•   
  •   
  •   

Politics In scathing ruling, judge dismisses Trump campaign's effort to overturn election results in Pennsylvania

03:15  22 november  2020
03:15  22 november  2020 Source:   usatoday.com

Fact check: Trump lawyer Sidney Powell falsely stated he won election 'by a landslide'

  Fact check: Trump lawyer Sidney Powell falsely stated he won election 'by a landslide' A meme correctly quotes onetime Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell. But her assertion that he won the election "by a landslide" is false.“We are not going to be intimidated. We are not going to back down. We are going to clean this mess up. President Trump won by a landslide and we are going to prove it. We are going to reclaim the United States of America,” reads a Facebook meme.

A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump ' s campaign in Pennsylvania . U. S . District Court Judge In his 37-page ruling , Brann said the Trump campaign asked him to “disenfranchise almost seven million voters” and said he could not find any case in which

A Pennsylvania judge threw out a lawsuit that sought to prevent the state from certifying the election results in favor of President- elect Joe Biden, who won U. S . Middle District Judge Matthew Brann in Williamsport, Penn., rejected a request by the Trump campaign for an injunction that would stop the

A Pennsylvania federal court on Saturday denied President Donald Trump's request to block certification of the state's 2020 election results in order to give his campaign lawyers time to find evidence to support their claims of a fraudulent election system and improper ballot counting.

Donald Trump wearing a suit and tie standing in front of a flag: Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden (left) and President Donald Trump (right) are pictured during their respective campaigns. © Angela Weiss, AFP via Getty Images | Saul Loeb/AFP Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden (left) and President Donald Trump (right) are pictured during their respective campaigns.

In a scathing ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann criticized the lack of evidence the Trump campaign presented to support its argument to potentially disenfranchise every voter in the commonwealth who cast a ballot in the 2020 elections — nearly 7 million in all.

How Trump’s erratic behavior and failure on coronavirus doomed his reelection

  How Trump’s erratic behavior and failure on coronavirus doomed his reelection The same impulses that helped lift the president to victory in 2016 contributed to his undoing just four years later, and the exhausted voters who once gave Trump a shot turned on him.[This story has been optimized for offline reading on our apps. For a richer experience, you can find the full version of this story here. An Internet connection is required.

A federal judge in Pennsylvania threw out a lawsuit by President Donald Trump ’ s campaign that aimed to block certification of the state’ s election results unless it tossed out tens of thousands of mail-in ballots, rejecting the “startling” request due to a lack of evidence.

Arguing that the results of the presidential election are defective, Donald Trump ’ s campaign has asked a judge in Pennsylvania to declare him the winner in the state and allow the Overturning the result there is crucial to the president’ s efforts to claim victory and a second term in the White House.

The ruling entirely dismissed the case filed by Trump's campaign and two Republican voters who said their ballots were rejected for technicalities, while those cast by thousands of voters in the state's Democratic strongholds were accepted.

Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

"This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated," Brann wrote in the 37-page decision.

"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 corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief," he wrote.

Fact check: Nevada's AG did not admit to changing signature verification manually in election

  Fact check: Nevada's AG did not admit to changing signature verification manually in election A claim that Nevada's attorney general admitted to changing signature verification for thousands of votes is false.One Facebook user on Nov. 16 claimed: "Nevada AG Admits to Changing Signature Verifications Manually for Over 200,000 Votes.

Trump campaign legal aide Jenna Ellis told reporters that the elections in the several disputed counties were “irredeemably compromised,” and that this The campaign ’ s goal wasn’t to overturn the election as such, but to ensure that the US had free and fair elections going forward, Ellis argued.

Twitter flags Trump ' s tweet on mail-in voting in Pennsylvania . A second Texas judge , this time in federal court, ruled on Monday against an effort by a group of Republicans to invalidate Trump ' s campaign has signaled he may declare victory on Tuesday night if he is ahead in sufficient states

"That has not happened. Instead, this court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled ... and unsupported by evidence," Brann wrote. "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."

The decision slams the door on a pivotal case in Trump's effort to get courts to overturn election results in key states he lost to former Vice President Joe Biden. It came two days before Pennsylvania's Monday deadline to certify its results, a precursor to formally awarding the state's 20 electoral votes to Biden.

A state canvassing board in Michigan, which Biden also carried, is scheduled to vote on certifying its totals Monday.

Brann's decision rejected the Trump campaign's claims that Pennsylvania's elections procedures were unconstitutional because they disadvantaged Trump voters and boosted those who voted for Joe Biden.

President Trump's defeat may give Supreme Court a rest from personal, policy lawsuits

  President Trump's defeat may give Supreme Court a rest from personal, policy lawsuits Many cases tied to Trump's policies or personal entanglements are likely to become moot or, at least, undeserving of the Supreme Court's attention.Even in the autumn of his presidency, little has changed. The administration came before the justices the week after Election Day in hopes of dismantling the Affordable Care Act, perhaps the most celebrated achievement of his predecessor. Later this month, it will defend its plan to exclude noncitizens from the census count used to apportion seats in the House of Representatives.

