Daniel Greenfield, When dealing with compulsively dishonest people, it doesn’t pay to spend too much parsing their words. It’s more helpful to study their deeds.
The media keeps claiming that President Trump can’t win, that his legal challenges are futile, hollow, and have absolutely no chance of winning in court. And, it’s also launching a full-scale Jihad against those law firms and lawyers participating in legal challenges against the election results.
This harassment, which includes threats to the licenses of lawyers who represent Republican clients, is an unprecedented violation of political norms. But it’s also a tell.
Yes, Going After Trump’s Law Firms is Fair Game – Washington Post
Pressure Mounts on Attorneys Lodging US Election Fraud Claims – Connecticut Law Tribune
No Self-Respecting Lawyer Should Touch Trump’s Election-Fraud Claims – The Atlantic
Another Law Firm Bails Out on Trump Campaign – Politico
Why go all-out, launching a boycott campaign targeting Jones Day, and doxxing lawyers, if the whole thing is futile? If Trump can’t win, then conservatives are just wasting money that won’t be spent on protecting the Senate majority in Georgia?
What’s behind all the hollow slogans about “protecting democracy”?
The obvious answer is two admissions.
1. President Trump has a case. Enough of one for Democrats, and their media and legal allies to be worried.
2. The Democrats have something to hide.
And those admissions are worth the price of admission.
PA Judge Rules Secretary of State Can’t Unilaterally Invent Election Law
As I discussed in yesterday’s Freedom Center webinar, the battle against the election theft is taking place on multiple levels and from multiple angles. Just as the fraud occurred on multiple levels and from multiple angles.
One of the sounder legal strategies is taking on the unilateral and illegal moves by Democrat state officials that fundamentally changed how elections were run.
And so far it’s the first legal strategy that appears to be paying off.
A Pennsylvania judge has ruled in favor of the Trump campaign by concluding segregated ballots should not be counted. Further, the judge found that Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar lacked the “statutory authority” to change election law just days before Election Day.
“[The] Court concludes that Repsondent Kathy Boockvar, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked statutory authority to issue the November 1, 2020, guidance to Respondents County Board of Elections insofar as that guidance purported to change the deadline in Section 1308(h) of the Pennsylvania Election Code…for certain electors to verify proof of identification, based on Secretary Boockvar’s interpretation and application oof the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar,” the ruling states. “Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Respondents County Boards of Elections are enjoined from counting any ballots that have been segregated.”
It’s a win, but it’s one victory in a much bigger battle. But it shows the legal vulnerability of the Democrat unilateral election rewrites.