EXCLUSIVE: Fani Willis Possesses Evidence Exonerating Georgia’s Alternate Electors
Fulton County DA Fani Willis has evidence exonerating Republicans she's targeting in her 98-page Georgia indictment.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider a handful of high-profile election challenges at its mid-February conference taking place this week. If the court chooses to accept any of the lawsuits, they will likely be heard and decided in October.
The cases include lawsuits filed by pro-Trump attorneys Lin Wood and Sidney Powell in Georgia and Michigan, a lawsuit filed by Pennsylvania Republican state Rep. Mike Kelly, and two lawsuits filed in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by former President Donald Trump's campaign.
The lawsuits collectively allege that unlawful conduct took place in several battleground states during the 2020 presidential election, such as the unconstitutional expansion of mail-in voting by state election officials, the failure to enforce security measures for mail-in ballots, the denial of meaningful access for Republican poll watchers, and technical issues involving voting machines.
After the lawsuits were rejected by lower courts in the weeks following the election, attorneys representing plaintiffs in the lawsuits made their appeals to the Supreme Court in short order, but the court opted not to consider the cases during a turbulent transition period.
Now, all of the cases mentioned above are scheduled for a conference taking place this Friday, February 19, according to records on the Supreme Court's website.
In nearly every plea, attorneys backing Trump's election challenges insisted their cases be heard prior to President Joe Biden's inauguration on Jan. 20, or else their success would be unlikely, the Washington Examiner reported. However, even now that Biden's inauguration has come and gone, the lawsuits have not been withdrawn.
"Our legal issue remains important and in need of the court's review," Trump lawyer John Eastman told the Examiner in reference to Pennsylvania's handling of the 2020 election. Kelly's lawyer Greg Teufel added that he has no plans to drop the lawsuit.
The attorneys likely believe their lawsuits can set in motion the advance of election security legislation even if they did not affect the 2020 presidential election, as originally intended.
Even now, Republican lawmakers across the country are pushing for legislation to reform elections, especially reining in widespread mail-in voting.
The Supreme Court put an end to one of the last ditch efforts to overturn the official results of the 2020 election when it said on Friday that it would not hear a lawsuit by the state of Texas.
The order from the Supreme Court was brief and said simply that the plaintiff did not have standing to sue over the manner in which other states run their elections.
The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.
Justice Alito offered a separate statement, to which Justice Thomas agreed.
In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.
The order likely dooms any legal recourse President Donald Trump has to deny the official results saying former Vice President Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election.
Supreme Court rejects Texas' effort to toss out election results in 4 key stateswww.youtube.com
A federal judge on Monday dismissed the "Kraken" election fraud lawsuit filed in Georgia by attorney Sidney Powell, who sought to decertify the Georgia presidential election results declaring former Vice President Joe Biden the winner.
Judge Timothy Batten of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia listened to arguments for a little more than an hour before ruling from the bench to grant a motion to dismiss from lawyers for the state of Georgia, WSB-TV reported. He said that this sort of case belongs in state court, not federal court, that the plaintiffs lacked standing, and that Powell waited too long to file her complaint about Dominion Voting Systems machines.
"The courts have convincingly held that these types of cases are not properly before federal courts. These are state elections. State courts should evaluate these proceedings from start to finish," Batten said.
"Moreover, the plaintiffs simply do not having standing to bring these claims," he added.
"Additionally, I find that the plaintiffs waited too long to file this suit," Batten said. "Their primary complaint involves the Dominion ballot marking devices. They say those machines are susceptible to fraud. There is no reason they could not have followed the administrative procedure act to the rule-making authority that had been exercised by the Secretary of State."
"This suit could have been filed months ago at the time these machines were adopted," Batten concluded. "Instead the plaintiffs waited until over three weeks after the election to file the suit. There's no question in my mind that if I were to deny the motion to dismiss, the matter would be brought before the 11th Circuit, and the 11th Circuit would reverse me."
Powell in recent weeks claimed that her "massive" lawsuit would "save" the Trump presidency by uncovering evidence of a widespread conspiracy to commit election fraud in the 2020 presidential election. She alleged, among several other claims, that international and domestic persons used Dominion Voting Systems, the company that manufactures the voting machines in Georgia, to fix the election by switching votes for Trump to Biden.
