The Evidence

Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

November 29, 2020

Here, below, is the evidence presented in court and public hearings, to date, claiming that the Nov 3, 2020 general election for President was illegitimate.  Read it and judge for yourself.

I have read it and am forming my own assessment on the quality and integrity of the evidence.  I invite you to do the same.  Don’t rely on news outlets, don’t rely on political commentators, and don’t necessarily rely on the courts.  Read and judge for yourself.

Several of these cases already have been tossed out by courts on procedural grounds, not on their inherent merits or lack thereof.  It’s up to you to make a distinction between procedural flaws and intrinsic merits. 

It is also up to you to decide if the evidence, such as it is and as it continues to become public, stands a chance of resolution in a court of law, given the procedural maneuvers available to attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants.  Judges render their decisions based on the cogency of the legal arguments, supported by cherry-picked case law, from both sides.  This is why it’s all-important to hire a cunning, shrewd, and brilliant law firm.  (These are lawyers who can get an acquittal for Jack the Ripper.)

I’m not trying to persuade a court that the election was phony and stolen from Mr. Trump.  Nor am I trying to persuade you.  I’m saying, “Look, here is the evidence so far.  You decide for yourself.  If you think the evidence is flimsy, then so be it.  If you think it’s compelling, then so be it.” 

If you think it’s flimsy, more than likely you think the vote was legit—not tampered with.  In which case you might conclude Calvin Martin has worked himself into an unnecessary lather over all this.  Except for one thing, one flaw in the argument, which is that I’m concerned about the millions of people (I may be exaggerating this number) who seem convinced the voting machines and paper ballots were outrageously compromised, with votes often fabricated or discarded.  I worry that people will lose confidence in the vote, and I don’t want them to. 

You see, I’m not prepared to “polarize.”  People on both sides of the issue are my kinsmen:  neighbors, friends, relatives, and fellow Americans.  I don’t believe in civil wars.  I don’t believe in riots and mayhem and hatred.  What I believe in is empirical evidence:  a demonstrably valid vote

If this vote is not demonstrably valid, yes, after the fact, then America has a huge problem on its hands. 

CLM

The Pennsylvania Senate Majority Policy Committee held a public hearing on Nov 25, 2020 to discuss 2020 election issues and irregularities at the request of Republican Senator Doug Mastriano.  It’s 3 hours long.  It’s well worth watching.  It begins with a presentation of evidence by Mr. Giuliani, followed by approx. 18 witnesses.

My wife, Dr. Pierpont, listened to the entire hearing.  She took notes, below, with a time stamp attached.  (See, for instance, p. 1, para. 3, 0:16 Witness 1: Justin Kweder, Esq.  This means you can slide the control button to the 16-minute mark to begin listening to Attorney Kweder’s testimony.  Below this, see 0:23 Witness 2: Kim Peterson.  Slide the control button to the 23-minute mark to begin listening to her.  And so on.)

Pennsylvania lawsuits
Georgia lawsuits
Michigan lawsuit

"The Will to Power"

2 thoughts on “The Evidence”

  1. Avatar

    We both are strongly opinionated students of politics and history. There are even times when we agree. The sheer magnitude of the array of lawsuits being filed and the almost unanimous response of (mostly Republican) judges would seem to show a modern political ploy: throw as much mud as possible against the wall hoping that at least some of it sticks.

    If we fail to recognize the editorial viewpoint of our news sources, it’s easy for those sources to reinforce our preconceptions and preferences. I try to consume news and information from a wide swath that brushes the edges of credibility.

    Today, this included an editorial from that conservative bastion, The National Review, which posits:

    There are legitimate issues to consider after the 2020 vote about the security of mail-in ballots and the process of counting votes (some jurisdictions, bizarrely, take weeks to complete their initial count), but make no mistake: The chief driver of the post-election contention of the past several weeks is the petulant refusal of one man to accept the verdict of the American people.

    Flawed and dishonest assertions like this pollute the public discourse and mislead good people who make the mistake of believing things said by the President of the United States.

    .
    .
    Editor’s note: Wayne Miller holds an advanced degree in American history as well as a Masters in Library Science. Several years ago he retired from being the Head Librarian at the Franklin Academy in Malone.

    .

  2. Avatar
    Patricia Greenstein

    Calvin, thank you for this. I appreciate your comment:

    I have read it and am forming my own assessment on the quality and integrity of the evidence. I invite you to do the same. Don’t rely on news outlets, don’t rely on political commentators, and don’t necessarily rely on the courts. Read and judge for yourself.

    I do not have TV. I get my news from independent citizen journalists. These journalists have lead me to the conclusion that there is VERY compelling evidence that our voting system is compromised. Your readers (still on the fence about fraud) ought to consider further research into Dominion > Scorecard > Scytl. Also educate themselves about the term that Sidney Powell and Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney refer to as KRAKEN.
    .

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on google
Google+
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn