ChikN10der
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
So the evidence doesn't count until cross examination, and cross examination can't happen without a trial, but a trial can't happen without the evidence produced by the cross examination?I'm not saying that there isn't evidence, though. As it stands, though, while the evidence that we do have may be worthy of further discovery, Trump's lawyers can't get to discovery because they can't establish their standing in the case in the face of a motion to dismiss, and they can't make the case that the relief they seek is appropriate in the first place.
That's the issue, isn't it? They suck.
How do you determine credible testimony without vetting them in cross examination?
How do you get to cross examination when you're being blocked on standing?
Your take is evidence is a catch 22 and that's legitimate?
Lower courts saying they don't have standing is expected. What the pa sc says is irrelevant, they're the ones the trump campaign is trying to get the scotus to overturn.