In arguing to have the case dismissed, the defendants pointed out that Georgia has certified its election results three times: Once after the first count, a second time in a hand-counted audit of the 5 million ballots cast, and a third recount that confirmed the results from the previous two.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said Monday that he will recertify the state election results, confirming that Joe Biden won Georgia by roughly 12,000 votes.
"Today the Secretary of State's office will be re-certifying our state's election results," Raffensperger said. "Then the safe harbor under the United States Code to name electors is tomorrow, and then they will meet on December 14th to officially elect the next president."
Additionally, a federal judge in Michigan denied an emergency request filed by Powell to overturn the election in that state, making similar arguments about the timing of Powell's lawsuit and the complaint being moot and adding that the court lacks the power to overturn an election.
"Plaintiffs ask this court to ignore the orderly statutory scheme established to challenge elections and to ignore the will of millions of voters," U.S. District Judge Linda Parker wrote in her 36-page opinion. "This, the Court cannot, and will not, do."
Parker also said that "the ship has sailed" on this case and that the lawsuit was filed too late.
"Plaintiffs could have lodged their constitutional challenges much sooner than they did, and certainly not three weeks after Election Day and one week after certification of almost three million votes," Parker wrote.
She also criticized the allegations of fraud made in Powell's affidavits as "an amalgamation of theories, conjecture, and speculation that such alterations were possible" (emphasis hers).
"With nothing but speculation and conjecture that votes for President Trump were destroyed, discarded or switched to votes for Vice President Biden, plaintiffs' equal protection claim fails," her opinion stated.
On Nov. 22 before this lawsuit was filed, President Trump's legal team distanced itself from Powell in a statement making clear that she "is practicing law on her own" and "is not a member of the Trump legal team," despite the fact that she appeared with Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani in a press conference just days earlier.
A panel of three Republican-appointed federal judges on Friday rejected an appeal from the Trump campaign to block the state of Pennsylvania from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election.
"Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy," said Judge Stephanos Bibas, who was appointed to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the Senate in 2017. "Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof.
"We have neither here," he wrote in the court's opinion.
The Trump campaign had asked the 3rd Circuit Court to reverse a decision by a lower court judge who had rejected the campaign's claims of unfair treatment of Republican poll watchers and mail-in ballots. Some Pennsylvania counties told voters they could fix defective ballots and others did not. The campaign also asserted that the Pennsylvania secretary of state and some counties restricted Republican poll watchers. The Trump campaign filed a lawsuit claiming this was a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the case, saying he had "no authority to take away the right to vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens."
The campaign appealed to the 3rd Circuit on the narrow ground that Judge Brann did not permit Trump's lawyers to amend their lawsuit a second time. But the 3rd Circuit said the District Court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to grant Trump's lawyers' request.
Reacting to the decision, Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis, speaking for Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani as well, said, "The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover up the allegations of massive fraud."
"We are very thankful to have had the opportunity to present proof and the facts to the PA state legislature," Ellis tweeted. "On to SCOTUS!"
In his opinion, Trump-appointed Judge Bibas noted that Giuliani "stressed" that the Trump campaign "doesn't plead fraud" and asserted to the District Court that "this is not a fraud case."
"Instead, it objects that Pennsylvania's Secretary of State and some counties restricted poll watchers and let voters fix technical defects in their mail-in ballots. It offers nothing more," Bibas said.
"Most of the claims in the Second Amended Complaint boil down to issues of state law. But Pennsylvania law is willing to overlook many technical defects. It favors counting votes as long as there is no fraud. Indeed, the Campaign has already litigated and lost many of these issues in state courts," he continued.
"The Campaign tries to repackage these state-law claims as unconstitutional discrimination," Bibas added. "Yet its allegations are vague and conclusory. It never alleges that anyone treated the Trump campaign or Trump votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or Biden votes. And federal law does not require poll watchers or specify how they may observe. It also says nothing about curing technical state-law errors in ballots. Each of these defects is fatal, and the proposed Second Amended Complaint does not fix them. So the District Court properly denied leave to amend again.
"Nor does the Campaign deserve an injunction to undo Pennsylvania's certification of its votes. The Campaign's claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters. Plus, tossing out millions of mail-in ballots would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate and upsetting all down-ballot races too. That remedy would be grossly disproportionate to the procedural challenges raised. So we deny the motion for an injunction pending appeal."