Fooling the American people, for Donald Trump, has been easy. Not all of the people, of course, but enough to keep a conspiracy narrative alive. But in court, fooling a judge isn’t as easy, as Donald Trump and his pretend TV lawyer Rudy Giuliani found out on Saturday.
The full opinion: https://t.co/DetGohz5wE
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) November 21, 2020
THE KEY LINE: "In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.”https://t.co/DetGohz5wE
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) November 21, 2020
A judge in Pennsylvania dismissed the big Pennsylvania election fraud case touted by the president and former Mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani, and found it to be meritless, without evidence, and even borderline ridiculous due to its lack of evidence and shaky premise.
In his legal decision, US District Court Judge Matthew Brann wrote:
‘One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruptions, such that this Court would have no option except to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.
‘That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.’
As for their claim that Republican observers didn’t have adequate access to watching the vote count, he said they offered no evidence that their watchers were treated differently than those from the Biden campaign.
— Ali Velshi (@AliVelshi) November 21, 2020
What the judge found most astounding was Republicans’ claims that the presidential election was rigged, but that all the down ballot races Republicans won were legitimate. The election, they claimed, needed to be ruled unconstitutional due to fraud, except for all the other races. Those were fine. The judge also addressed that premise in his ruling.
‘Curiously, Plaintiffs now claim that they seek only to enjoin certification of the presidential election results. Doc 183 at 1. They suggest that their requested relief with other election results in the state. But even if it were logically possible to hold Pennsylvania’s electoral system both constitutional and unconstitutional at the same time, the Court would not do so.’
BREAKING: A federal judge rules that Pennsylvania officials can certify election results currently showing Democrat Joe Biden winning the state by over 80,000 votes, dealing President Trump’s campaign another blow in its effort to invalidate the election. https://t.co/1R3GRZzo5Q
— The Associated Press (@AP) November 21, 2020
The truth is that Trump and Giuliani never believed that they could overturn the results of a democratic election. They knew from the start that Joe Biden had won and that what they were doing was riling up the country instead of carrying out any legal mission. Enough people believe them, however, to create an audience. That’s the sole reason these lawsuits are happening, and it’s just not good enough of an argument in court.
‘In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.’
🚨🚨BREAKING: Pennsylvania federal court DISMISSES Trump lawsuit WITH PREJUDICE–meaning Trump cannot refile it. A total victory for the voters of Pennsylvania.
Trump and his allies are now 2-34 in post election litigation.https://t.co/tA5ZIymzPz
— Marc E. Elias (@marceelias) November 21, 2020
