What are they afraid of?

The same thing all criminals are afraid of, being exposed, going to prison, dropping the soap, that sort of thing.

At this point, they should be more afraid of dangling from a rope.

The goal is to get to the Supreme Court as soon as possible. The fact this corrupt Demoncrat state turned it down, is okay. Just take their names, put them on a list, and prosecute them later for their corruption.

Either the Third Circuit Court of Appeals will order an audit... or Alito will... God willing, because everyone will lose faith in American elections if the Democrats can openly and obviously steal the election.

Forget about an audit in PA (at this point given the various illegal acts committed by PA Sec of State and local Dem election officials in Philly amd Pittsburgh) —this would be just like Georgia’s audit—simply recounting hundreds of thousands of illegally counted fraudulent votes. Justice Alito and SCOTUS simply need to rule correctly that PA officials including the Sec of State and PA Supreme court violated the US Constitution and either toss out all of the tainted mail in votes counted in Philly amd Pittsburgh or if it is impossible to distinguish those mail in votes received after the deadline set by law by the PA legislature—then revoke the entire election result—as there is not sufficient time for a repeat PA election—this would send the decision of which electors PA sends to the electoral college in hands of the PA state legislature. And same situation is looming in Michigan for certain—rinse, wash, repeat. If same thing happens in MI and WI—odds are the Repub controlled state legislatures send Repub electors for Trump. Same thing could happen in AZ and possibly GA. And if SCOTUS tosses out election results in PA, MI, and WI or GA—if the state legislatures of these states cant get their act togethet and vote themselves on a slate of electors to send to Electoral college on Dec 14–then neither Biden nor Trump would have the required 270 electoral votes to win—and Constitutional backup plan takes over—and there is a vote by US House of Representatives—on a state by state delegation—with each state getting to cast one vote for the candidate chosen by its group of Representatives to HOR—so CA and NY get one vote each, as does AK, MT and TX. Since Repubs have a majority of Representatives in about 30 states—Trump would undoubtedly win that vote.

I'm sure that's why all the clamoring for Trump to concede knowing this path is very close getting closer to implication. Notice the minions starting to peak out over the swamp mud piles like Christy thinking they better hurry to kiss the butts of those on the left assuming control...

Trump has expanded his Party such that we no longer need the RINOs. Why don't the Democrats have DINOs? I'll tell you why, because the DNC will immediately cut off campaign funds if someone steps off the reservation.

I have to agree..."hey look, folks, we counted the illegal votes really accurately". Huh???

The big problem, judges at ALL levels are in great fear of "disenfranchising" voters (legal or illegal). Therefore, they will create "tortured" opinions (ref: Roberts and Obamacare) to justify the win for Biden. After all, they want to continue receiving invites to the best beltway parties too, and to be liked by the others in attendance (anti-Trumpers)!!!!

Where's your evidence for fraud?

That HAS to be a troll... Go to the Gateway Pundit and you can spend the next week reading the evidence, watching the videos, reading the data... If you can't see any evidence you're not looking.

If the the Gateway Pundit evidence is so powerful, why haven't Trump's lawyers used it already, when it most mattered, to stop certification and avoid the dozens of losses they've suffered in court?

Especially if you think you might have to appeal to a higher court you want to make sure to present all the evidence that you have at the lower court level. Otherwise a higher court will be asking “why wasn’t this presented before?”

You don’t lay much of a foundation for appeal by getting cases dismissed with prejudice due to lack of evidence.

Instead you make it a lot more likely that an appeals court will refuse to even take up your case.

You have to look at criminal proceedings vs civil. Different rules and processes. Criminal has the higher requirement of evidence prior to hearing. If I'm correct this is civil which does not require "discovery" until after initial hearings to determine "standing" and all that. No lawyer here but that's the way it was explained to me. The activist judge knew this but acted and ruled inappropriately. Doesn't matter, he did them a favor by immediately tossing it rather than dragging it out, wasting time. Now they get to the SCOTUS faster, which is where they want to be.
Search for this on YT and watch. He explains what's up. BTW, this is one of mult parts coming...
Rudy Giuliani lays out President Trump's Pathways To Victory - 2pm Nov. 23rd

The lower burden of proof in a civil case is no reason not to present all of your best evidence at the outset. You still want to do everything you can to prove your arguments at every stage in the process. Not presenting powerful evidence that you have to a lower court certainly doesn’t help you prevail in or even reach a higher court. It’s just foolish.

And if you were to withhold evidence as a means to avoid discovery then it wouldn’t be admissible and you’d be held in contempt.

That's not the point. Did you read anything or did you just hip-shoot a reply? The judge himself abrogated the process. Discovery happens AFTER the judge allows standing and the case to continue. Evidence is not given before. Look up "preponderance of evidence" and civil court process. The judge didn't even allow "first base" much less discovery phase. the judge acted in a completely inappropriate manner. but that's ok, it helped Trumps case anyway. SCOTUS is where it's at, not some low-level activist flunky.

You are incorrectly stating what happened in the case. Judge Brann did not rule that the Trump campaign attorneys had no standing. He allowed them to present evidence and ruled that it was insufficient to warrant disenfranchising millions of voters dismissing the case with prejudice.

that is still NOT the process. Gathering evidence happens AFTER the suit is granted standing. It's called the DISCOVERY phase, not PRESENTATION. The judge abrogated the process. Last word I will give on this.

