Quote:
Originally Posted by
blake
i think there is a 2nd action in front of a PA court, in which there is a hearing on Monday.
Yeah, I was reading the opinion of PA lawyers chiming in on that case specifically, and different election lawyers speaking more broadly.
You’d clearly understand it far better than I did, but basically my takeaway was that it was an opinion meant to give cover to the machinations of the corrupt state republicans attempting to steal the election in PA and elsewhere. They keep hoping if they obfuscate everything, and gain any traction ever, that it will create some type of legal momentum.
Obviously they know there wasn’t any actual fraud, which is why their attorneys never argue it. They said pressure is being exerted in a similar fashion in all the swing states. In that case it’s about deadlines and rules that they wrote themselves.
They don’t have the numbers even among their ranks on the state level, and it was kind of meant to hopefully sway some of them in PA and elsewhere to subvert the will of the voters. They said it ultimately had no real way to succeed. They said it’s so transparent and obviously corrupt that it would never gain any traction among actual serious judges, regardless of their political affiliation. Thank god for the judicial branch. I am fully convinced they have the will to go all in with a coup, but the judicial branch has been a firewall as it simply isn’t corrupted like the other branches are at this point.
