Additional reasoning from Judge Diamond in the earlier case re Clinton’s efforts to keep Trump supporters away from the polls on election day:
“Plaintiff has not explained what it learned in the last month or even the last week that created emergent conditions. On the contrary, Plaintiff has long known of the acts and statements on which it bases its claims,” wrote Diamond, an appointee of President George W. Bush. “I am thus compelled to base a ruling that could restrict Defendants’ Election Day speech and conduct on media reports because Plaintiff has contrived to transform this litigation into a mad scramble.”
CDiamond said the Democrats painted some evidence in a misleading light, such as a Bloomberg News report about “voter suppression” efforts undertaken by the Trump campaign. He said it was clear from the context that the Trump official was talking about highlighting storylines or themes that would undercut Hillary Clinton’s support
“In context, these are not ‘suppression’ efforts at all, and they do not appear designed to threaten or intimidate voters. Rather, they are coarse efforts to convince Secretary Clinton’s likely supporters not to vote for her,” the judge wrote.
(http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/11/voter-intimidation-injunction-pennsylvania-230901)
I especially like his comment that the Plaintiff (Clinton) “has contrived to transform this litigation into a mad scramble.”
Kind of like Dr. Stein’s last minute efforts...
Legally, Stein has no standing to bring the recount - SHE IS NOT THE AGGRIEVED - HER COUNTING IS NOT UNDER SUSPICION OF CAUSING HER TO LOSE HER ELECTION.
WITHOUT THIS STANDING .. SHE HAS CAUSED A LOT OF WORK FOR THESE STATES .. AND I THINK THE STATES SHOULD SUE THE DNC FOR PUTTING HER UP TO IT; TO FORCE THE DNC TO PICK UP THE TAB.
And, if there’s anybody left in the DNC who has a brain; they should send the bill to Hillary.