Again, these are lawsuits being brought by people running around claiming that they are the biggest, most consequential cases ever filed in our democracy. Some are being brought by the president himself.
But they're getting shot down left and right over stupid, basic stuff.
The 11th Cir.'s ruling that Wood lacks standing means this case is done, an ex-case.
Arizona officials would like the judge in the local Kraken case to see how badly L. Lin Wood's case was stomped by the 11th Cir.
In addition to being the plaintiff in the now-stomped Georgia case, they note Wood is one of the attorneys of record in the far-fetched Arizona one.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sidney Powell told a judge it's important for the Department of Defense to get access to Georgia's voting machines.
The judge is basically sitting there while she goes through the stack of "expert" testimony that's been introduced in the case.
... and then the judge comes back to the actual legal questions of standing and why this case belongs in federal court, and he sounds pretty skeptical about all that and says Powell has been "glib" with her claims about binding precedent.
The federal court order in MI ending Sidney Powell & Co.'s request to overturn the election results there methodically shreds all of their claims. They lose on every single issue - the case is moot, was filed too late, they have no standing, etc.
The judge deals very briefly with the merits of these Kraken claims. The plaintiffs offered "nothing but speculation and conjecture."
Judge: Sidney Powell's election lawsuit in Mich. "seems to be less about achieving the result the Plaintiffs seek ... and more about the impact of their allegations on the People's faith in the democratic process."
As Trump leaves Georgia, where he complained about fictional election fraud, the state weighed in on a lawsuit seeking to overturn the election. "These claims would be extraordinary if true, but they are not."
The state has filed lots of pages, but this is probably the only one it really needs. The 11th Cir. bounced a similar suit today because plaintiffs lacked standing. That decision binds the district court here.
Georgia: "There is no credible evidence to support the drastic and unprecedented remedy of substituting certified presidential election results with the Plaintiff's preferred candidate."
The filing is by Georgia's Republican AG on behalf of its Republican governor and others.
Meanwhile in Wisconsin, the state Supreme Court won't allow a conservative group to file a new challenge to the results of the election Trump lost there.
There's a concurrence from Justice Hagedorn, a frequent swing vote, expressing dismay at overturning an election. "We are invited to invalidate the entire presidential election in Wisconsin by declaring it “null”—yes, the whole thing."
Hagedorn's concurrence probably doesn't bode well for President Trump's own state lawsuit in Wisconsin that also seeks to invalidate the results of the presidential election he lost.
A Nevada state court just shot down Trump's effort to overturn the election he lost there. The plaintiffs "failed to meet their burden to provide credible and relevant evidence to substantiate any" of their claims.
The judge said a lot of the Trump electors' evidence was inadmissible because it was hearsay and was submitted in the form of written declarations. But the judge considers it anyway and Trump still loses.
Trump's lawyer to a federal judge just now: "It's been a long time since my civil procedure class."
The judge asks why, if Trump's lawyers say only the legislature can redress violations of the Electors Clause, are we here at all? Why didn't you just ask them?
Judge: "I have a very, very hard time seeing how this is justiciable in the federal court."
Judge Ludwig: Trump's request to have the case remanded to the state legislature is "a little bizarre."