Federal judge dismisses Trump campaign Pennsylvania lawsuit

link

A federal judge dealt a death blow to the Trump campaign's effort to overturn President-elect Joe Biden's win of the presidency on Saturday, by dismissing a closely watched lawsuit that sought to invalidate millions of Pennsylvania votes.

"It is not in the power of this Court to violate the Constitution," Judge Matthew Brann of the US District Court in the Middle District of Pennsylvania wrote on Saturday in a withering decision, hours after the final round of filings in the case came in. The judge wholeheartedly rejected the Trump campaign's attempt to throw out the Pennsylvania vote, noting that Biden has won the state and results will be certified by state officials on Monday. Biden has a margin of more than 81,000 votes in the state.

"In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more," the judge wrote. "At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted."

Well along with Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, and now finally Pennsylvania, Trump’s last gasps to steal an election are upon us...

a reply to: Willtell

You've underestimated the power of the Kraken, Sidney Lied Calamari Powell will be revealing the truth on HAMMER, PHILIPS HEAD SCREWDRIVER and SOCKET WRENCH.

a reply to: Willtell

You realize the faster these lower courts decisions like this happen, the faster it goes to the SCOTUS (where it was headed regardless), right?

This is just as far from over as it was 2 weeks ago.

Just need to get Rudy on all the Sunday shows sweating hair-dye and screaming.

All will be well. Rudy can sling nonsense to keep all occupied for months to come!

Though the case was always extremely unlikely to succeed, President Donald Trump's backers and legal team -- and particularly his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani -- had pinned their hopes on the federal judge in Pennsylvania giving some credibility to their suspicions of fraud and entertaining Trump's attempt to overturn the popular vote for Biden.
But Brann, a longtime and well-known Republican in Pennsylvania, refused.

And this REPUBLICAN judge as far as I know is NOT a secret democrat.

Let's give credit to one of our branches of the triad of power--the judiciary--for saving our democracy from an assault!

a reply to: burdman30ott6

My friend birdman, this will not get to the SCOTUS

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Willtell

You realize the faster these lower courts decisions like this happen, the faster it goes to the SCOTUS (where it was headed regardless), right?

This is just as far from over as it was 2 weeks ago.

No, he doesn't. His TDS is so strong it blinds him and all the others who keep saying it's over. It's not over until the SC determines it is and whatever they say is what we will have to deal with.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: burdman30ott6

My friend birdman, this will not get to the SCOTUS

Man, you really don't know how our system works, do you?

a reply to: Willtell

The Obama appointed judge? Ok...

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Willtell

You realize the faster these lower courts decisions like this happen, the faster it goes to the SCOTUS (where it was headed regardless), right?

This is just as far from over as it was 2 weeks ago.

The SCOTUS could overturn every state's election result. That's true.

It's also true that it will never happen. No state has seen any real proof of substantial fraud. Even if they overturned Pennsylvania, it would not be enough to win. I'd be shocked if they even bothered to hear an argument after the sh!tshow lawsuits shown so far at the state level.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Willtell

You realize the faster these lower courts decisions like this happen, the faster it goes to the SCOTUS (where it was headed regardless), right?

This is just as far from over as it was 2 weeks ago.

With all due respect, these aren't "decisions". They are dismissals.

SCOTUS chooses the cases they take.

These are not lost cases. These are cases that were tossed out.

For lack of proof & “speculative accusations”.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Willtell

You've underestimated the power of the Kraken, Sidney Lied Calamari Powell will be revealing the truth on HAMMER, PHILIPS HEAD SCREWDRIVER and SOCKET WRENCH.

Actually, this will just go to the Appeals Court.

Currently presided over by Justice Alito.

You know, the SCOTUS Justice that told the Pennsylvania Supreme court to reverse their decision.

Which they ignored.

I'm sure THAT will go over well...

a reply to: Willtell

Excellent! The Trump Administration issued this statement after the PA judge issued the anticipated/expected ruling today.

The Statement: twitter.com...

A REPUBLICAN judge said it: Just no facts in the case. There is no evidence at all of fraud.

the SCOTUS has to have EVIDENCE to even take a case. If you look at the lunacy of Trump's claims such as the Guliami's press conference NO ONE believes this.

No credible evidence.

What is the SCOTUS going to do?

Nothing

Earlier they rejected Trump claims of absebtee voting

U.S. Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block North Carolina absentee ballot extension

www.aol.com...

originally posted by: Lumenari
Actually, this will just go to the Appeals Court.

Currently presided over by Justice Alito.

That's nice. Good thing the decision he ruled on changed zero vote totals. You need more 'wins' like that.

You should prep for Biden, it's happening.

a reply to: carewemust

Wishful thinking here

NO EVIDENCE OF FRAUD

Courts determine the truth NOT the SCOTUS

When Trump lawyers try to do that they'll be dismissed just like this case

No evidence speaks loudly

Anyone can cry fraud but you have to offer evidence.

They arent going to have any trial on this when there is no credible evidence to overturn an election

a reply to: Willtell

LOL...the EVIDENCE was not, and will not, be presented to the lower-courts. They just need to be navigated because of the way our court system is set up.

The White House declared today that fraud and errors in many states were, to borrow a favorite Democrat 2020 word, "Systemic" (widespread) and Real.

The U.S. Supreme Court will see the evidence, and render a decision.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

Social Media (ATS-Twitter-Facebook, etc.) participants, News Media, Pundits, and Politicians, can chatter all we want.

But statements made by Trump team attorneys Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and Lin Wood, are important to pay attention to....as are any statements issued by the Supreme Court, or individual justices.

a reply to: Lumenari

The SCOTUS just doesn't take frivolous cases with NO EVIDENCE.
They have to have a constitutional issue involved

If you recall Bush got to the SCOTUS based on the 14th amendment, a constitutional issue

And that case was over 1000 votes, not 5 states, and a 5 million vote advantage.

So, the only hope for Trump is a fixed SCOTUS?

That won't work either. Those judges aren't fools or stupid

a reply to: carewemust

The White House declared today that fraud and errors in many states were, to borrow a favorite Democrat 2020 word, "Systemic" (widespread) and Real.

Just because a partisan party cries fraud and offers no credible evidence doesn't mean the SCOTUS gets involved.

And even if they do get involved doesn't mean Trump will win just because they are a conservative majority.

Many of the judges already as conservative republican leaning have totally rejected Trumps claims