President Donald Trump blasted the Supreme Court as having ‘no wisdom, no courage’ on Friday night after it dismissed a case filed by the attorney general of Texas which asked them to intervene and overturn the election in four states which Joe Biden won.
The SCOTUS decision to not even hear the case dealt a crippling legal blow to Trump’s legal strategy, adding to the long list of failed lawsuits his campaign has filed in an effort to change the election results as the president still refuses to concede and continues with unfounded claims of voter fraud.
‘The Supreme Court really let us down,’ Trump claimed, as he took to Twitter to voice his disapproval.
He added quotes from Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle which claimed ‘the establishment failed us’ and that ‘the American people deserve answers’ as the show argued that the case should have been heard.
The SCOTUS decision was met with immediate anger from the president’s loyalists, as hundreds began to protest the outcome in Washington D.C., joined by members of the far-right Proud Boys and pardoned Trump ally Roger Stone.
Stone addressed the protests, which turned violent in the early hours of Saturday morning as Proud Boys clashed with Black Lives Matter counter-protesters.
Before the SCOTUS result was announced, Trump had tweeted that the Texas AG’s suit was ‘perhaps the most important case in history’ and that if the court’s judges showed ‘great wisdom and courage’ the country’s ‘Electoral Process will be respected again’.
Yet the majority of the Supreme Court Justices did not agree with the president and seven of them voted to dismiss the case completely without it being heard.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said they would have heard the case but that they would have refused to overturn the election result which effectively made the result 9-0.
The stunning end to Trump’s legal bid to overturn the election came just after 6.30pm in a one-page ruling from the court which deemed that the Texas AGs bid to have the case heard had little standing.
Trump slammed the Supreme Court on Friday after it dismissed a case filed by the attorney general of Texas which asked them to intervene and overturn the election in four states Biden won in another blow to the president’s campaign
President Trump claimed on Twitter that the Supreme Court judges had ‘no wisdom, no courage’
Trump added quotes from Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle as he raged against the result on Twitter, claiming ‘the establishment failed us’ and ‘the American people deserve answers’, arguing that the case should have been heard.
D.C.: Roger Stone, a longtime friend and adviser of U.S. President Donald Trump, walks with supporters of Trump and members of the far-right Proud Boys as they march to protest the Supreme Court decision in D.C. on Friday night
D.C.: Proud Boys Chairman Enrique Tarrio (center) walks as hundreds of Trump supporters and members of the far-right group march in Washington D.C. following Friday night’s Supreme Court decision to dismiss a case regarding alleged election fraud
The case was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, pictured, on Monday who claimed votes in the 4 states were tainted
The Supreme Court declined to take the case Trump called ‘the big one, dismissing completely on Friday evening
D.C.: Washington DC Police keep Members of the Proud Boys back as they clash with Black Lives Matter protesters during a protest near Black Lives Matter Plaza on Friday night following Trump’s loss at the Supreme Court
D.C.: A Trump supporter lies on the ground after clashes break out with Black Lives Matter counter-protesters
‘Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,’ the ruling said – refusing to even take up a case that legal scholars had already ripped as a legal farce.
Trump fumed into the early hours of the morning about the result as he launched a Twitter tirade declaring it a ‘legal disgrace’ and an ’embarrassment to the USA’.
He had been scheduled to address the White House Christmas party earlier in the evening but guests were informed last-minute that he would not be joining.
‘So, you’re the President of the United States, and you just went through an election where you got more votes than any sitting President in history, by far – and purportedly lost,’ he wrote.
‘You can’t get “standing” before the Supreme Court, so you “intervene” with wonderful states hat, after careful study and consideration, think you got “screwed”, something which will hurt them also. Many others likewise join the suit but, within a flash, it is thrown out and gone, without even looking at the many reasons it was brought.
‘A Rigged Election, fight on!’ he added, appearing to be determined to continue refusing to concede the election.
He interspersed the flurry of tweets with a reminder that the FDA had approved the emergency use of a COVID-19 vaccine earlier in the evening.
D.C.: Cops pull apart a pro-Trump protester and a counter protesters as demonstrations began to turn violent
D.C.: The recently pardoned Roger Stone, pictured, is among Trump’s most loyal allies. He joined the protests in Washington D.C. on Friday night, addressing the crowd of hundreds with a mega phone following the Supreme Court announcement
D.C.: Hundreds of Trump supporters emerged in the Capitol on Friday night to protest
D.C.: Many of the protesters carried Trump flags as they marched to protest the Supreme Court decision
D.C.: A counter protester was spotted among hundreds of Trump loyalists who marched in Washington D.C. on Friday night
D.C.: Roger Stone was pictured on Friday night joining protests with Trump supporters in Washington D.C.
D.C.: Trump supported quickly lined the streets to voice their anger after the Supreme Court decision was announced
D.C.: Stone had joined members of the Proud Boys, a far-right group who led the pro-Trump protests on Friday night
‘It is a legal disgrace, and embarrassment to the USA!’ Trump said in one of his tweets on Friday night
Trump hit out at the Supreme Court for dismissing the case without it even being heard
Meanwhile, Stone took his support of Trump marching through the nation’s capital with the extremist far-right group the Proud Boys, of which he is a member.
