election-integrity.info

I followed the link to STANFORD-MIT HEALTHY ELECTIONS PROJECT COVID-Related Election Litigation Track and got more info on the case:

healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu

The case was filed and ruled on in August 2020 with a final Iowa SC ruling in October 2020 which upheld the original ruling. At issue was 3 Democratic counties in Iowa sending our absentee ballot request forms that were pre-populated with voter info like name, date of birth and pin number. Voters needed to review the request form and then send it back into to the county in order to get the actual absentee ballot. The courts ruled that absentee ballot request forms could not be pre-populated in this way but must be sent out blank and all forms that were sent out that way (thousands of them) must be invalidated. All this happened prior to the November 2020 election and was indeed a win for Trump and the Republicans, but because this victory occurred well before the election in November, implying this case is some kind of proof that voter fraud occurred which affected the presidential election is ludicrous.

The linked to tweet states:

It is up for debate whether any particular lawsuit would have been the deciding factor, but the critical underlying point is that the election challenges were legal and valid. The sum of these lawsuits paint the picture that the "fortified" 2020 election was highly flawed and undemocratic, since it did not abide by fundamental practices of election integrity.

Thus debunks a widespread narrative: Trump's legal challenges to the 2020 election were all "baseless."

www.courthousenews.com

Iowa Supreme Court sides with GOP over absentee ballot request forms
October 15, 2020

Iowa's highest court upheld a state directive Wednesday that was used to invalidate tens of thousands of absentee ballot requests mailed to voters pre-filled with their personal information.

The Iowa Supreme Court issued its ruling in favor of President Donald Trump's campaign and Republican groups as Trump held an evening rally in Des Moines.

The court rejected a Democratic challenge that argued the directive issued by Republican Secretary of State Paul Pate was unconstitutional.

Pate instructed county elections commissioners in July that all absentee ballot request forms they mailed to voters must be blank in order to ensure uniformity statewide.

Auditors in three counties defied Pate's guidance and mailed forms to thousands of voters with their names, addresses, dates of birth and voter pin numbers already filled in. Voters just had to review, sign and return the forms, which the three auditors said were intended to make voting by >mail as easy as possible during the coronavirus pandemic.

twitter.com

Missing context indeed. Either Becker has been too negligent to dig into the context himself, or he is counting on other people being too lazy to do so.

healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu

What that meant for MN voters:

Five Days Before the Election, a Federal Court Moves Minnesota's Mail-In Ballot Deadline Up a Full Week

A federal appeals court invalidated Minnesota's mail-in voting procedure Thursday evening, ruling that mail-in votes had to be received by the close of polls on Election Day, not simply postmarked by then, in order to be counted. Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, in response to a different lawsuit this summer demanding an extension, agreed in July that mail-in votes would need to be postmarked by Nov. 3, with a seven-day window afterward for the vote to arrive and be counted. The state subsequently sent out some 1.7 million requested absentee ballots with specific instructions explaining just that. Months later, just five days before the election, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals weighed in and changed the rules. Nearly 400,000 of the absentee ballots have yet to be returned, according to Simon.

slate.com

healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu

Again, neither case supports the claim that "the 'fortified' 2020 election was highly flawed and undemocratic, since it did not abide by fundamental practices of election integrity." Neither case supports the claim that Trump really won the election, but it was rigged against him and stolen from him.