Trump election campaign asks judge to declare him winner in Pennsylvania By Reuters - Nov 18, 2020 21. By Andrea Shalal and Trevor Hunnicutt WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A little-known agency that keeps the U. S . federal bureaucracy running is the biggest impediment to new efforts to

A Pennsylvania judge has granted the Trump campaign ’ s request to observe -- up-close -- Philadelphia poll workers as they process the remaining mail-in ballots, overturning earlier rules that kept them further back out of concern about the coronavirus. Judge Christine Fizzano Cannon

Without supplying any witness affidavits or other evidence, the campaign argued that tens of thousands of mail-in ballots should have been rejected for defects.

The Trump campaign faced an uphill battle from the start in the closely-watched case, which included arguments similar to those in lawsuits filed in other battleground states.

The campaign initially launched a legal broadside against mail voting, arguing that Pennsylvania's secretary of the commonwealth and elections officials in seven counties with high Democratic Party enrollment created an unconstitutional, two-tiered voting system.

The campaign argued that in-person voters, who largely voted for Trump, had to abide by strictly enforced rules. People who voted by mail, who largely cast their ballots for Biden, were subject to lax rules, the campaign argued.

But the campaign abruptly shifted focus in an amended complaint that was filed as one team of lawyers departed and another entered — and as a federal appeals court ruling in a different case foreclosed certain constitutional arguments.

20 days of fantasy and failure: Inside Trump’s quest to overturn the election

  20 days of fantasy and failure: Inside Trump’s quest to overturn the election With his denial of the outcome, Trump endangered America’s democracy, threatened to undermine national security and public health, and duped supporters into believing, perhaps permanently, that Biden was elected illegitimately.  Trump’s allegations and the hostility of his rhetoric — and his singular power to persuade and galvanize his followers — generated extraordinary pressure on state and local election officials to embrace his fraud allegations and take steps to block certification of the results. When some of them refused, they accepted security details for protection from the threats they were receiving.

The second complaint focused on allegations that elections officials improperly blocked Republican watchers from meaningful access to the processing of mail ballots.

Then Rudy Giuliani, Trump's personal lawyer and a former New York City mayor, entered the case and the legal strategy changed yet again. This time, the Trump campaign combined many of the legal arguments of the prior complaints in a proposed third version. The lawyers accused the state's secretary of the commonwealth and elections officials in seven Democrat-heavy counties of scheming to help elect Biden.

The proposed third complaint urged the federal court to disqualify as many as 1.5 million voters, which would have wiped out the 81,813-vote edge Biden held in Pennsylvania as of Saturday night.

Legal experts rap Trump legal challenge: Nine legal experts say Trump's lawsuit challenging election results in Pennsylvania is dead on arrival

Nine election law and constitutional law experts surveyed by USA TODAY criticized the Trump campaign's initial lawsuit. They said courts are reluctant to invalidate ballots cast by voters who followed what they believed to be the election rules.

The campaign's allegations didn't raise constitutional questions, said the experts, who added that mail voting is legal and used in many states beyond Pennsylvania.

Fact check: Trump's campaign page has control over his designation as 'political candidate'

  Fact check: Trump's campaign page has control over his designation as 'political candidate' Trump has been designated as a political candidate long before the election and Facebook is not in charge of determining a page's titleMany supporters are criticizing Facebook, claiming the platform removed Trump's title of "President" on what many describe as his "official" Facebook page and downgraded it to "Political Candidate.

Their criticism sharpened as the Trump campaign kept changing its arguments.

“I have never seen a high-profile case like this cycle through so many sets of lawyers so quickly, nor a high-profile election case not handled by election law and federal court and appeals court specialists,” Richard Hasen, a professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine, and the author of Election Law Blog, wrote in an email.

“The claims are both legally and factually faulty," Hasen wrote.

Where's the evidence?: In Pennsylvania, Trump wants questioned ballots or the entire election thrown out. His claims of fraud remain baseless.

Kermit Roosevelt, a constitutional law expert at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, said the Trump campaign is "sending the message that election outcomes that go against Republicans are inherently illegitimate and need not be accepted — even if there is no evidence and no plausible legal argument that anything was wrong with the election."

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: In scathing ruling, judge dismisses Trump campaign's effort to overturn election results in Pennsylvania

Fact check: Fake Trump tweet echoing Halsey song lyrics originally began as a joke .
A doctored image shows Trump tweeted Halsey lyrics about losing the election. This fake tweet, which doesn't appear on his profile, was a joke.“I was red… and you liked him cause he was blue.. then you touched me.. and i was a lilac sky.. but then you all decided that purple just wasn’t for you,” reads an Instagram post containing what appears to be a quote of a tweet from Trump.

usr: 7
This is interesting!