The "Judges" (or the jurors in common law, grand jurors representing the accuser, or trial jurors representing the whole people as one) are going to be either seriously looking at broken chain of custody or looking the other way as if broken chain of custody, which is a self-evident fact, does not matter in the case.

Serious "Judges" would acknowledge that chain of custody must be in place so as to discover evidence of fraud. Broken chain of custody is a defect because the crumbs left by Hansel and Gretel have been eaten by the birds, and there is no longer a marked trail back home.

Broken chain of custody, such as is the self-evident fact that matters in the "Voting" Machine hardware, software, and known connections to the Internet, is therefore self-evident, smoking gun, defects in whichever votes were counted by the defective method. There is no way to prove any of those votes are valid: there is no way to find the evidence.

There is no way to find the evidence when the chain of custody (put in place to document evidence) is broken.

The "Judges" will be looking at the fact that chain of custody is broken.

In order to certify (claim accuracy) of a vote count one would have to either assume that there is no evidence of fraud, and therefore no reason to look for it, or one would have to assume that there is a way to look if the assumption - by anyone - challenges the accuracy of the vote count, and then assume that someone did look, and since the assumption was already made that there is a way to look, there is therefore no evidence, because of the two assumptions.

1. Assume there is no evidence (no one looks)
2. Assume that there is a way to find evidence (chain of custody was not broken)
3. Assume that since there is a challenge to the accuracy of the vote count, someone looked and didn't find any evidence, since they did look, otherwise why would anyone look in the first place, when the first assumption is that there is no evidence.

That is potentially the thinking of those "Judges" who don't look, assuming that they are not in on the fraud themselves, and they know that there is fraud, because they are an integral part of the fraud.

What if the "Judge" is seriously doing the job trusted to be the job of a "Judge?"

Just the facts, please.

Chain of custody is broken, the way to find evidence is therefore removed because the chain of custody is broken, therefore the power to certify a challenged vote count is gone. The vote count cannot be certified.

All that is a circus, because a reasonable, serious, member of the common law, a grand jury member, would have already sent out the invitation to an expedient trial in a Court of Law, with the named defendant being one of the suspected frauds near the top of the food chain.

I would like to offer a competitive look at a decision made by Trump et al. (Deplorables) to take a dive in this battle.

A decision to take a dive, to throw the fight, to lay down and let the opponent win, is on the table, since the evidence shows that Trump et al. (Deplorables) have the power to win if they decide to win, having all the necessary mechanisms in place to do so.

How demoralizing would it be if the decision to take the dive is decided upon?

Just be prepared, please.

A possible moral reason for doing so is to pay out even more rope to the pedos, to give them the opportunity to abuse their power (more victims) even more overtly, leaving even less doubt as to their guilt, to even more people.

I don't agree with the decision, it purchases a nebulous goal, by sacrificing all the victims abused by the pedos from the moment something could have been done, at that moment, but wasn't done, at that moment.

We are not talking about one guy sniffing the hair of children right in front of God and everyone who cares to know. We are (or I am) talking about a World Wide Industrial Level Slavery Cabal, where the numbers of victims known is staggering, and the number of victims unknown is reasonably more than the known numbers of victims.

Leaving them with free access to their tormentors, even worse: SUBSIDIZING the Slave Trade for an unknowable amount of time longer, 4 years longer, 8 years longer, who knows, is to me an unjust abuse of power, a gamble, a risk where those making the call are not themselves risking their own immediate ticket into the meat grinder: OR ARE THEY?

Benefit of doubt, as to why decisions are made, is a common law principle stated as: presumed innocent until proven guilty.

That is why I keep looking, and why I keep sharing what I see.

[pandemic.warroom.org]

December 8 and 14 are "arbitrary" dates compared to January 20. The later date (Jan 20) is the "constitutional" date at the National Level (it is not federal), and therefore extra-judicial (outside the law, outlaws, unconstitutional) actions would be such after the Jan 20 date ACCORDING to some authorities.

What about according to all authorities unanimously?

That is the point I want to keep pointing out.

Common law, which is processed in a Court of Law, requires unanimity of the representatives who represent The Public as a whole, who are the trial jurors selected by lot, not by "election."

According to Marxist Communist Indoctrinated Authorities of Marxist Communist Indoctrination, Pedo wins, in every single possible situation known or unknown, and that is a fact that matters, an obvious bias, which is self-evidently not just, not equitable, not moral, not legal, not lawful, not fair, not right. The blind lady isn't blind when the bias is obvious.

According to Nationalists Indoctrinated Authorities of Nationalist Indoctrination, Trump wins, in the specific cases justified by Nationalist Indoctrination, which includes the use of Nationalist Courts, which could conceivably include common law processed in a Court of Law.

I look for a jury trial, in a Court of Law, and the one that would solve this justly, legally, morally, lawfully, would be a common law criminal trial, moved from an accusation to an independent grand jury, to a trial by jury, whereby the named - presumed to be innocent - accused (Biden, or any greater or lesser level fraud) is no longer eligible for government office, due to the cause of action pending. Once The People through their representatives in the trial jury adjudicate the matter lawfully, then the accused is either released as not guilty, and can then resume government office, or eligibility in seeking government office, or if found guilty, the jury agrees unanimously on the remedy, redemption, restitution (of his victims), or punishment. If history is at all worthy of following (precedent) then treasonous criminals in America are justly removed from any further possible abuse of life, liberty, etc.

Muwahhhh