Proud Boys Chairman Enrique Tarrio was at the rally and addressed the crowd of Trump supporters near the Washington Monument Friday night.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, the group is a far-right males-only extremist group that has neo-fascist, violent, nationalistic, Islamophobic, and misogynistic views.
With the high court dismissing the high-profile effort – the mother of all the ‘Kraken’ lawsuits – Trump is without an avenue to overturn the election he calls ‘rigged’ despite dozens of lower courts ruling against allied efforts.
A disappointed Texas AG Ken Paxton responded to the result on Twitter, saying: ‘It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court decided not to take this case and determine the constitutionality of these four states’ failure to follow federal and state election law.’
The president sought to intervene in the case – and 126 Republican House members followed suit, while 17 states signed a friend of the court brief supporting the Texas suit.
That didn’t stop the four states being sued, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia, from blasting the suit as ‘legally indefensible and is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy.’
Trump interspersed the flurry of tweets with a reminder that the FDA had approved the emergency use of a COVID-19 vaccine
But the majority found that Texas lacked ‘standing’ to even bring the case. It also had not demonstrated a ‘judiciably cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts elections.’ In other word, its legal argument failed to justify why it was justified in having a court consider it’s objections to how another state chose to run its elections.
The dissent by Alito and Thomas was a particular blow. The two conservatives gave no quarter to the substance of Texas’ argument.
Their separate dissent spoke only to their position that they would have heard the case, or granted certiorari, due to its nature as an inter-state dispute.
They said it ‘falls within our original jurisdiction,’ a reference to the Constitutions grant of authority to the Supreme Court to hear such cases. Both have previously said they believe that they have no choice but to hear cases brought by states.
Their statement that they ‘would not grant other relief’ constitutes a rebuke to the case itself, and it was not required that they telegraph what they would decide.
Stunning blow: Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, regarded as the two most outspokenly conservative justices said that they were obliged to take it – and would then have refused to overturn the election
Rejected: Amy Coney Barrett, installed on the high court only in October helped decide the election as Donald Trump had predicted she would – but not in his favor, joining the unanimous rejection
Two more picks who went against him: Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, both raised to the high court by Trump, dashed his hopes they would overturn Joe Biden’s victory
But the Court’s majority of seven did not believe such a dispute would automatically get a hearing. In the case at hand, which was bound to Trump’s own claim to have suffered ‘massive’ electoral fraud – not a single justice, liberal or conservative, spoke to the substance of his claim.
That would include the Court’s newest justice, Amy Coney Barrett, despite Trump having openly discussed the imperative to push through her confirmation in order to hear election disputes.
Three of the justices in the majority: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Barrett, were in the majority voting not to even hear the case.
‘Every American who cares about the rule of law should take comfort that the Supreme Court — including all three of President Trump’s picks — closed the book on the nonsense,’ said Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, one of the few Republicans to publicly condemn the effort.
It also wiped away any hope Trump had of getting any Bush v. Gore-style intervention from the Court – in an analogy that showed up in pro-Trump legal briefs that overlooked how that Supreme Intervention involved an exceedingly close contest in a single state and a judicial question of whether to stop a count taking place.
Hailing the decision was Pennsylvania’s Attorney General Josh Shapiro, whose legal filing eviscerated the claims made by the Texas Republican attorney general.
‘Our nation’s highest court saw through this seditious abuse of our electoral process. This swift denial should make anyone contemplating further attacks on our election think twice,’ he said.
Said Michigan’s attorney general Dana Nessel: ‘Today’s Supreme Court decision is an important reminder that we are a nation of laws, and though some may bend to the desire of a single individual, the courts will not.’
Republican Sen. Ben Sasse commended the Supreme Court for refusing to take a Texas case that President Donald Trump wanted to use to overturn the results of the presidential election.
The Nebraska senator also mocked the president and his legal team’s conspiracy theories used on Trump supporters to call into question the winner.
‘Since Election Night, a lot of people have been confusing voters by spinning Kenyan Birther-type ‘Chavez rigged the election from the grave’ conspiracy theories, but every American who cares about the rule of law should take comfort that the Supreme Court – including all three of President Trump’s picks – closed the book on this nonsense,’ Sasse said.
Some of Trump’s allies, however, were incensed.
The head of the Republican Party of Texas, Allen West, sent out a statement where he floated the idea of secession.
‘Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution,’ he said.
The Supreme Court on Friday denied a Hail Mary effort by the attorney general of Texas who had asked the court to intervene and overturn the election in four states that went for Joe Biden, dealing a crippling legal pro to Donald Trump’e legal strategy.
Trump’s obsession with the case was such that he even reportedly asked Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) if he would argue the case if the Court agreed to hear it.
With the Supreme Court’s refusal to take the case, the next key moment comes Monday, when the electoral college meets in state capitals around the country, effectively ensuring Biden’s inauguration.
Biden leads in the electoral college by 306 to 232 electoral votes, unless a ‘faithless’ elector tries to vote contrary to the popular vote in a state.
A ‘safe harbor’ period for challenges to the count in each state has already passed.