By the way, Discovery is when lawyers on both sides of a trial provide their evidence to the opposing side.

Dude-I'm not a lawyer but my father was for decades and your ignorance of how the legal system works is so complete that I wouldn't had to have heard a word he said over that entire time to know that your "ideas" about what's going on here are laughable.

Even more funny that you think that lawyers should wait for a trial or hearing to begin before gathering evidence.

Funny that you think that Judge Brann wasn't ruling on evidence presented to him when he ruled that insufficient evidence had been presented to him. Are saying that Judge Brann was hallucinating? You need help...

The judge scanned the evidence and already had a preconceived notion that he would not allow a hearing. Just like Thumperx54 said he abrogated his authority and punted it just like Roberts. Which is a good thing for Trump, to get to the higher courts.

He did no such thing and you’ll see that I’m right about that in the response of higher courts.

You're not the one who evaluates his review of the evidence. The system presumes that Federal judges have evaluated the evidence properly. So again it's unlikely that a higher court will view the evidence differently, if at all. Just don't say I didn't warn you.

I am well schooled in the laws of evidence. I did it for quite a few years. These affidavits do warrant an investigation. I know that time is in constraint, but that is no excuse for not getting it right. There is to much at stake for our judicial system to just dismiss something out of hand like they have.

My father is a retired lawyer and prosecutor. I don’t believe that you’re a lawyer.

I was an investigator and was before the Grand Jury and Judges in civil cases. I know that affidavits can go either way. I also know you submit them and they get sorted out in the investigation. No investigation is being done here.

You should read the actual ruling from the judge, before you offer up opinions about how he reviewed the evidence and determined its value, admissibility.

If you did that you would also know that there was a hearing and indeed that the judge bent over backwards to accommodate the plaintiffs.

But what about the rights of the defendant? Our legal system allows for suits to be dismissed when they plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that there should be a trial. The Constitution does not and never has guaranteed all plaintiffs in a civil action a trial, regardless of whether or not they can show cause for one.

You’re making up your own alternative legal system as you go along to justify your personal grievances and you don’t care about the rights of anyone but those on your side.

How Russian of you!

No investigation was done by any law enforcement agency. I have met many judges and worked with them, that had the title but no rudimentary understanding of actual investigative law. Much like a young bartender in NYC that is trying to change the world but can't add 1+1. AOC!

Well said!

It’s a fair question: do you have evidence or not?

Wow! So why hasn't that bastion of ethical journalism, the Pundit, shared their "evidence" with Trump's team? Couldn't a drowning man use a life line about now??

In the possession of the lawyers who will present it in a court of law! However with just a tiny bit of effort there is evidence all over the internet. Heck Biden himself is on video admitting that they have the largest voter fraud organization in history! Wake up open your eyes!

Biden also admitted (nee BRAGGED) about committing "Quid Pro Quo" and what consequences did he face for it? Why Trump was impeached for it, not him!!!!!! Again, in this scandal, it's not the amount or quality of the evidence, it's finding an uncompromised court (good luck with that!) willing to accept it and turn over an election- STATE by STATE!!!! That.won't.happen.!!!! All I see is a court (I'm referring to YOU SCOTUS) declaring that Trump's lawyers, and Sydney, have no standing, evidence thrown out, or a "tortured" opinion giving Biden the WH.

LOL. Trump's lawyers have been to court dozens of times and not presented anything of substance yet.

ITS OVER.

They have not been to court dozens of times quit following the MSM many private citizens have filed suit and had them tossed out.

Definitely dozens.

Trump is one of the most litigious members of the human race. As a businessman he has been in 3500 lawsuits, both as originator and defendant.

NOPE... only 4 times so far!

The media is lying again andcnot telling the whole story!

The other lawsuits are from groups that support fair elections and the conting of ALL LEGAL VOTES!

Yet these groups are not affliated with the Pres. Trump's team of lawyers!

35 times so far.

If they have all this evidence, why didn't they present it to Judge Brann before he tossed their case with prejudice, finding
“This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence,” putting them in a very weak position to appeal? If they had evidence that they didn't present to Judge Brann, before he made that ruling, they were terribly incompetent, don't you think?

You’re right I along with anyone else with common sense is ignorant of how anyone would think it would be a good idea to avoid presenting evidence of widespread fraud in court when it most mattered, if they had such evidence.

Are you really dumb enough to believe that Biden was boasting about fraud and didn’t just simply misspeak the way everyone does from time to time?

If Trump’s lawyers have all this evidence of fraud why haven’t they been presenting it in court when it most mattered thereby avoiding getting their cases tossed for lack of evidence as they have been by now literally dozens of times?

You are confusing the Trump Campaign's law suit with the individual lawsuits being filed by groups and citizens separately!

Either way, if Trump and his lawyers have had lots of evidence of widespread fraud that they haven't presented or made sure was presented by now they've made a catastrophic error .

The new conspiracy thinking is that the cases were designed to be so full of errors and so lacking in evidence that they’d be certain to be thrown out and would be, I don’t know, more likely to get to SCOTUS. It’s hard to keep up with such impressively gymnastic logic.

Yeah because the Supreme Court always looks for cases full of errors as important test cases in constitutional law.