… will ensure that in future ‘elections’ leftists will always win the important offices.
“The left is very dangerous. At this point, they feel less need to hide who they are.” neo
Dangerous to individuals working within what is now a rigged system, yes. However, exposing themselves to public scrutiny will prove to be less than ‘optimal’ when the binary choice of surrendering to 1984 or “politics by ‘other’ means” is all that remains.
The struggle between left and right boils down the left’s “the end justifies whatever means are neccessary” and the right’s ‘we work within constitutionally lawful procedures’ in order to preserve the Constitution.
That is equivalent to trying to win a chess match where one person confines themselves to the rules of chess but where the other person is allowed to make up and modify on the fly whatever moves they wish. Including overturning the board, declaring themselves the winner and putting a gun to the ‘loser’s’ head while demanding they acknowledge their loss to avoid execution for ‘cheating’.
Put another way, democrats are now in effect stating that elections now consist of “heads we win, tails you lose”.
If the S.C. allows that to stand, the S.C. will have “canceled” itself, as it effectively forces upon the right the binary choice of surrendering to 1984 or fighting another 1776.
I have seen some clips from the Pennsylvania Republican Legislature hearing at Gettysburg. I’m feeling a bit better about the Trump team.
For example, this group advertises itself as election and political law specialists.
I’m not seeing what I’m talking about (rapid-process election law litigation) on their emblematic case list. I’ll restate the problem: (1) there isn’t enough business for it to be a notable practice line for anyone. (2) The lawyers who know their onions are people who are involved in politics on an avocational basis. They generally have a reason to not take your case and may have an actual conflict of interest. A dear friend of mine actually argued a case pro se; they couldn’t get a lawyer and they were more at home with the process than all but a few lawyers (if not so at home in court).
Geoffrey Britain,
Yeah, I wasn’t making any judgment about how long Biden will be president but Harris or whoever has a real incentive to keep Biden propped up for at least two years because if he’s out before that she can only run for one more term.
Way off topic, and I apologize for that. But . . . what is the attraction among video podcasters to use hard rock music in their intros? I find it off putting. Yes, I’m being seriously picky here, but I can’t help it.
Griffin,
Once democrats fix electoral vote counting to always ensure their candidates winning, the two term limit for President can be amended.
As for Harris, her 2024 replacement is already being considered. She’s a nasty bit of work and will never attain the necessary level of popularity to win reelection. In office, her popularity would be certain to remain at her miniscule primary levels and if possible fall even lower. Once Trump was gone the dems would need a Presidential candidate whose popularity was high enough to give at least fig’s leaf of coverage to their fraudulent vote counts.
I listened to the whole presentation and like an earlier one was quite impressed.
This is like a trial. The prosecution (the uni-party) has put their case forward and listening to them you think that the defendant is the most low down dirtiest skunk that was allowed to be born.
Then the defense takes over. This is the defense starting to present their case. Up until now the process has the certification process moving forward. It is AFTER the certification is when aggrieved party can start filing challenges. Let’s see what evidence can be produced. It will be very interesting to see how the Pennsylvania Secretary of State explain the 1.8M absentee sent out vs. the 2.5M absentee returned.
I feel much better after today.
” I’m not sure exactly how signature matching is done.”
Computerized signature matching uses algorithms to compare features in a signature to a known sample. Because no signatures are exactly alike, even from the same person on the same day, there is a margin of error that’s built into the algorithm that allows for some differences. So for example, the margin could be set to 90% match and that would be a very strict standard.
Conversely, if you set the margin of error too high then the algorithm will accept all sorts of deviations from the known signature, even to the point of accepting clearly wrong signatures.
The allegation is that the limits in NV were set to 40%, which is effectively no signature matching.
Bone to pick w/ Mr Barnes: NOTE- The “Pig Farmers” that I know are all successful (Net worth in millions, two that I know personally are knocking on 50- 100 mil net worth). They were smart enough to go into a business that was low status and have been laughing all the way to the bank ever since, some for generations. DO not underestimate people with whom you disagree.
The Barnes and Frei video on this topic is only 25 minutes and gets to the crux of it too. I don’t know who this other dude is, so i’m glad you’ve provided me with another apparent sanity checker on the right. The right is obnoxiously STILL very susceptible to disinformation operations DESPITE having borne the brunt of them for the past 20 effing years, FFS. Most disinformation campaigns are coming from leftists like this one with the sole purpose of discrediting the right en masse: https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs
WHY won’t they write it down! not everyone watches videos. Is there a transcript anywhere?
WHY won’t they write it down! not everyone watches videos. Is there a transcript anywhere?
Elaine T: YES!
Youtube usually offers a computer-generated transcript available at the “…” button. (Right-click “…” and select “Open Transcript.”) It’s ok, but not optimal reading without punctuation or paragraph breaks..
However, YouTube neglected to include a transcript with the Barnes video. Maybe because the video is close to four hours long? Or more nefarious reasons?
Sidney Powell has now filed lawsuits in two states, and they’re big.
It was pointed out to me by two lawyers that appellate law is very nitpicky. Powell is an appellate specialist. I suspect she wanted to be sure everything was perfect before she filed. This means that not only do you include affidavits of witnesses, you do research to make sure that the affidavits are credible and the affiant reliable–willing to show up in court.
There had been a case filed in Michigan that included data on precincts in Minnesota. Easy mistake to make, but fatal to an appeal.
It seems that Powell’s efforts are moving in parallel to Trump’s efforts. For legal reasons, some lawsuits have to come from Trump folks, others from other affected parties.
Yeah this doesn’t look like we’re gonna win and what’s excruciating is how easily it could’ve been had we pursued their nibble strategy. I think the best thing we can hope for now is to overcome the massive fraud in the Georgia runoff and hold the senate from Diapers. But I’m not confident for 24 since they now have a template for stealing