But that doesn’t mean political backing for Trump’s continued efforts to rage against the election will end. Throughout weeks’ worth of challenges since Election Day, the vast majority of elected Republicans have refused to declare Joe Biden the winner while Trump pursued his options.
126 REPUBLICAN HOUSE MEMBERS GOT BEHIND IT – AND ARE NOW LEFT EMBARRASSED BY THEIR FAILURE
The court’s move came after wave of Republicans sought to align with Trump even in what looked to be his last days in office.
House minority leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California joined the effort Friday.
He is now one of 126 Republican lawmakers who have signed onto a legal brief seeking to join the seat – out of a caucus of 196 members, meaning well over half of elected Republicans have lent their names to the effort.
In addition, 17 states have sought to file a ‘friend of the court’ brief in support of the Texas suit to have the court disallow the result and have the Republican-run legislatures in four states choose Trump Donald Trump electors rather than those that voters chose for Joe Biden.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has signed onto a brief seeking to support a lawsuit by the Texas attorney general seeking to overturn the election
The names provide a real-time guide within the elected GOP for who supports ‘Kraken’ style lawsuits to overturn the election despite the popular vote, versus a smaller bloc clinging to traditional norms.
In the Senate, Republican whip John Thune of South Dakota was dismissive of the suit. ‘I just don’t know why a state like Texas which never wants anybody telling them what to do, now wants to tell a bunch of other states how to run their elections. I doubt the Supreme Court will take it up,’ he told The Hill newspaper.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a Trump rival in 2016, called the Texas lawsuit ‘crazy.’
‘This is crazy. it will be killed on arrival. Why are smart people advancing this notion? Let it go. The election is over, he tweeted Thursday night.
TEXAS AG HAD EVEN CLAIMED IT WAS UP TO THE SWING STATES TO SHOW THERE WASN’T FRAUD – HE JUST HAD TO CLAIM THERE WAS MISCONDUCT
The state AG had claimed in a new filing Friday that it is ‘impossible’ to know who won the election – and faulted the four states for failing to ‘show’ that Biden won.
AG Ken Paxton, who has been photographed with the Trump in the presidential limousine and who is under indictment but maintains his innocence, responded to the charge that his lawsuit seeks to ‘overthrow the votes of the American people.’
Although the suit sought to overturn the vote in four states that went for Joe Biden, Paxton rejected the claim that it would do such a thing.
‘Texas does not ask this Court to reelect President Trump, and Texas does not seek to disenfranchise the majority of Defendant States’ voters,’ according to the response. ‘To both points, Texas asks this Court to recognize the obvious fact that Defendant States’ maladministration of the 2020 election makes it impossible to know which candidate garnered the majority of lawful votes,’ according to the filing.
‘Texas IS likely to prevail’ according to the legal brief filed with the Supreme Court by the office of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, seen here with Trump in June.
Supporters of President Donald Trump gather outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on December 11, 2020 in Washington, DC
The suit sought to overturn the vote in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania – which would be sufficient to award Trump the White House. The suit claims the states violated the constitution through major expansions of mail-in voting amid the pandemic.
‘Texas IS likely to prevail’ according to the brief.
After Georgia’s Republican lieutenant governor on Thursday night responded to the suit saying there had ‘not seen a single ounce of systemic or organized fraud,’ Paxton’s filing maintained the burden falls on the states to prove that their elections were legitimate.
‘The balance of equities tips to the Plaintiff State,’ according to the filing. ‘Defendant States first assume that Mr. Biden won their States legitimately, then use that assumption to criticize Texas’s arguments for disenfranchising voters. If the flawed 2020 results stand, that result would disenfranchise voters,’ according to the filing.
The filing says the four states ‘assume’ that Biden won legitimate. Each operates a legal apparatus to assess the vote, and two of them conducted recounts
‘At best for Defendant States, the balance of equities could be neutral. But because Defendant States cannot—or at least do not— seriously defend the merits or show that Mr. Biden actually prevailed, the equities tip in favor of Texas and of the lawful process for resolving contested elections ‘do precious little to defend the merits of their actions,’ according to the filing.
All four states have already certified their results for Joe Biden. Georgia already conducted multiple statewide recounts, and Wisconsin conducted a recount in two heavily Democratic counties at the request and cost of the Trump campaign.
TRUMP TURNED UP HEAT ON TWITTER
Trump repeatedly used his Twitter megaphone seeking to drive up political pressure and even make arguments that might influence the court.
‘If the Supreme Court shows great Wisdom and Courage, the American People will win perhaps the most important case in history, and our Electoral Process will be respected again!’ he wrote late Friday afternoon.
He brought up campaign speculation that Biden would seek to pack that court – although Biden was being pushed by some on the party’s left flank to do so assuming he won a substantial Senate majority, which didn’t happen.
‘If the two Senators from Georgia should lose, which would be a horrible thing for our Country, I am the only thing that stands between ‘Packing the Court’ (last number heard, 25), and preserving it. I will not, under any circumstances, Pack the Court!’ he said, in tweet that appeared designed to appeal to the individual justices, who hold tremendous power as lifetime appointees to a group of nine under the current system.
