BREAKING: Nevada Judge DISMISSES THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF EVIDENCE Of Widespread Voter Fraud In SHAM RULING Because He Didn't Like It, Then Rules For JOE BIDEN

By John Paluska, Founder of The Daily Fodder

After filing a formal lawsuit yesterday, the Trump Campaign and Nevada GOP alleged more than 40,000 people voted twice and thousands upon thousands of people voted from fake or commercial addresses or from out-of-state, the Nevada judge presiding over the court case threw out all the witness statements because he said they weren't considered evidence before a court of law.

On page 12 of judge's ruling over voter fraud in Nevada, the judge used a procedural error by Republicans do dismiss thousands of pages of witness statements from being considered admissible evidence. He then continued to ban all future witness statements as "hearsay," INCLUDING affidavits and other sworn testimony. 

The judge stated:

57. Much of Contestants' evidence consists of non-deposition evidence in the form of witness declarations. These declarations fall outside the scope of the contest statute, which provides that election contests "shall be tried and submitted so far as may be possible upon depositions and written or oral argument as the court may order." NRS 293.415. The reason for this is to allow for the cross-examination of the deponent under oath.

58. These declarations also constitute hearsay, as they are out-of-court statements offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matters asserted. See NRS 51.035, 51.065; Cramer v. State, 126 Nev. 388, 392, 240 P.3d 8, 11 (2010) ("An affidavit is generally inadmissible hearsay."). Most of these declarations were self-serving statements of little or no evidentiary value.

The judge also claimed on page 13 that one of the experts the Republicans cited had "unsound" methodology because he relied on sworn witness statements when making his analysis. 

Meanwhile, the judge took the verbal testimony of the Jeff Ellington, the president of Agilis, one of the manufacturers of voting machines without asking him to prove or provide facts or evidence to prove his claims. They claimed Jeff Ellington had a "lack of bias" even though his company's integrity was being questioned in the lawsuit.

The judge in question has a history of ruling in favor of the government in court proceedings, including denying an appeal to a ruling where the Nevada Department of Corrections allegedly added extra months to a prisoner's parole that went outside his allotted parole time, a case where he sided with his own judicial branch, and a case where the Supreme Court declared his ruling was unconstitutional when he said a cop that allegedly discriminated against a driver was acting completely legally.

It's difficult to prove anything when the presiding judge throws out your evidence and then supplants his own, based on his own opinions of whether the testimony is credible or not. This was a sham ruling based on a judge's feelings and not willfully engaging in the facts of the case or the analyses thereof from the Nevada Republicans and Trump Campaign.


SHARE our articles and like our Facebook page and follow us on Twitter!

Post a Comment