The trail of Trump's wacky and irresponsible bid to reverse the e******n is so cold it is frostbitten.
Nov 19, 2020 17:05:58 #
Andrew C. McCarthy
Wed, November 18, 2020, 3:54 PM MST
Realistically speaking, the legal battle over the 2020 e******n is over. As I explained over the weekend, from President Trump’s perspective, that battle is beset by a fatal mismatch between (a) what his campaign is in a position to allege and prove, and (b) the remedy — i.e., the potential number of v**es that could swing from Biden to Trump. That problem was already apparent last week, when the campaign filed its original complaint in the Williamsport federal court. It became insurmountable Sunday, when the campaign amended its complaint, stripping out the main fraud claims.
What is left of the lawsuit cannot conceivably change the result in Pennsylvania. For that reason, the court will probably not even rule on it — even if we assume for argument’s sake that the campaign and its two co-plaintiffs (v**ers residing in the Commonwealth) have standing to sue, which is doubtful. And, to repeat what I laid out over the weekend, without reversing the e******n result in Pennsylvania, the president has no chance to reverse the nationwide result (which would minimally require winning Pennsylvania plus two other states).
To some extent, the campaign has gotten a bad rap for dropping its main counts, which alleged that there were gross improprieties, amounting to fraud, in Pennsylvania’s tabulation of the v**e. Abandoning these counts seemed inexplicable Sunday, given that the campaign was simultaneously alleging massive fraud on television.
In fact, there is an explanation. On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling that destroys the viability of those counts (and probably the remaining counts, too — I’ll come to that). In scrambling to respond to that ruling — which is binding on the federal district court where the campaign’s lawsuit is filed — the campaign shed the fraud-related counts. The lawyers should not be faulted for doing that. The fault lies in pressing ahead with a narrower suit that could not change the outcome of the race in Pennsylvania, even in the unlikely event that the campaign prevailed.
Andrew C. McCarthy
Wed, November 18, 2020, 3:54 PM MST
Realistically speaking, the legal battle over the 2020 e******n is over. As I explained over the weekend, from President Trump’s perspective, that battle is beset by a fatal mismatch between (a) what his campaign is in a position to allege and prove, and (b) the remedy — i.e., the potential number of v**es that could swing from Biden to Trump. That problem was already apparent last week, when the campaign filed its original complaint in the Williamsport federal court. It became insurmountable Sunday, when the campaign amended its complaint, stripping out the main fraud claims.
What is left of the lawsuit cannot conceivably change the result in Pennsylvania. For that reason, the court will probably not even rule on it — even if we assume for argument’s sake that the campaign and its two co-plaintiffs (v**ers residing in the Commonwealth) have standing to sue, which is doubtful. And, to repeat what I laid out over the weekend, without reversing the e******n result in Pennsylvania, the president has no chance to reverse the nationwide result (which would minimally require winning Pennsylvania plus two other states).
To some extent, the campaign has gotten a bad rap for dropping its main counts, which alleged that there were gross improprieties, amounting to fraud, in Pennsylvania’s tabulation of the v**e. Abandoning these counts seemed inexplicable Sunday, given that the campaign was simultaneously alleging massive fraud on television.
In fact, there is an explanation. On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling that destroys the viability of those counts (and probably the remaining counts, too — I’ll come to that). In scrambling to respond to that ruling — which is binding on the federal district court where the campaign’s lawsuit is filed — the campaign shed the fraud-related counts. The lawyers should not be faulted for doing that. The fault lies in pressing ahead with a narrower suit that could not change the outcome of the race in Pennsylvania, even in the unlikely event that the campaign prevailed.
