I don't know how good I'll be at that, but here goes.
This is an oral argument on the defendant's motion to dismiss. law.cornell.edu/wex/motion_to_…
Giuliani is trying to keep the complain from being thrown out.
He is now arguing that mail-in ballots are nationwide problem. . .
1/
This is an oral argument on the defendant's motion to dismiss. law.cornell.edu/wex/motion_to_…
Giuliani is trying to keep the complain from being thrown out.
He is now arguing that mail-in ballots are nationwide problem. . .
1/
https://twitter.com/scsfsu/status/1328774886190424066
. . . and that what is happening in Pennsylvania is a "small part of the problem."
He just called "mail in voting" a "new form of voting," and is rambling about how it's "widely known" to be riddled with fraud.
And all the problems are in big cities controlled by Democrats.
2/
He just called "mail in voting" a "new form of voting," and is rambling about how it's "widely known" to be riddled with fraud.
And all the problems are in big cities controlled by Democrats.
2/
Giuliani is rambling. The judge is letting him talk.
"This is not an isolated case" Giuliani says.
From my own (limited) experience (I've only done appeals) a silent judge is not a good sign 😉
3/
"This is not an isolated case" Giuliani says.
From my own (limited) experience (I've only done appeals) a silent judge is not a good sign 😉
3/
Giuliani is arguing that some voters were given the opportunity to fix errors but other voters were not.
He hasn't explained the reason for the difference.
He just implied that this is happening in Democratic cities because Democrats run "machines."
But . . !
4/
He hasn't explained the reason for the difference.
He just implied that this is happening in Democratic cities because Democrats run "machines."
But . . !
4/
He's arguing:
1) Democratic cities allowed people to cure ballots (these ballots are legal) and
(2) Democrats engage in widespread fraud.
So letting people fix errors is "fraud."
Really the question is why other counties didn't offer the chance to fix errors
5/
1) Democratic cities allowed people to cure ballots (these ballots are legal) and
(2) Democrats engage in widespread fraud.
So letting people fix errors is "fraud."
Really the question is why other counties didn't offer the chance to fix errors
5/
Now he's arguing that Republicans weren't allowed to watch.
Giuliani hasn't offered any evidence.
He just called Philadelphia a dishonest place that has been cheating for decades.
(I'm not from Philly but that offends ME. I did go to college there, so I claim injury😂)
6/
Giuliani hasn't offered any evidence.
He just called Philadelphia a dishonest place that has been cheating for decades.
(I'm not from Philly but that offends ME. I did go to college there, so I claim injury😂)
6/
Basically, he's arguing Philadelphia allowed voters to fix errors in their ballots and didn't let Republicans watch.
AN OUTRAGE I TELL YOU.
The judge still hasn't said a word. That would worry me if I were Rudy.
(This live tweeting is kinda fun)
7/
AN OUTRAGE I TELL YOU.
The judge still hasn't said a word. That would worry me if I were Rudy.
(This live tweeting is kinda fun)
7/
He says 1.5 million ballots were illegal.
I can't figure if he's arguing that that many people were allowed to fix ballots, or if he's arguing that all mail-in ballots be tossed.
Giuliani's evidence is 300 affidavits or declarations or their own statements.
8/
I can't figure if he's arguing that that many people were allowed to fix ballots, or if he's arguing that all mail-in ballots be tossed.
Giuliani's evidence is 300 affidavits or declarations or their own statements.
8/
Sounds like the affidavits are about how the Republican observers couldn't see when they tried to watch.
Because this an argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss, "winning" for Giuliani means not getting the case thrown out of court.
9/
https://twitter.com/scsfsu/status/1328776624549007360
Because this an argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss, "winning" for Giuliani means not getting the case thrown out of court.
9/
Well, dang. My sound went dead.
I hear something like a swishing sound, but no more voices.
I'll be watching to see how the court rules.
Usually it's pretty easy to survive a motion to dismiss . . .
10/
I hear something like a swishing sound, but no more voices.
I'll be watching to see how the court rules.
Usually it's pretty easy to survive a motion to dismiss . . .
10/
You just need a reason to go to trial (or a hearing). I heard nothing in Giuliani's rambling that would rise to that level, but I suppose a court would need to see what is in the affidavits.
I mean, there COULD be something there 🙄
11/
I mean, there COULD be something there 🙄
11/
If, say, the judge says, "Even if everything in these affidavits is true, there'd be no grounds to stop the state from certifying the election," he'd toss out the case because what would be the point?
Giuliani really wants to put mail-in balloting on trial.
12/
Giuliani really wants to put mail-in balloting on trial.
12/
Okay, so what would be the remedy, even if these errors were made?
Trump wants to stop PA from certifying their results.
Giuliani is arguing that the entire election was tainted.
PA can't hold a new election. The date is set by Congress.
13/
Trump wants to stop PA from certifying their results.
Giuliani is arguing that the entire election was tainted.
PA can't hold a new election. The date is set by Congress.
13/
Oh, I see. It's the elector argument. This doesn't work because the Electoral Count act controls: If the executive (governor) and legislature send different slates of electors, the executive branch counts.
Plus . . .
14/
Plus . . .
14/
The legislature would have to abide by the laws in place before the election. They can't substitute their own judgement. I wrote about that in my Washington Post piece:
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/0…
Also PA isn't enough electoral votes.
The whole thing is Strong Man Fantasy.
15/
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/0…
Also PA isn't enough electoral votes.
The whole thing is Strong Man Fantasy.
15/
I went off topic with the talk about electors.
The problem here was remedy. Team Trump argues that the election was tainted because some counties took steps to allow voters to cure their ballots, but others didn't.
They remedy they ask for . . .
16/
The problem here was remedy. Team Trump argues that the election was tainted because some counties took steps to allow voters to cure their ballots, but others didn't.
They remedy they ask for . . .
https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1328834524629897216
16/
. . . is to throw out all the mail-in ballots. Why? because they found two voters in counties who were not contacted and offered a chance to cure their ballots, so they say the law wasn't equally applied.
The remedy is to try to get the un-cured ballots cured.
17
The remedy is to try to get the un-cured ballots cured.
17
Instead, they wanted to throw out millions of legal ballots.
I'd like to say it's the stupidest legal argument I've heard, but I spent dozens of hours listening to the House Managers argue the impeachment case, and their arguments were dumber.
This gets second place.🏆🏆
18/
I'd like to say it's the stupidest legal argument I've heard, but I spent dozens of hours listening to the House Managers argue the impeachment case, and their arguments were dumber.
This gets second place.🏆🏆
18/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
