I read the "Kraken." It's an encyclopedia of every half-baked election-fraud theory that's circulated online (with extra typos), including a few that have already been rejected in court.
The only thing at all about it that surprised me was that actual GOP officials signed on.
The lawsuit quotes extensively from witnesses in another case that had been filed in Michigan state court.
What it doesn't say: The state judge didn't buy this *at all.* He found that witnesses didn't know what they were talking about; they were "incorrect and not credible."
It quotes the expert who mixed up Michigan and Minnesota in his analysis that got included as the infamous "Exhibit Q" in a case in Georgia.
The "Georgia Kraken" hasn't actually been filed yet.
A lot of these allegations are fantasy-planet stuff. Some have been specifically rejected in court. But it tells you something about how far some Republicans are being pulled into this alternate reality that a few party chairman agreed to put their names on it as plaintiffs.
We now take you live to an actual lawyer attempting to read this. It’s a journey ->
The Third Cir. has rejected Trump's appeal. Decisively.
"Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
The court rejects Trump's arguments pretty categorically. He loses on everything. And there's no point in letting him file a new complaint, because he'd lose on that too.
The court also says Trump can't get an injunction to overturn Pennsylvania's election results. "The campaign's claims have no merit," it says. "Tossing out millions of mail-in votes would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate."
Bunch of law profs pile on in the 3d Cir.: "For the good of the country, for the good of the Constitution, for the good of democracy, and for the good of all the voters who did all the law required of them to cast lawful ballots, the Court should reject Trump's challenge."
The brief is about remedies. Whatever else is going on with Trump's lawsuit, they say, he can't just overturn the results of an election. That would "subvert democracy, undermine federalism, and threaten the orderly transfer of power."
Pennsylvania has filed a brief opposing Trump's request to enjoin certification of the state's election (which already happened). "No federal court has ever issued an order enjoining a state's certification, or directing decertification, of presidential electors."
Pennsylvania notes that Trump's lawyers didn't adhere to the procedural requirements for seeking an injunction.
Pennsylvania also argues that although Trump offers "the rough outline of a potential statistical analysis - and theories about an elaborate conspiracy - precedent requires much more than hypotheticals to justify injunctive relief."
Pennsylvania responds to Trump's 3d Cir. appeal: "It is beyond time for this baseless litigation to come to an end."
It argues that Trump's campaign made a mess of the litigation, and giving it permission to file a new complaint would be futile because that one would lose, too.
The state says that even Trump allowed to amend, plaintiffs wouldn't have standing. "Their proposed second amended complaint is Frankenstein's Monster's Monster, randomly re-cobbled together, even more illogical and haphazard than the first."
The state also says that because Trump's lawyers chose not to challenge most of Judge Brann's decision -- that their claims lack merit -- they're now stuck with it.
President Trump's lawyers have filed their Third Circuit brief. They're asking the court to reverse the district court's decision that they could not amend their complaint a second time.
Trump's lawyers want to make clear that they're not "seeking to disenfranchise 6.8 million voters." They're seeking to disenfranchise some subset of 1.5 million voters who cast absentee ballots in some counties.
(Though their lawsuit literally asked that the court prevent the state from certifying the results of the election.)
President Trump's lawyers just told the Third Cir. they plan to seek an emergency restraining order to block Pennsylvania from certifying its election results.
This is something Trump could have done when it filed its appeal. Or yesterday. Or .....
Trump's legal team says that because of the " the extreme time pressures involved in drafting and filing all of the motions and briefs required," it should get to add 1,300 words to its brief.