Trump campaign attorney says that their theory of the case isn't fraud: "This is not a fraud case."

[Roland99]

Link to tweet

Trump campaign attorney says that their theory of the case isn't fraud: "This is not a fraud case."

"It is not a stealing the election case."

He says he's alleging flaws in the system.

Link to tweet

Judge Kiley presses the Trump campaign:

Their solicitation of witnesses produced sworn affidavits that his own investigation determined were "clearly false," "spam as you put it."

The ones they could not prove were false, they submitted to the court.

Trump camp: "Correct."

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

Judge Kiley: "This is concerning."

"How is that a reliable process of gathering evidence?"

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

Kory Langhofer

That's the name of the Trump campaign attorney insisting that those form-produced sworn affidavits are somehow reliable even though a subset of them were false.

Because the form had a CAPTCHA.

Their evidence is information submitted from an online form!!!!

This is beyond a farce at this point. Judges need to start initiating sanctions, fines and disbarring these lawyers

[wryter2000]

1. Flaws in the system?

What kind of cause for action is that?

[Ms. Toad]

7. Due process, Equal protection, failure to follow the letter

of the election statutes.

Those are actually more viable than fraud, since there is virtually no evidence of fraud.

There is some evidence of non-compliance with various statutes - not enough to change the election results - but some. Those lawsuits are losers, but at least they pass the laugh test for a claim that can be proven.

[wryter2000]

19. Thanks

[Stallion]

2. That's a Matter the Legislatures should Consider for FUTURE Elections

[Roland99]

3. Exactly!!

[Ms. Toad]

8. What they are alleging is that statutes that exist weren't complied with -

Or were inconsistently applied based on the expected proportion of the vote for one candidate or another.

So that's not a future election - it is related to this election.

NOTHING has been alleged that is significant enough to change the results, so wise courts will decline to issue what would end up being an advisory opinion.

[Moostache]

4. It is not fraud, its just we didn't win because too many people showed up or mailed in...

*Stomping of feet and screaming at the bench heard*
"Your honor, we seek immediate relief from our feels...its not fair that the liberal media made all of their viewers hate us and then convinced them to show up in the election - even though we thought letting the virus run out of control would scare them into their homes on election day! Therefore, ipso factum, ex genius Trumpist...you have to find in our favor and just make us presidential again."

These fucking clowns keep making "Idiocracy" look like an actual documentary...

[Ms. Toad]

11. These are actually the non-frivolous claims.

They won't change the election - but these are based on either not complying with the statute - or unevenly complying with the statute.

They are all losers, in terms of changing the outcome of the election - but they assert claims that have a basis isn fact and law.

[dware]

13. Ok,

Thanks for that info.

I think I'll just delete my post as misinformation.

[Ms. Toad]

22. No need to delete

There are obviously attorneys who have decided either that they skate the line too close (one firm resigned, another publically distanced themselves from most of the claims)- or they just don't want to be associated with the case.

I could file many of the claims without worrying, personally, that I would be sanctioned for frivolous claims as to the substance. Individually, they aren't necessarily done for an improper purpose. Collectively, I'm less certain. Rule 11 sanctions can be issued against attorneys for either substance - or for using the courts fo rimproper purposes. The latter is a much closer call.

[dware]

23. Well, I already deleted it,

but I gotta say I love reading your posts, they are full of pertinent info and facts.

Keep up the great work!!!!

[Demsrule86]

21. No they don't because it is bull shit...They accept all these imperfections in states they won.

[Ms. Toad]

25. A party is not required to litigate every substantively valid claim.

Picking and choosing your battles doesn't make the ones you choose to litigate frivolous.

From a non-legal position, it is certainly hypocritical - as it is hypocritical to accept winning Republican races in the same states where they are contesting the presidential race results. But that's a matter of hipocrisy - not an assessment of whether any particular claim is frivolous.

[Mr. Ected]

6. You mean like the President effing with the USPS to screw up mail-in votes?

The irregularities share one thing in common.

The wrong candidate is lodging these complaints.

