Posted on 11/27/2020 9:53:45 AM PST by Alter Kaker
Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof.
We have neither here. The Trump Presidential Campaign asserts that Pennsylvania’s 2020 election was unfair. But as lawyer Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.” Instead, it objects that Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State and some counties restricted poll watchers and let voters fix technical defects in their mail-in ballots. It offers nothing more.
This case is not about whether those claims are true. Rather, the Campaign appeals on a very narrow ground: whether the District Court abused its discretion in not letting the Campaign amend its complaint a second time. It did not. Most of the claims in the Second Amended Complaint boil down to issues of state law. But Pennsylvania law is willing to overlook many technical defects. It favors counting votes as long as there is no fraud. Indeed, the Campaign has already litigated and lost many of these issues in state courts.
The Campaign tries to repackage these state-law claims as unconstitutional discrimination. Yet its allegations are vague and conclusory. It never alleges that anyone treated the Trump campaign or Trump votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or Biden votes. And federal law does not require poll watchers or specify how they may observe. It also says nothing about curing technical state-law errors in ballots. Each of these defects is fatal, and the proposed Second Amended Complaint does not fix them. So the District Court properly denied leave to amend again.
Nor does the Campaign deserve an injunction to undo Pennsylvania’s certification of its votes. The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters. Plus, tossing out millions of mail-in ballots would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate and upsetting all down-ballot races too. That remedy would be grossly disproportionate to the procedural challenges raised. So we deny the motion for an injunction pending appeal.
I see you points. Thanx for the insight
Thank you for your negative input. However, I’ll stick with Rudy. I believe he has a bit more information to work with.
Welcome to FR, by the way.
I couldn't agree more. Even if we fail totally with this case we might get the republican Pennsylvania legislature to assign electors for Trump IF we can show through other means that this case was Fraud.
Once we show this was fraud and get one state the rest will create a domino effect
The recourse is the ultimate power of the people — to vote the bastards out. It is the reason why the best government is the most local government. The framers felt this was the best way to keep the government to a minimum and responsive to the people.
Yes. However, state legislatures are bound by state law to pick electors representing the will of the voters. I am not an expert of PA law, but I imagine state legislators have no discretion to examine whether fraud was committed in the election.
That is a decision for the judiciary.
Which is why it is critical that air-tight lawsuits be filed by competent counsel.
Let’s see what comes of the cases filed by Sidney Powell. But I really, REALLY want her to be lead counsel and attorney of record for DJT.
If she is only representing solo voters, she has an uphill fight because a court can say “OK, if your client was denied the right to vote, fair enough, we hereby decree that his vote shall count. But we are not going to throw away other votes.” This would be a meaningless victory. But I imagine that is the only remedy a single aggrieved voter is going to get. On the other hand, the aggrieved candidate can get a much broader judicial remedy.
‘Vote the bastards out’, when the election process is obviously riddled with fraud?
Good luck.
I have no doubts as to the reality that The Democrat Organized Crime Party stole this election. I fully believe Donald Trump was re-elected, if only legal ballots had been counted. Unfortunately, it seems The Democrat Organized Crime Party is too entrenched in the Deep State, and have been given plenty of time to cover their tracks. On the Republican side there seems to be total ineptness and incompetence to deal with the forces that have imposed themselves upon us. I suspect every legal move will run into a solid concrete wall, due to a lack of concrete evidence to put on display to the courts. Republicans should have seen this coming months ago, and should have been prepared to strike hard at the very moment the fraud was taking place. By the time the strike force went in, it was too late. It’s hard for me to believe something more could not have been done by the Fed early on in this process, even as the fraud was being committed. When duly sworn observers were not allowed to view the count, the Feds should have been sent into to enforce observance if that was a legally feasible option. I don’t know all the legalities, but with a Federal Election on the Ballot, it would seem to me that there could have been some type of Federal intervention when these cities stopped the counting early in the evening. At this point, only God Almighty can turn this around, for the legal moves attempted by Trump and others are failing at every turn. The so-called evidence can’t even seem to move beyond Conservative, Constitutional Courts at this point. God have mercy with Divine Intervention to save this nation from these evil Despots.
Uhhh the link is in the thread title in red.
There in lies the rub. Remember that what is not expressly prohibited is allowed. In the rush to protect the right to vote in the era of contagion, mail in and early voting by drop box was expanded with little forethought for integrity. Did the Democrats take advantage of loopholes and banked Biden votes until needed?. Where the Republicans simply out worked and caught flat footed?
After this MAJOR screw up by Rudy this is the best course to take.
No matter who was representing Trump, the Court would have ruled against them. Giuliani is great.
Well, its better than your solution to have big brother and 9 tyrants in black robes rule my life...either figure it out or stop whining, but looking for government to save you is like the woman and the snake. You are surprised when the snake bites you.
Rudy is a great guy but he made huge mistakes that we simply can't live with
Thank you, genesis, for clarifying what’s going on.
Now it makes sense.
What do you mean he allowed it?
You are suggesting a losing proposition, if what we’re hearing about all of the fraud in our election system is true - and I think that anyone who has been paying even a little attention, and possesses a modicum of intelligence, KNOWS that Biden did NOT win this election.
I’m not willing to trust the future to more elections like this. We need a house-cleaning; and as things stand, voting alone is NOT going to do it when the entire election system has been corrupted. Only very courageous State legislatures consisting of enough honest people - and those black-robed ‘tyrants’ - can save us right now. And NOW is when it matters.
Did you see how many thousands of people turned out for Trump’s many rallies? and the tiny handfuls that turned out for Biden?
If you believe that Biden’s status as the presumptive ‘president elect’ is the result of a fair and honest election - or that more of such will save the Republic - there are people who would really like to sell you some valuable real estate.
I do not believe that it was fair or proper, but I am for people regaining their own power as the just consent of the governed, not for waiting for the USSC to overstep and take care of us.
Enjoy your dependency. Too bad you dont believe in the republic or Americanism.
God Country Guns Trump Newbie - Yup
so is there a work around? new filing with new plaintiffs with standing? sidney powell atty?
was penn where the big gun trump lawyers dropped out due to doxing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.