‘SEDITIOUS ABUSE’ AND ‘FANTASY’: HOW THE FOUR SWING STATES SLAMMED THE TEXAS AG
The thumping defeat for Texas came after the four states responded to the initial suit, which President Trump wants to join.
Their filing shredded the effort to turn the vote as a ‘surreal alternate reality’ and ‘seditious’ abuse of the courts.
They attacked the lawsuit as an attempt to ‘overthrow’ the results of the election.
It was a last-ditch argument Trump immediately latched onto in his effort to have courts and state legislatures ‘overturn’ the election.
But the Texas suits’ arguments were ‘moot, meritless, and dangerous,’ argued the four states who would have their votes discounted.
‘Let us be clear. Texas invites this Court to overthrow the votes of the American people and choose the next President of the United States. That Faustian invitation must be firmly rejected,’ they asked the court.
The Pennsylvania AG’s office described the Texas suit as a crass political maneuver to extend Trump’s term.
‘Texas’s effort to get this Court to pick the next President has no basis in law or fact. The Court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated,’ they urged.
The lawyers for the four states, headed by Pennsylvania Josh Shapiro’s office, took aim at a major federalism flaw in the case – allowing one state to seek to ‘dictate’ the election laws of another, even as the Constitution grants states the authority to run their own elections.
‘Texas has not suffered harm simply because it dislikes the result of the election, and nothing in the text, history, or structure of the Constitution supports Texas’s view that it can dictate the manner in which four other states run their elections. Nor is that view grounded in any precedent from this Court. Texas does not seek to have the Court interpret the Constitution, so much as disregard it.’
The Pennsylvania AG even took time to dispatch a ‘statistical analysis’ provided by the Texas suit that the chance of Biden winning despite Trump’s ‘lead’ at 3 am on election night was ‘less than one in a quadrillion.’
‘Texas also relies on a statistical analysis prepared by Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D., in support of the assertion that the results in the four defendant states were so improbable as to be evidence of misconduct. Bill of Complaint ¶¶ 9–12. Texas’s allegations and Dr. Cicchetti’s analysis are nonsense,’ according to the filing.
”It bases this astounding assertion on Dr. Cicchetti’s assessment, for each of the states, of the extremely low probability that the votes counted before 3 a.m. and those counted afterwards were ‘randomly drawn from the same population.’
However the way the votes came in were not random.
‘But the votes counted later were indisputably not ‘randomly drawn’ from the same population of votes, as those counted earlier were predominantly in-person votes while those counted later were predominantly mail-in votes,’ they noted.
The claims by Texas ‘are neither serious nor dignified,’ according to the filing. The dispute ‘involves Pennsylvania’s interpretation of its own laws, and Texas’s disagreement with that interpretation.’
Texas ‘repeats the same false allegations of election fraud that have already been repeatedly rejected by other courts,’ according to the filing, following dozens of defeats by Trump and his allies in election lawsuits since Nov. 3.
‘And its request for relief—to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters who reasonably relied upon the law—is uniquely unserious.’
Georgia’s lieutenant governor, Geoff Duncan, blasted the suit. ‘This is not American, this is not democracy. This is not our finest moment. My hope is we quickly move past this,’ he told the PBS News Hour.
‘We have not seen a single ounce of systemic or organized fraud,’ he said. ‘I’m proud of that even though the person I supported didn’t win.
ADULTERY AND AN FBI PROBE: MEET THE AG BEHIND HAIL MARY BID TO VOID ELECTION
The FBI is investigating allegations that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton broke the law in using his office to benefit a wealthy donor.
Federal agents are looking into claims by former members of Paxton’s staff that the Republican committed bribery, abuse of office and other crimes to help Austin real estate developer Nate Paul.
The investigation was reported in mid-November by the Associated Press.
Paxton has denied wrongdoing and refused calls for his resignation since his top deputies reported him to federal authorities at the end of September.
Trump ally: Ken Paxton with Eric Trump and his wife Angela – who he admits cheating on
It’s unclear how far the FBI is into investigating the allegations against Paxton. An agency spokeswoman in San Antonio declined to comment.
Paxton is accused of using his position as Texas’ top law enforcement official to benefit Paul in several ways.
Central to their claims is the fact that Paxton hired an outside lawyer to investigate the developer’s allegations that the FBI improperly searched his home and offices last year.
Each of Paxton’s accusers has resigned, been put on leave or been fired since reporting him. Last week, four of them filed a state whistleblower lawsuit against the attorney general, claiming he ousted them as retribution.
The full nature of Paxton and Paul’s connection remains unclear. In 2018, Paul donated $25,000 to the attorney general’s reelection campaign. The developer also said in a recent deposition that Paxton recommended a woman for her job with his company.
Two people previously told The Associated Press that Paxton acknowledged in 2018 having an extramarital affair with the woman, who was then a state Senate aide. The people spoke on condition of anonymity due to fears about retaliation.
Paxton has spent most of his tenure in office maintaining his innocence in the face of an indictment on unrelated securities fraud charges. The case has been stalled for years over legal challenges.
