Share this page!

Mike Sacks Profile picture
Twitter logo
18 Nov, 6 tweets, 2 min read
Here's the docket: courtlistener.com/docket/1863278…
Wood, a GA Elector, is asking Judge Grimberg, a Trump appointee, for a temporary restraining order to block certification of GA's final count as well as closer count observers for the GASEN runoff
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Hearing's underway now and Judge Grimberg doesn't seem all that keen on the plaintiff's argument for standing
"I understand that is your argument, sir. What is your evidence?"
This is painful
Judge asking a whole table of lawyers simple questions about their client's constitutional claims and just...crickets before they come up with their halting answers.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Mike Sacks

Mike Sacks Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MikeSacksEsq

Mike Sacks Profile picture
19 Nov
Hearing is still going on, but I have to go on air now. So go to @KlasfeldReports for more updates
Just deleted a tweet saying Judge Grimberg said the case was a closer call than the Dem Party argued and wanted to decide on the briefs. Judge was talking about Dems’ motion to intervene, not about merits of case or plaintiffs’ standing.

SORRY FOR THE HEART ATTACKS.
NOTE TO SELF: Don't livetweet reports from high-profile hearings I'm half-listening to while writing my on-air intro.

Read 17 tweets
Mike Sacks Profile picture
19 Nov
Rudy pretty much delivering to the press right now his opening argument to Judge Brann the other day.
Rudy alleging a vast left-wing conspiracy in which any judge that rules against Trump Campaign "will issue ridiculously irrational opinions just to come out in [Democrats'] favor."
REMINDER
Read 7 tweets
Mike Sacks Profile picture
18 Nov
Federal judge in PA heard enough at yesterday's arguments, cancels evidentiary hearing scheduled for tomorrow, and orders final briefing to be completed by the end of this week.
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The order puts in writing what the Judge suggested from the bench yesterday
Meanwhile the federal judge in Michigan yesterday called out the Trump Campaign for not even serving a copy of their complaint to the State and set the briefing schedule for completion by this Friday: courtlistener.com/docket/1861986…
Read 20 tweets
Mike Sacks Profile picture
18 Nov
Is the idea to keep contesting the battleground results in court with the hope that judges won’t be able to whack all the moles before December 14th, thereby forcing states to either blow the deadline or risk further calamity by pushing forward despite “unresolved” disputes?
It’s clear that’s what relief they want from courts, but it also seems that they’re hoping that flooding the zone with a constant flow of lawsuits could just block certification by 12/8 safe harbor by default cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public-files/p…
I’m generally of the mind that should any of this get to SCOTUS, it’s gonna be ACB and Kav who stick the final dagger into the Trump Presidency
Read 5 tweets
Mike Sacks Profile picture
17 Nov
Judge just called Rudy “Mr. Mayor”
“The best description of what we’re alleging...is widespread nationwide voter fraud of which this is a part” - Giuliani, noting in those ellipses that his claims, all based on conspiracy theories, have to be treated as true at this motion to dismiss phase
Oh
Read 10 tweets
Mike Sacks Profile picture
10 Nov
We'll see how this prediction holds up with the signals the justices are set to send in just a few minutes
Roberts probing whether individual plaintiffs have standing because even though they don't have to pay anything, they're still breaking the law
Thomas hypos a mask mandate: "There is some degree of opprobrium of one doesn't wear one in some settings. What if someone violates that command, let's say it's in similar terms to the mandate here but no penalty, would they have standing to challenge the mandate to wear a mask?"
Read 41 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get email notifications when new thread is out from this Author!

Check out other threads from this Author!

Read all threads by @MikeSacksEsq