- ADVERTISEMENT -
To cut to the chase, all that remains of the Trump campaign’s complaint is the claim that v**ers in pro-Trump counties were denied equal protection of law because mail-in v**ers in pro-Biden counties — mainly Philadelphia and Allegheny counties (Pittsburgh is in the latter) — were invited by e******n boards to cure defects in their b****ts. Even if there were arguably merit to this claim (doubtful), it may only involve a few hundred v**es, and certainly not more than a few thousand. That’s not enough. By current count, presumptive president-elect Biden leads President Trump by 83,000 v**es. Since I’ve already made this point several times (see, e.g., here and here), perhaps it’s best to quote what the Third Circuit said just last Friday (my italics): For a party
to have standing to enjoin the counting of b****ts . . . such v**es would have to be sufficient in number to change the outcome of the e******n. . . . See, e.g., Sibley v. Alexander (“Even if the Court granted the requested relief, plaintiff would still fail to satisfy the redressability element of standing because enjoining defendants from casting the v**es . . . would not change the outcome of the e******n”).
Even if a court were to ignore this fatal problem and entertain the campaign’s remaining claims, there are several other reasons why they would fail. Pennsylvania’s secretary of state argues that there is no equal protection violation because she advised all counties that they had the discretion to invite v**ers who’d submitted defective mail-in b****ts to cure the defect. The fact that some counties availed themselves of this option does not mean the state violated the equal-protection rights of v**ers in counties that did not.
In addition, the Third Circuit reasoned that the Bush v. Gore equal-protection theory that the Trump campaign relies on is limited to the peculiar facts of that post-e******n recount scenario, and not really applicable to this one. More important, the Third Circuit held that equal-protection claims of the kind the Trump v**ers are raising are too non-specific and speculative to confer standing to sue.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/checkmate-pennsylvania-trump-campaign-225447040.html
Wed, November 18, 2020, 3:54 PM MST
Realistically speaking, the legal battle over the 2020 e******n is over. As I explained over the weekend, from President Trump’s perspective, that battle is beset by a fatal mismatch between (a) what his campaign is in a position to allege and prove, and (b) the remedy — i.e., the potential number of v**es that could swing from Biden to Trump. That problem was already apparent last week, when the campaign filed its original complaint in the Williamsport federal court. It became insurmountable Sunday, when the campaign amended its complaint, stripping out the main fraud claims.
What is left of the lawsuit cannot conceivably change the result in Pennsylvania. For that reason, the court will probably not even rule on it — even if we assume for argument’s sake that the campaign and its two co-plaintiffs (v**ers residing in the Commonwealth) have standing to sue, which is doubtful. And, to repeat what I laid out over the weekend, without reversing the e******n result in Pennsylvania, the president has no chance to reverse the nationwide result (which would minimally require winning Pennsylvania plus two other states).
To some extent, the campaign has gotten a bad rap for dropping its main counts, which alleged that there were gross improprieties, amounting to fraud, in Pennsylvania’s tabulation of the v**e. Abandoning these counts seemed inexplicable Sunday, given that the campaign was simultaneously alleging massive fraud on television.
In fact, there is an explanation. On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling that destroys the viability of those counts (and probably the remaining counts, too — I’ll come to that). In scrambling to respond to that ruling — which is binding on the federal district court where the campaign’s lawsuit is filed — the campaign shed the fraud-related counts. The lawyers should not be faulted for doing that. The fault lies in pressing ahead with a narrower suit that could not change the outcome of the race in Pennsylvania, even in the unlikely event that the campaign prevailed.
Andrew C. McCarthy
Wed, November 18, 2020, 3:54 PM MST
Realistically speaking, the legal battle over the 2020 e******n is over. As I explained over the weekend, from President Trump’s perspective, that battle is beset by a fatal mismatch between (a) what his campaign is in a position to allege and prove, and (b) the remedy — i.e., the potential number of v**es that could swing from Biden to Trump. That problem was already apparent last week, when the campaign filed its original complaint in the Williamsport federal court. It became insurmountable Sunday, when the campaign amended its complaint, stripping out the main fraud claims.