THE FBI SUBPOENAED THE TEXAS AG WHILE HE FILED HIS CASE (AND CRITICS SAID HE WAS HUNTING FOR A PARDON)
Adding to the intrigue and farce of the situation, it was revealed just hours after the latest filing that Texas Attorney Gen. Ken Paxton, who filed the suit, had his office served with a federal subpoena on Wednesday.
FBI agents delivered ‘at least one’ subpoena to the AG’s office, the Austin-American Statesman reported Thursday, in connection to an ongoing investigation.
The subpoena follows multiple aides in his office quitting and alleging abuse of his office and bribery. Paxton’s prominent role in the case, combined with his own legal troubles, has led to speculation he is seeking a presidential pardon – following Trump intends to dole out a slew of pardons to allies in his final weeks in office.
Paxton was among the Republican attorneys general who met with Trump at the White House Thursday amid his suit seeking to overturn the election.
Nebraska GOP Sen. Ben Sasse was among a few elected Republicans dissing the case, even as 17 state attorneys general sought to sign on.
A total of 22 states plus the District of Columbia signed an amicus brief against it.
‘I’m no lawyer, but I suspect the Supreme Court swats this away.
From the brief, it looks like a fella begging for a pardon filed a PR stunt rather than a lawsuit – as all of its assertions have already been rejected by federal courts and Texas’ own solicitor general isn’t signing on,’ he wrote.
His ‘begging for a pardon’ comment likely referenced Texas AG Ken Paxton, who was indicted in 2015 for alleged securities fraud and been accused by former aides of abuse of office and bribery. He is currently under FBI investigation.
REPUBLICAN AGs GOT BEHIND TRUMP AND GOT A TRIP TO THE WHITE HOUSE TOO
Trump kept up his bid to try to get the Supreme Court to overturn the election Thursday, tweeting about a ‘coup’ and a ‘corrupt election’ hours after another federal judge dismissed an election challenge by a Trump ally.
Trump met Thursday with state attorneys general have have followed his lead in seeking to intervene in a Texas lawsuit asking the high court to disregard millions of ballots in four states that Joe Biden Won.
And he continued to tout a conspiracy theory involving voting machines that Trump’s lawyers say were designed to rig the election, despite courts and state officials not buying it.
‘Great. Most corrupt Election in history, by far. We won!!!’ Trump tweeted, as he blasted out post about Republican House members seeking a special counsel to probe the election, which Joe Biden won by more than 7 million votes.
‘Voter Fraud!’ he wrote in another tweet, where he retweeted a Newsmax host who posted video purporting to show ‘mysterious ballots’ being counted in Georgia.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro filed a blistering response to the Texas AG’s lawsuit seeking to overturn the election
The filing calls out a ‘cacophony of bogus claims’ and calls it ‘legally indefensible’
Trump retweeted video purporting to show voter fraud that the Georgia Secretary of State said showed nothing improper
THE 126 HOUSE REPUBLICANS WHO WANT SCOTUS TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION RESULT
Ralph Abraham Louisiana
Robert Aderholt Alabama
Rick W. Allen Georgia
Jodey Arrington Texas
James R. Baird Indiana
Jim Banks Indiana
Jack Bergman Michigan
Andy Biggs Arizona
Gus Bilirakis Florida
Dan Bishop North Carolina
Mike Bost Illinois
Kevin Brady Texas
Mo Brooks Alabama
Ken Buck Colorado
Ted Budd North Carolina
Tim Burchett Tennessee
Michael C. Burgess Texas
Bradley Byrne Alabama
Ken Calvert California
Earl L. ‘Buddy’ Carter Georgia
Ben Cline Virginia
Michael Cloud Texas
Doug Collins Georgia
Mike Conaway Texas
Rick Crawford Arkansas
Dan Crenshaw Texas
Scott DesJarlais Tennessee
Mario Diaz-Balart Florida
Jeff Duncan South Carolina
Neal P. Dunn Florida
Tom Emmer Minnesota
Ron Estes Kansas
A. Drew Ferguson Georgia
Chuck Fleischmann Tennessee
Bill Flores Texas
Jeff Fortenberry Nebraska
Virginia Foxx North Carolina
Russ Fulcher Idaho
Matt Gaetz Florida
Greg Gianforte Montana
Bob Gibbs Ohio
Louie Gohmert Texas
Lance Gooden Texas
Sam Graves Missouri
Mark Green Tennessee
Morgan Griffith Virginia
Michael Guest Mississippi
Jim Hagedorn Minnesota
Andy Harris Maryland
Vicky Hartzler Missouri
Kevin Hern Oklahoma
Clay Higgins Louisiana
Jody Hice Georgia
Trey Hollingsworth Indiana
Richard Hudson North Carolina
Bill Huizenga Michigan
Bill Johnson Ohio
Mike Johnson Louisiana
Jim Jordan Ohio
John Joyce Pennsylvania
Fred Keller Pennsylvania
Mike Kelly Pennsylvania
Trent Kelly Mississippi
Steve King Iowa
David Kustoff Tennessee
Darin LaHood Illinois
Doug LaMalfa California
Doug Lamborn Colorado
Robert Latta Ohio
Debbie Lesko Arizona
Billy Long Missouri
Barry Loudermilk Georgia
Blaine Leutkemeyer Missouri
Kenny Marchant Texas
Roger Marshall Kansas
Kevin McCarthy California Minority leader
Tom McClintock California
Cathy McMorris Rogers Washington
Dan Meuser Pennsylvania
Carol D. Miller West Virginia
John Moolenaar Michigan
Alex Mooney West Virginia