[soothsayer]

9. Electoral college that favors the white minority?

[Roland99]

10. JESUS!!! It's WORSE!!! Litigation via Internet comment section!

Link to tweet

Judge Kiley presses the Trump campaign:

Their solicitation of witnesses produced sworn affidavits that his own investigation determined were "clearly false," "spam as you put it."

The ones they could not prove were false, they submitted to the court.

Trump camp: "Correct."

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

Judge Kiley: "This is concerning."

"How is that a reliable process of gathering evidence?"

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports

Kory Langhofer

That's the name of the Trump campaign attorney insisting that those form-produced sworn affidavits are somehow reliable even though a subset of them were false.

Because the form had a CAPTCHA.

Their evidence is information submitted from an online form!!!!

[Ms. Toad]

17. The proper way to gather affidavits is for observers to gather them

(or at least contact information) on the day of the election at the time the discrepancies are observed. Dem observers are trained to do that. My interaction with Republican observers indicates they were not trained in this criticial function to support litigation efforts if systemic abuses are uncovered.

The Republican observers I worked with had no clue about what she should be looking for - other than something that just "doesn't feel right." The only specific thing they were trained on is vote flushing.

[dalton99a]

24. Submitted by dogs and cats and dead people in St. Petersburg

[Ms. Toad]

12. I've been reading the cases - and that is consistent with my interpretation of the claims.

[LisaL]

14. And what in the world do they want done about it?

NT

[Ms. Toad]

20. To toss a few ballots to show Trump's cult they are trying.

They make very loud noises about fraaud - even though they are not actually making a legal claim that fraud occurred. So the impression in their base (and far broader) is that they are filing suits about election fraud.

They lose (or they win on a few ballots - perhaps 562 in PA that didn't have addresses in the right place; perhaps a few thousand that came in after election day), claim the courts were rigged - just like the vote. Trump can accept the election results without conceding, and set himself up for a 2024 run.

[frazzled]

15. Time to hang it up, boys

The party's over.

[UpInArms]

16. I, too, noted some serious flaws in the system

Texas Governor Announces Counties Can Only Have One Ballot Drop-Off Location, Forcing Harris County, Other Large Dem Counties to Remove Drop Boxes

Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued a proclamation on Thursday that counties in the state are only allowed to have one drop-off location for mail-in ballots.

Mail ballots delivered in person must be dropped off to "a single early voting clerk's office location as publicly designated by the county's early voting clerk" and all other drop-off or satellite locations will be closed as of Friday.

The proclamation also requires early voting clerks to let poll watchers observe ballot delivery as an election security measure.

... snip ...

The announcement means large Democratic counties in Texas—including Harris County and Travis County—that added sites to increase voter convenience will have to remove additional drop boxes. Harris County currently has 12 and Travis County has four.

The move could make it more difficult for voters in these larger counties to cast their ballots ahead of Election Day.

The Texas Democratic Party called the proclamation a "blatant voter suppression tactic."

[Caliman73]

18. Okay. Trump is an idiot and anyone who willingly works for him is also an idiot.

That said, there certainly are flaws in the system, BUT, it is Republicans who have created those flaws AND exploited them in the past to actually steal elections. Democratic policies, actual policies and goals that Democrats have, when polled, are supported by over 70% of the population. Republicans know this. They know they are a minority party. They also know that they are funded by the wealthiest people, and that the objective has always been to use racial, gender, religious, sexual orientation, and other "cultural" issues to hold sway over a coalition of ignorant and bigoted people while finding ways to suppress the votes of other so that they could win enough to rule as a minority.

The FLAWS in the system are that while I do support and believe in the States running elections there is WAY too much room for crooks (mainly conservatives) to throw wrenches into the works. It is way too easy for some demagogue to cast doubt on the elections.

I agree completely that there should be significant sanctions on Trump and his lawyers for not even trying to actually make valid legal claims but basically trying to SLAPP suit themselves into remaining in power.

[onethatcares]

26. wait until they find out about

LegalZoom.