Law prof: Election fraud evidence significant, cases dismissed only on legal process grounds
Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.
LAS CRUCES, New Mexico, January 19, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A business law professor at New Mexico State University (NMSU) said that anyone who proposes there “is no evidence” for massive election fraud in November’s presidential election doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Professor David K. Clements released a provocative video in response to a letter sent to the entire faculty of NMSU from Dr. John Floros, the university’s president. Clements described the letter as “regurgitating” the narrative “in the media” regarding the election and the January 6 violence at the U.S. Capital.
While broadly addressing many issues on these topics, he was very specific with regards to his own personal investigation into the election fraud question.
For those who believe “there is no evidence, you don’t know what you are talking about,” he said. “I’ve reviewed hours upon hours of public hearings. I have read almost all of the lawsuits that are out there. Most of them were dismissed on legal process grounds.”
These suits, he said, were dismissed due to a legal lack of standing. “The general argument” that was presented in these cases, he said, “was that because this was a general harm,” then “you have no standing because your harm has to be particular. It’s not because there isn’t evidence. There is evidence,” the professor emphasized.
“In fact, I’m in possession of 574 pages of sworn affidavits, forensic reports, all of which would make its way in a court of law under the rules of evidence in a federal or state court. The fact that the evidence has not been heard here by these courts” should not be conflated into “this idea that there is no evidence,” Clements argued.
“The courts have done what they always do,” Clements explained. “When you have political matters, they want them to be decided politically, not in a court room, but through the elections, through the state legislatures.”
However, he observed, the main problem was that “we have a bunch of cowards. We have judges who are cowards, we have politicians that are cowards, and that’s the reality.”
Clements, who lost a close primary run for senate in 2014, encouraged all “to look at the evidence, [including] sworn affidavits where people face 10 to 15 years of prison time if they commit perjury, and statistical analysis that just flies in the face of this idea that there was no fraud in this election.”
More broadly Clements went through Floros’ letter providing commentary along the way. He highlighted hypocrisy on the part of the NMSU president for the special attention paid to the intrusion at the Capitol and his silence during the BLM riots last summer.
“I’m offended that this is the email you are going to send to faculty, when you have been largely silent as cities have burned. People have lost their businesses [and] homes … entire city blocks [were] turned into zones for Antifa and BLM … Your silence speaks volumes,” he said.
Floros celebrated how on January 6 “our democratic institutions held strong, and by the end of the day both houses of Congress returned to the Capitol Building to do the people’s business.”
Clements, a long-time political independent, responded, “The people’s business” that day “was to certify votes to ensure that there was a proper transition to the next president. However, in seven of those states there were dueling electors, and the ‘People’s Business’ allowed for the American people to hear evidence of voter fraud. When these members of Congress returned, they did not deal with the massive black cloud hanging over the election in November. They did nothing of the sort. They used the riot as grounds to move forward and push their paper.”
According to the law, the professor explained, during this certification process, “you can object, and you can investigate, when certain votes are not regularly given. And in many states, it’s clear that they weren’t.”
Therefore, Clements concluded, “The people weren’t heard,” that day. “They were silenced once again. And that is why you had folks show up in the first place because they felt like they were silenced in their own respective states, and they wanted to be heard.”
To demonstrate the weakness of the media narrative Clements showed video clips, including an Antifa activist bragging about his involvement in the Capitol Hill riots, police removing barriers and waving the crowds into the Capitol area, and Trump supporters forcefully working to stop “Antifa” individuals from smashing windows at the Capitol.
“President Floros, you have reached a conclusion prematurely, way too quickly,’ the law professor concluded. “I hope you will send another email out saying that you rushed to judgment.
“For my fellow faculty members who are continuing to call out Trump supporters, to demonize them, I hope that you can treat them, and myself, with civility,” he concluded.