11/23/2020 10:04
Clarín.com
World
Updated 11/23/2020 10:04
A federal judge issued a scathing order Saturday dismissing President Donald Trump's campaign's futile attempt to block Pennsylvania ballot certification, debunking claims of numerous mail-in voting irregularities.
The case was always considered
an unlikely effort
to prevent the inauguration of Joe Biden, but it was Trump's best hope of affecting the results of the elections through the courts, more than anything because of the number of electoral votes,
20,
at stake. in Pennsylvania.
His personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, entered a courtroom for the first time in decades to present arguments in the case last week.
Federal District Judge
Matthew Brann
wrote in his order that Trump had asked the court to disenfranchise nearly
seven million
voters.
"One might hope that by seeking such an alarming result, a plaintiff
would arrive formidably armed
with compelling legal arguments and factual evidence of rampant corruption," Brann wrote, so much so that the court had no choice but to
stop certification
even if doing so. it would affect so many people.
"That hasn't happened."
In a scathing ruling, the judge (who is a Republican) compared the campaign's legal arguments to
"Frankenstein's monster"
and concluded that Trump's team offered only "speculative allegations," not evidence of rampant corruption.
Trump did not give up, and
appealed on Sunday
the court decision in Pennsylvania, a state that, along with Georgia, was preparing this Monday to certify the victory of Joe Biden.
An election observer after the polls closed on November 3 in Pennsylvania.
Photo: AP
Trump had already advanced, in a tweet published at the stroke of midnight on Saturday, that his campaign would appeal the decision, and his lawyers trusted the appeals court to decide quickly on the case to be able to reach the Supreme Court "as soon as possible."
Even if he had won the case in Pennsylvania, Trump would have needed to win other lawsuits in other states where he also asked to delay certification.
The president's campaign
bombarded the fluctuating states
or swing states with litigation in the days after the election by alleging massive electoral fraud without presenting evidence, but most of those cases beforehand have been dismissed.
The president has taken his effort to subvert the 2020 election results
beyond the courts
in recent days.
Some Trump allies have expressed hope that state lawmakers could intervene in the selection of Republican voters.
With that in mind, Trump invited Michigan lawmakers to the White House on Friday, hoping an Oval Office meeting would persuade them to sideline the popular vote favoring Biden by more than 154,000.
But lawmakers issued a statement after the meeting saying they
would abide by the laws
and the "normal process" of voters. Trump was said to be considering issuing a similar invitation to Pennsylvania lawmakers.
Time is running out for Trump and his campaign, as states certify their results one after another,
showing that Biden won
the 270 votes necessary from the Electoral College to win the presidency.
Brann determined that Pennsylvania authorities can certify the election results that currently show that Biden won the state by more than 80,000 votes.
He added that the Trump campaign presented "forced legal arguments on the merits and speculative accusations ... not supported by evidence."
"In the United States, this cannot justify depriving a single elector of their right to vote, much less all the electors of its sixth most populous state," according to the ruling. "Our people, laws and institutions they demand more. ''
Trump tweeted after the ruling that he could not understand why Biden was forming a Cabinet when the president's investigators had found "
hundreds of thousands
of fraudulent votes," a baseless claim for which Trump has presented no evidence.
Giuliani and a lawyer for the president's campaign team said in a statement that they welcomed the ruling because it would allow them to expedite an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Trump has repeatedly said he feels he has empathetic judges.
However, the justices heard a state case before the election, about a three-day extension to vote by mail, and allowed the extension despite objections from the Republican Party.
Giuliani, a former federal prosecutor and mayor of New York, showed his lack of practice during a hearing this week when he stumbled on the meaning of "opacity," mistaking the judge for a federal judge in a separate district and provoking an opposing attorney. .
Giuliani repeatedly asserted in court that it was illegal for counties to help people vote.
Opposing attorney Mark Aronchick hinted that Giuliani was unaware of Pennsylvania's electoral code.
Associated Press
ap
Look also
Republicans start to turn away from Donald Trump and his allegations of fraud
United States: Joe Biden to elect Antony Blinken as Secretary of State