Markwayne Mullin Oklahoma
Gregory Murphy North Carolina
Dan Newhouse Washington
Ralph Norman South Carolina
Steven Palazzo Mississippi
Gary Palmer Alabama
Greg Pence Indiana
Scott Perry Pennsylvania
Bill Posey Florida
Guy Reschenthaler Pennsylvania
Tom Rice South Carolina
Mike Rodgers Alabama
John Rose Tennessee
David Rouzer North Carolina
John Rutherford Florida
Steve Scalise Louisiana Minority whip
Austin Scott Georgia
Mike Simpson Idaho
Adrian Smith Nebraska
Jason Smith Missouri
Ross Spano Florida
Pete Stauber Michigan
Elise Stefanik New York
Gregory Steube Florida
Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson Pennsylvania
Tom Tiffany Wisconsin
William Timmons South Carolina
Jeff Van Drew New Jersey
Ann Wagner Missouri
Tim Walberg Michigan
Mark Walker North Carolina
Jackie Walorski Indiana
Michael Waltz Florida
Randy Weber Texas
Daniel Webster Florida
Brad Wenstrup Ohio
Bruce Westerman Arkansas
Roger Williams Texas
Joe Wilson South Carolina
Rob Wittman Virginia
Ron Wright Texas
Ted S. Yoho Florida
Lee Zeldin New York
IS IT REALLY ALL OVER? ELECTORAL COLLEGE WILL MEET ON MONDAY – AND TRUMP IS LIKELY TO TRY ANOTHER ROUND OF FIREWORKS IN JANUARY
With the end of the case Trump called the ‘big one,’ his legal options appear to have fizzled. It is possible Trump allies who lost in lower courts could seek to appeal more cases to the Supreme Court.
But those appeals wouldn’t likely reach the court until after Monday, when the Electoral College meets.
And the Texas appeal already included even far-fetched appeals from lower court cases, such as claims that voting machines ‘flipped’ votes from Trump to Biden.
The new Congress will convene on Jan. 3.
Congress meets in a joint session on Jan. 6, the day after the Georgia run-off elections.
It presents an opportunity for political fireworks, but it there are procedures in place for both chambers voting on any challenges to the electors that emerge.
According to the Electoral Count Act, if a state only sends one set of electoral votes, they will be counted unless both chambers ‘determine that they were not ”regularly given” by ”lawfully certified” electors,’ according to a Lawfare blog on the subject.
The Texas suit seeks to have the four states delay their participation, despite the Constitution’s call for a single meeting.
‘There are 20 million reasons’ the case will fail, Republican election lawyer Ben Ginsburg told CNN this week, referencing the number of people who would be disenfranchised if the Court decided as Texas proposes. ‘Now this is just a sour grapes case,’ he said.
NO DAY IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR MELLISSA THE STRIPPER WHO WAS TRUMP’S STAR WITNESS (OR FOR TED CRUZ OR THE KAMALA BIRTHER WHO WAS TRUMP’S LAWYER)
The Supreme Court Texas case, filed this week, featured an affidavit by Mellissa Carone, whose wild and antagonistic testimony went viral and got treated to a sketch on Saturday Night Live.
It references a case filed in Michigan supported by the affidavit, and it includes her sworn statement in the appendix for the case.
Carone was recently on probation after initially being charged with a computer crime.
Trump on Wednesday night told a White House Hanukkah party that he is going to ‘win this election’ if Supreme Court judges have ‘courage and wisdom’ to overturn results.
This came after Trump’s new lawyer produced a filing claiming there was something ‘deeply amiss’ in the election results.
The lawyer, John Eastman, had also penned an op-ed this summer doubting whether Vice President-elect Kamala Harris was eligible for office despite her being born in California.
The legal brief with Trump’s name on it, included a motion for Trump, identified as the president, ‘to intervene in his personal capacity as candidate for re-election’.
The brief included many of the same arguments Trump has put forward on his Twitter account – including Wednesday, when Trump tweeted no candidate has ever lost the White House while carrying Florida and Ohio.
‘The fact that nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen should come as no surprise,’ according to the filing.
‘President Trump prevailed on nearly every historical indicia of success in presidential elections.
‘For example, he won both Florida and Ohio; no candidate in history—Republican or Democrat—has ever lost the election after winning both States.’
Attorney John Eastman, pictured above, who filed the motion for Trump to intervene in the Texas lawsuit, penned an op-ed this summer doubting whether Vice President-elect Kamal Harris was eligible for office despite her being born in California
It also relied on statistical claims about the vote, in a race Trump has claimed was ‘rigged’ despite Joe Biden getting 7 million more votes than he did.
‘This, despite the fact that the nearly 75 million votes he received—a record for any incumbent President—was nearly 12 million more than he received in the 2016 election, also a record (in contrast to the 2012 election, in which the incumbent received 3 million fewer votes than he had four years earlier but nevertheless prevailed).’
