I actually think the fraud allegation was dropped at a time when DJT was represented only by a solo-practicing attorney whose specialty was child custody and alimony. God bless her, I think she was in over her head, and she thought by striking those allegations, she could put together a complaint that skirted around the recent PA Supreme Court decision on ballot curing.
I’m not blaming her. She was trying her best, and she received death threats.
But given the timing, I doubt striking those allegations was a strategic decision.
> I’m not blaming her. She was trying her best, and she received death threats.
Yikes. If I could wave a magic wand there should be a way for the judges to take judicial notice of stuff like that in important cases and revisit a decision. (Rhetorically, I would wonder if this type of situation is covered in first year law school... or even a course on moral considerations in law, hmmm...) Perhaps if anyone could do it, the supremes might be able to (just a thought).
I actually think the fraud allegation was dropped at a time when DJT was represented only by a solo-practicing attorney whose specialty was child custody and alimony. God bless her, I think she was in over her head,
I suspect that she was just a figurehead with the ability to file within the jurisdiction while the campaign was searching around for replacement lawyers.