"We commend the District Court for its fast, fair, patient handling of this demanding litigation," writes Circuit Judge Bibas, a Trump appointee.
lololol, Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. You love to see it folks.
"The Second Amended Complaint does not meet Twombly and Iqbal’s baseline standard of specifics.
To start, note what it does not allege: fraud."
"Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law."
The Third Circuit panel's summation of the futility of the appeal.
Also worth quoting how the panel distinguishes Marks v. Stinson--the 1994 circuit case that the Trump campaign seemed to cite in every other sentence of its pleadings--from the present circumstances.
One of many indications throughout the opinion of the abysmal legal services the Trump campaign received. The case never should've been brought, of course, due to the lack of evidence, but this reflects an even more basic failure of blocking and tackling.
I'm gonna bring this thread to a close, but I fear I have not adequately conveyed how much Rudy and his team are getting ethered on pretty much every page.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"It is beyond cavil that Petitioners failed to act with due diligence in presenting the instant claim. Equally clear is the substantial prejudice [that] would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of
Pennsylvania voters."
Concurrence: "There is no basis in law by which the courts may grant Petitioners’ request to ignore the results of an election and recommit the choice to the General Assembly to substitute its preferred slate of electors for the one chosen by a majority of Pennsylvania’s voters."
I’ve been struggling to articulate why, to me, this is so funny
There’s the diminutive desk, its tinyness exaggerated by the camera, the dominating presence of the ungainly mic stand, the expanse of empty, barren, mussed carpet that looks like it’s already experienced his impending eviction, the Christmas tree, present but unadorned ....
Like they obviously took all the nice furniture out of this room. You can see that from the carpet. And then replaced it with a glorified tv tray and and a bare fir tree??
"Investigators found that Cardlytics’ chief executive at the time, Scott Grimes, sent Mr. Perdue a personal email two days before the senator’s stock sale that made a vague mention of “upcoming changes.”" nytimes.com/2020/11/25/us/…
"The timing of the message prompted additional scrutiny from investigators in both Washington and Atlanta. But ultimately they concluded the exchange contained no meaningful nonpublic information and declined to pursue charges, closing the case this summer."
If, say, you and I have a contract and we have come to disagree about the meaning of a provision in it, either of us can go to court and ask a judge to decide upfront what it means (w/o waiting for an alleged breach and damages to accrue). That’s what a declaratory judgment is.
Correx: It’s Wisconsin’s certification they’re challenging and that’s expected today, not Minnesota’s. I got flummoxed. My apologies.
As a for instance, before the election, Trump denigrated mail voting to his supporters, a Trump goon sabotaged the postal service, the PA legislature forbid precanvassing mail ballots (so they wouldn’t appear in election night tabulations of the vote), ...
the PA GOP sued to throw out late-arriving mail ballots, and Trump was reported to be planning to declare victory based on the strength of the same-day vote and then to sue to stop Biden from overtaking him in mail ballots. axios.com/trump-claim-el…
A notable thing about this letter, one that may rear its head again, is @GSAEmily skips over the 'ascertainment' part where she determines Biden and Harris are the "apparent successful candidates."
Instead, she jumps ahead to determining that they "may access the resources."
"I came to my decision independently," Director Murphy wrote.
At almost the same her letter became public, Trump tweeted that he had suggested she take these steps.