What is left of the lawsuit cannot conceivably change the result in Pennsylvania. For that reason, the court will probably not even rule on it — even if we assume for argument’s sake that the campaign and its two co-plaintiffs (v**ers residing in the Commonwealth) have standing to sue, which is doubtful. And, to repeat what I laid out over the weekend, without reversing the e******n result in Pennsylvania, the president has no chance to reverse the nationwide result (which would minimally require winning Pennsylvania plus two other states).
To some extent, the campaign has gotten a bad rap for dropping its main counts, which alleged that there were gross improprieties, amounting to fraud, in Pennsylvania’s tabulation of the v**e. Abandoning these counts seemed inexplicable Sunday, given that the campaign was simultaneously alleging massive fraud on television.
In fact, there is an explanation. On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling that destroys the viability of those counts (and probably the remaining counts, too — I’ll come to that). In scrambling to respond to that ruling — which is binding on the federal district court where the campaign’s lawsuit is filed — the campaign shed the fraud-related counts. The lawyers should not be faulted for doing that. The fault lies in pressing ahead with a narrower suit that could not change the outcome of the race in Pennsylvania, even in the unlikely event that the campaign prevailed.
- ADVERTISEMENT -
To cut to the chase, all that remains of the Trump campaign’s complaint is the claim that v**ers in pro-Trump counties were denied equal protection of law because mail-in v**ers in pro-Biden counties — mainly Philadelphia and Allegheny counties (Pittsburgh is in the latter) — were invited by e******n boards to cure defects in their b****ts. Even if there were arguably merit to this claim (doubtful), it may only involve a few hundred v**es, and certainly not more than a few thousand. That’s not enough. By current count, presumptive president-elect Biden leads President Trump by 83,000 v**es. Since I’ve already made this point several times (see, e.g., here and here), perhaps it’s best to quote what the Third Circuit said just last Friday (my italics): For a party
to have standing to enjoin the counting of b****ts . . . such v**es would have to be sufficient in number to change the outcome of the e******n. . . . See, e.g., Sibley v. Alexander (“Even if the Court granted the requested relief, plaintiff would still fail to satisfy the redressability element of standing because enjoining defendants from casting the v**es . . . would not change the outcome of the e******n”).
Even if a court were to ignore this fatal problem and entertain the campaign’s remaining claims, there are several other reasons why they would fail. Pennsylvania’s secretary of state argues that there is no equal protection violation because she advised all counties that they had the discretion to invite v**ers who’d submitted defective mail-in b****ts to cure the defect. The fact that some counties availed themselves of this option does not mean the state violated the equal-protection rights of v**ers in counties that did not.
In addition, the Third Circuit reasoned that the Bush v. Gore equal-protection theory that the Trump campaign relies on is limited to the peculiar facts of that post-e******n recount scenario, and not really applicable to this one. More important, the Third Circuit held that equal-protection claims of the kind the Trump v**ers are raising are too non-specific and speculative to confer standing to sue.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/checkmate-pennsylvania-trump-campaign-225447040.html
Nov 19, 2020 17:18:42 #
I think the plan conspiracy, and make no mistake it was a well hatched plan cooked up months or more in advance, actually needed a much closer set of races to work well. They knew what states and the precincts they were going to challenge results in, and the plan hinged on dozens of court cases so that there could be an overwhelming sense that the whole country had been plagued by "massive" v***r f***d as proved by the sheer number of cases. The legal filings of cases was the evidence, even when there was no evidence submitted to the courts which is why dozens of these baseless cases have been ridiculed and thrown out. FOX and right wing media made a big deal about the cases, not the substance of the cases. Cases that were truly underwhelming and insignificant in terms of the numbers on the fraud were often billed as massive, hundreds of thousands to over a million v**es. The "huge" case in Pennsylvania trump "won", had already been put on notice, it affected a few hundred v**es that had not even been counted so it had a net effect of zero to trump's losses.
Nov 21, 2020 01:07:23 #
woodguru wrote:
I think the s plan /s conspiracy, and make no mi... (show quote)
I think that you have a valid case.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.