Trainor said his review of evidence, including numerous affidavits claiming voter fraud and a sworn statement by a prominent mathematician flagging up to 100,000 Pennsylvania ballots, met the first level of legal scrutiny under what’s known as motion to dismiss or "Rule 12(b)(6)" of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which would dismiss less credible claims. [....]

"When considering a motion for summary judgment, a judge will view all evidence in the light most favorable to the movant’s opponent," explains Cornell University Law School’s Legal Information Institute website.

"What I would be concerned with, if I were on the other side of these election contests that are going on around the country, is that if you look at the level of evidence that has been provided by these affidavits — hundreds of affidavits that corroborate events that have happened on the ground — in a summary judgment phase of these cases, you have to take the evidence of the plaintiff as being true," Trainor told "Just the News AM" television show Friday morning.

Trainor said that the massive amounts of affidavits shows there was indeed fraud that took place and "the other side really needs to answer these questions."