President Trump's lawyers have filed a new motion in Pennsylvania making clear that they only want to block the state from certifying the results of the presidential election, which they claim was fraudulent. It can certify the other races, decided on the same ballots, they say. 
Marks v. Stinson has become the hydroxychloroquine of the president's post-election litigation.
Interesting concession in Trump's filing: If PA certifies its electors by Dec. 8, its certification "shall be conclusive" when Congress meets to count electoral votes. (That's in the statute, but you'd think they'd want some wiggle room here.)
Here the Trump campaign worries that if it doesn't get an injunction blocking PA from certifying the election results, we would be in "Constitutionally uncharted ground," which is also a quite good description of what happens if they do get an injunction.
The Trump campaign says PA officials "jeopardized ... the ability of Pennsylvanians to select their leaders" when they allowed some voters to correct "small errors" that would otherwise have led to their votes being discarded. This is the bottom line of its entire federal case.
Anyway, here it is. Read it and see if you can spot the massive vote-rigging campaign the president's lawyers described today in their notably not-in-court press conference. courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
