The questions of the day are all related.
How has the Trump campaign has managed to lose (at last count) 37 cases affecting seven battleground states?
Why are the cases not being litigated by lawyers who specialize in election law?
Why are the cases riddled with procedural errors that would caught by a first-year law student?
What haven’t the complaints been able to find the right plaintiffs to being the suits?
Why have the cases that could have litigated fraud expressly said that fraud is not an issue?
Why have the cases that actually allege fraud only been filed after the results have been certified?
There are two possible answers that come to mind immediately.
Answer #1. These cases are being brought and argued by some of the most inept lawyers in the history of American jurisprudence.
Answer #2. The purpose of bringing these suits in the first place was not to win.
I’ll concede Answer #1, but that doesn’t preclude Answer #2. Consider that Answer #2 allows for a couple of things to occur.
First, fundraising may continue, both for legal expenses and other political purposes.
Second, if you know that your fraud claims have no merit, the LAST thing you want is for a Court to say that. Keeping the Court from weighing in allows you to continue having “hearings” such as the one in Pennsylvania earlier this week where unsubstantiated claims may continue without the rigors of actual proof. [Written November 27, 2020]
No comments:
Post a Comment