Once the courts are involved, Biden’s odds of winning diminish
The media is quickly trying to claim that Joe Biden is the next president because President Trump has the law – the courts – on his side, according to an analyst.
Particularly, the election remains in play until Dec. 14 when the states actually cast their electoral college votes, unless one candidate concedes the race, according to market analyst Graham Summers.
“So, unless President Trump concedes between now and then, Joe Biden hasn’t won anything, no matter what the media tells you,” he writes. “Indeed, the media has no say in this, anymore than they can decide what color the sky is; they’re simply trying to get you angry so you’ll continue to watch their awful shows so they can sell your eyeballs to advertisers.”
“With that in mind, we need to take a step back and assess how this election is likely to play out based on the LAW, not public opinion or media propaganda,” he continued. “Based on the law, it is highly possible and in fact probable that Donald Trump will end up winning the 2020 Presidential election.”
Once the courts are involved, Biden’s odds of winning diminish, Summers added, because Trump has evidence on his side, and Biden only has a small “lead” in several states where there’s evidence of voter fraud.
The Supreme Court has already gotten involved by ordering the State of Pennsylvania to segregate ballots that arrived after 8PM on election night, ballots of which gave an edge to Biden.
Interestingly, there’s been reports that several Penn. precincts have failed to do so, which gives Trump a strong legal advantage.
“And the Supreme Court’s justices are currently 6-3 conservative to liberal. Even if Roberts were to side with the liberals, the conservatives still hold the 5-4 majority,” according to Summers. “Put simply, the ultimate arbiter in court rulings on elections favors Trump.”
“Provided he DOESN’T concede, the odds greatly favor him winning a second term.”
It’s also worth noting that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito issued the ruling to Pennsylvania without further comment by his fellow justices, suggesting that the court made the ruling in unison.