‘These things just don’t normally happen, and a large percentage of the American people know that something is deeply amiss,’ according to the filing, which comes after passage of the ‘safe harbor’ deadline and after enough states certified their vote for Joe Biden to win the Electoral College.
Trump had asked Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to argue the case if the Supreme Court decides to listen to its merit.
Cruz argued numerous cases before the Supreme Court before he was elected to the Senate and been a loyal Trump defender, although he also ran for president in 2016.
By way of remedy, Trump asked that the vote be thrown out and for the high court to ‘direct’ that state legislatures ‘have the authority to appoint a new set of Electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause, or to appoint no Electors at all’ – which would have the result of nullifying millions of votes in the four states.
A DARING LAWSUIT – OR DOOMED TO HIT THE TRASH? NOW WE KNOW…
Texas AG Ken Paxton lawsuit made a legal Hail Mary by going straight to the Supreme Court – meaning he could either win big, or he could simply be ignored. In the end it was even worse: he got humiliated.
The Supreme Court is the correct place for disputes between states to be played out, but usually such disputes are long-running, such as over water rights. In 2014, Oklahoma and Nebraska asked the Supreme Court to stop Colorado’s marijuana legalization – but it declined to hear the case.
That could be well be the justices’ first response to Paxton.
To convince them to take the case, he had to convince them that the people of Texas – whom he represents – suffered harm from the election’s outcome, and that the four states either breached the Article 1 clause establishing how elections are run, or the Equal Protection clause, by making the votes of the people of Texas somehow less important than those of the swing states.
The states themselves pointed out that election law is dealt with in individual states, and that cases there have universally lost. If the case had gone to trial, they would have pointed to the results in federal circuit courts and – in Pennsylvania – federal appeals courts which have dismissed claims too.
The usual approach the justices take to disputes between states is to set up their own special court, under a ‘special master’ to investigate both sides’ cases, take evidence, and approach the case like its own trial.
That is because, unusually, the Supreme Court is starting from scratch rather than dealing with a case which has already made its way through the courts system and is very well defined.
Paxton would have had to present voluminous evidence to back up his demand, that millions of ballots be voided and the results of four swing states’ elections be overturned – rather than the two brief sets of papers he filed.
The core of Paxton’s case was that the four states changed mail-in ballot rules before the election, then used those to fraudulently switch the result to Biden from Trump.
The Supreme Court would have had to rule both that the four states acted unconstitutionally, and then that the way to deal with those actions is by voiding their elections. Such an extreme act runs in the face of the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year on ‘faithless electors,’ which allowed states to punish or remove those who planned to vote against the states’ winning candidate.
During the case, Justice Brett Kavanaugh spoke about ‘the chaos principle of judging’ saying if it’s a ‘a close call…we shouldn’t facilitate or create chaos.’
As for his evidence, Paxton faced an obvious challenge: his submission relied on a string of claims about both the constitutional actions of the states in allowing more widespread access to mail-in voting, and of fraud, which have already been slapped down by state and federal judges in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia.
Among the ‘evidence’ was that Republicans were not allowed to watch ballots being counted in Philadelphia, which was laughed out of court when a Trump lawyer admitted there was a ‘non-zero’ number of observers.
He also claimed that Georgia’s mail-in ballots would have gone to Trump if they had been rejected at the same rate as they were in 2016 – which the state has already ruled out happening.
In Michigan, the evidence included the affidavit of Jessy Jacob, already dismissed by a Detroit judge, claiming that that election workers coached voters to either vote Biden or straight Democrat by standing beside them in the voting station, and that she was asked not to seek photo ID from voters. The judge dismissed her claims as ‘generalized,’ said she did nothing about it when she claimed it was happening, and only came forward when Trump lost.
In Wisconsin Paxton claimed voting drop boxes were unconstitutional. The state’s attorney general invoked what is known as ‘laches,’ a defense that Paxton should have sued at the time the boxes were authorized, rather than waiting to see the outcome of the vote. It also included a claim from a USPS sub-contractor about ballots being backdated after polls closed – even though the state had already reported its result.
And in all four states Paxton quoted a statistical analysis: ‘The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin— independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000.’ But its basis is undeclared and comes from an energy economist, not an elections expert.
Now it will never be fully tested in court – and both sides of the case don’t need a statistician to tell them who won.
Republicans rage! Texas GOP chairman calls for secession, Diamond and Silk demand military intervention, and Rudy Giuliani fumes that its ‘censorship’ after the Supreme Court refused to hear a case to throw out millions of votes
Donald Trump supporters have voiced outrage after the Supreme Court refused to hear a case to throw out millions of American votes in the election, with Rudy Giuliani raging that its ‘censorship’, Diamond and Silk asking for military intervention and the Texas GOP chairman calling for secession.
The Supreme Court on Friday denied a Hail Mary effort by the attorney general of Texas who had asked the court to intervene and overturn the election in four states that went for Joe Biden, dealing a monumental blow to Trump’s flailing legal strategy.
The president’s loyalists instantly hit out at the decision calling for various forms of drastic action in response.
