A lot of them were thrown together haphazardly, with little time. For a few of them, it was a judgment call by the judge, perhaps affected by pressure or bias. Can a judge safely ignore hard-to-imagine statistical improbabilities?
I remember reading that one case actually did get to discovery but then I haven't heard anything, but haven't…
A lot of them were thrown together haphazardly, with little time. For a few of them, it was a judgment call by the judge, perhaps affected by pressure or bias. Can a judge safely ignore hard-to-imagine statistical improbabilities?
I remember reading that one case actually did get to discovery but then I haven't heard anything, but haven't been paying attention.
Trump's "holy grail" was the internal records of the computerized voting machines, but there were also reported irregularities, together with statistical improbabilities, in the six swing states with mail-in balloting.
I suspect that there was also an intelligence-related source that Trump could not make public.
A lot of them were thrown together haphazardly, with little time. For a few of them, it was a judgment call by the judge, perhaps affected by pressure or bias. Can a judge safely ignore hard-to-imagine statistical improbabilities?
I remember reading that one case actually did get to discovery but then I haven't heard anything, but haven't been paying attention.
Trump's "holy grail" was the internal records of the computerized voting machines, but there were also reported irregularities, together with statistical improbabilities, in the six swing states with mail-in balloting.
I suspect that there was also an intelligence-related source that Trump could not make public.