Awaiting the Kraken

[mystery-ak]

November 20, 2020
Awaiting the Kraken
By Tadas Klimas

 

The only way the Left could win this election was by massive fraud. That is what they realized during the early morning hours after midnight of Election Day.

So they piled it on.

This really is startling. Not that the Left cheated, not that they engage in psychological warfare to cover up their cheating.

But that all the constant pounding, the immense effort by the enemy-of-the-people, false and fake, media, the near-criminal defalcating do-nothingness of the DOJ, even the held-back news of Trump’s vaccine -- failed miserably against the forces of MAGA.

We Republicans, or whatever we are, gained a governorship, at least ten seats in Congress, several statehouses, and, regarding the presidential race, support from nearly every demographic, including a tremendous gain amongst black and Latino voters.

President Trump himself garnered 73 million votes – 10 million more than in 2016.

It was the forces of MAGA that triumphed, not the Democrats.

more
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/awaiting_the_kraken.html

[Fishrrman]

Tadas Klimas:
"Awaiting the Kraken"

Fishrrman:
The Kraken ain't comin'.
Call him by his other name:
Godot.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Like Linus waiting for the great pumpkin.

[skeeter]

Like Linus waiting for the great pumpkin.

Or you, waiting for the barkeep to serve you just one more Cosmopolitan.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I know we're all anxious for the kraken to make a splash (see what I did there  ) ... Personally, I'm thinking the kraken is going to be the thread that's woven through a clear and compelling story of targeted, premeditated and coordinated fraud to deny the vast majority of American voters their choice for President of the United States. (Think Supreme Court)

As for evidence, I think we can relax, at least a little. I think they've got it ... maybe a little too much.       In a civil fraud lawsuit, such as the election lawsuit(s) are/will be, the plaintiff must present clear and convincing evidence.  They are not required to present evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Part of this process is to present a clear and convincing story which the evidence supports.  I imagine the President's legal team is now fine-tuning the clear and compelling story that is supported by the evidence they have collected. Remember, the team has collected this evidence without the benefit of a legal discovery phase -- so kudos to them for collecting so much evidence and kudos to the Americans who have stepped up to help provide it.

Here's a bit more on evidence: 

The burden of proof has two components. First, the plaintiff must satisfy the burden of production, which has also been referred to as the burden of going forward. As the terms suggest, this burden requires the plaintiff to put forth evidence in the form of witness testimony, documents, or objects. After the plaintiff presents his or her case-in-chief, the burden of production shifts to the defendant, who then has the opportunity to provide evidence either rebutting the plaintiff’s evidence or supporting the defendant’s own arguments.

In some civil cases, the burden of proof is elevated to a higher standard called “clear and convincing evidence.” This burden of proof requires the plaintiff to prove that a particular fact is substantially more likely than not to be true. Some courts have described this standard as requiring the plaintiff to prove that there is a high probability that a particular fact is true. This standard sets a higher threshold than the preponderance of the evidence standard, but it does not quite rise to the widely recognized standard used in criminal cases, known as “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/lawsuits-and-the-court-process/evidentiary-standards-and-burdens-of-proof/

the burden of production shifts to the defendant, who then has the opportunity to provide evidence either rebutting the plaintiff’s evidence or supporting the defendant’s own arguments.

This,    IMHO, is why the President's legal team is not taking their evidence, chapter and verse, to the media.  It's much more likely they're using the media to test the story, not give a precise heads-up to George Soros.


So, all's good.  Tense, but good.  I hope this helps get us through another weekend with a louder, more insistent drumbeat for "evidence!", "evidence!", "evidence!" and the President's team not tipping their hand.  Yet.


@Weird Tolkienish Figure