Texas GOP Chairman Allen West said some states should break away from the rest of the United States and ‘bond together’ in a call for secession not seen since the American Civil War while vloggers Diamond and Silk questioned: ‘where is the military?’
Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer and the man who has spearheaded his legal battle against the election result, appeared on Fox News’ Sean Hannity to cry ‘censorship’ and claim the ‘facts have been suppressed’.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany also joined the show to blast the Supreme Court for ‘dodging’ the lawsuit and ‘hiding behind procedure’.
Meanwhile, Roger Stone, Trump’s former adviser who was pardoned by the president for lying to Congress during its probe into Russia‘s involvement in the 2016 election, marched through Washington DC in protest with members of the Proud Boys, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled a hate group.
Texas GOP Chairman Allen West suggested states should secede from the union after the Supreme Court refused to hear a Texas-based case President Donald Trump hoped to use as a vehicle to overturn the results of the presidential election
West wrote, ‘Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that abide by the constitution,’ in a statement released shortly after the Supreme Court refused to take up the Trump-backed case
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mocked the idea of a new union being formed tweeting that it would be ‘a confederacy of dunces’
Texas GOP Chairman Allen West put out a statement suggesting states should secede from the union in response to the ruling.
‘This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable,’ West said in a statement after the ruling.
‘Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.’
His comments were quickly read as a push for secession, what southern states did in the lead-up to the Civil War, in a dispute over slavery.
Democrat socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mocked the idea of a new union being formed tweeting that it would be ‘a confederacy of dunces’.
Vloggers Diamond and Silk, aka Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson, also called for drastic action, tweeting a demand for military action.
‘If the Supreme Court can’t save our Republic, then where is the Military?’ they tweeted.
In a follow-up post they added: ‘There needs to be a Forensic Audit done by our Military in all the Swing states in question.
‘The ballot boxes need to be open, and the Dominion machines need to be examined for irregularities. All Illegal Ballots and Illegal tabulation counts should be removed!!’
Vloggers Diamond and Silk, aka Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson, also called for drastic action, tweeting a demand for military action
While some Trump supporters called for unprecedented action in outrage, Trump’s inner circle took aim at the Supreme Court over its ruling.
Giuliani fumed about the court’s decision as he spoke on Hannity from his hotel, where he is recovering from COVID-19.
He branded the move ‘censorship’ and a ‘scandal’ that will ‘go down in history’.
‘So far the facts have been suppressed, they’ve been subject to censorship by big media, censorship by big tech, censorship by the Democrat party, and censorship by the courts,’ he said.
‘What are you so afraid of?’ he asked.
Giuliani accused the Supreme Court of ‘evading its responsibility’
‘People in this country are entitled to a hearing on this,’ he said.
‘I feel the Supreme Court or at least seven of the justices have evaded their responsibility to try to bring this country together and give us a rational view of this case as opposed to the hysterical propaganda we’ve had so far.
‘These are very sound allegations, they may or may not be true, they have to be tested but that’s what the court is for. They can’t just dismiss it like that because it is too difficult to hear.’
Giuliani fumed about the court’s decision as he spoke on Hannity from his hotel, where he is recovering from COVID-19
He branded the move ‘censorship’ and a ‘scandal’ that will ‘go down in history’
He added: ‘And I think are evading their responsibility as the chief law enforcement agency – the chief court in this land.’
He attacked the Supreme Court justices for taking what he called a ‘see no evil, hear no evil’ approach.
‘No judge has been willing to give us a hearing about it – its see no evil, hear no evil keep it away from us, don’t let us have to deal with it it’s too controversial,’ he said.
Giuliani doubled down on unfounded claims that Trump ‘won’ the election, saying ‘President Trump, if you were to look at Pennsylvania, won Pennsylvania by 300,000 to 400,000 votes – it’s been stolen from him.’
He added: ‘I think this is going to be a terrible thing in American history… this is going to live in our history and the Supreme Court has made a terrible mistake in not getting this resolved in a fair, decent, and equitable way because it’s going to leave a real black mark with regard to the selection throughout our entire history.’
McEnany also appeared on Hannity where she hit out at the court saying it ‘dodged’ and ‘ignored’.
Kayleigh McEnany also appeared on Hannity where she hit out at the court saying it ‘dodged’ and ‘ignored’
‘We’ve gone state-by-state outlining the egregious equal protection violations and due process claims that were entirely ignored,’ she fumed
‘There’s no way to say it other than they dodged, they dodged, they hid behind procedure and they refused to use their authority to enforce the constitution,’ she said.
‘We’ve gone state-by-state outlining the egregious equal protection violations and due process claims that were entirely ignored.’
She went on to accuse ‘none of the judges’ on the court of giving ‘a view on the facts of the case’.
Instead, she said the case ‘was dismissed on standing.’
Meanwhile, Stone took his support of Trump marching through the nation’s capital with the extremist far-right group the Proud Boys, of which he is a member.
Proud Boys Chairman Enrique Tarrio was at the rally and addressed the crowd of Trump supporters near the Washington Monument Friday night.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, the group is a far-right males-only extremist group that has neo-fascist, violent, nationalistic, Islamophobic, and misogynistic views.