Connect with us

Published

on

The U.S. Third Circuit of Appeals in Pennsylvania on Friday rejected President Donald Trump’s campaign appeal in their challenge of the state’s election results, a move that Trump’s lawyers said will allow them to expedite their lawsuits to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“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 [Pennsylvania] state legislature,” Trump lawyers Jenna Ellis and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani wrote in response.

“On to SCOTUS!” they wrote, referring to the Supreme Court.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that the Trump campaign’s challenge doesn’t have merit, saying that “voters, not lawyers, choose the President. Ballots, not briefs, decide elections. The ballots here are governed by Pennsylvania election law.”

“No federal law requires poll watchers or specifies where they must live or how close they may stand when votes are counted. Nor does federal law govern whether to count ballots with minor state-law defects or let voters cure those defects. Those are all issues of state law, not ones that we can hear. And earlier lawsuits have rejected those claims,” wrote the three-judge panel (pdf).

The court also asserted that Trump’s legal team did not provide evidence of their claims of fraud.

Earlier this week, the Trump campaign asked the appeals court to review a lower court decision that rejected their request to amend their claims in another complaint. They also asked the court for an injunction to block Pennsylvania’s certification of its votes.

Trump’s lawsuit argued that mail-in ballots were handled separately in counties that leaned heavily Democratic, in contrast with counties that leaned Republican. Trump’s campaign also said that some GOP poll observers were blocked from watching vote-tabulation efforts and could not witness the process or, more importantly, contest any alleged fraud or irregularities. In a hearing this week in front of GOP state senators in Pennsylvania, several witnesses, including one in Philadelphia, said that election officials forced them to stand sometimes as much as 200 feet away from the vote-counting.

A district court judge on Nov. 21 dismissed the campaign’s lawsuit, ruling that the lawsuit had “strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations.”

The Third Court in their Friday ruling rejected both requests, saying that they saw no evidence that vote counting was carried out improperly or fraudulently.

“The Campaign tries to repackage these state-law claims as unconstitutional discrimination. Yet its allegations are vague and conclusory,” the court found.

It also said that the remedy the campaign had asked for was “grossly disproportionate” to the challenge raised.

“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,” the judges ruled.

Ellis and Giuliani have both previously stipulated that they want to take their lawsuits to the Supreme Court.

In their Pennsylvania hearing, both Ellis and Giuliani suggested to the GOP state senators that they should vote against certifying the results of the election in the Keystone State, which has 20 Electoral College votes. It came as numerous witnesses were called to speak in front of the officials, alleging significant irregularities and security lapses in various areas.

For example, Greg Stenstrom, who, besides being a poll watcher, said he’s an expert in security fraud, told the senators that they saw numerous violations, including how mail-in ballots were handled in Delaware County. In one situation, he said that data on USB cards were uploaded to voting machines by a warehouse supervisor without being observed by a poll watcher, which he said he saw happen at least 24 times.

The case is cited Donald J. Trump For President, Inc. v. Boockvar (District Court: 4:20-cv-02078; Appeals Court: 20-3371).

Advertisement
26 Comments
  • george eady says:

    AMERICANS HAS SEEN JEST CORRUPT THIS NATION IS. RIGHT OR RONG DOES NOT MATTER. THAT IS NOT THE NEW LAW . THE NEW LAW IS STAY WITH YOUR PARTY NO MATTER WHAT . AND LAWS DOES NOT MATTER . THIS IS BAD FOR AMERICA .BUT NOT AS BAD IS IT GOING TO BE . THIS CRAP WILL NEVER STOP. JEST GROW AND MOVE FORWARD . UNTIL AMERICA IS DESTORYED FROM THE IN SIDE OUT. AND THEM RATS DID IT. AND WHEN THE REST OF AMERICA SEE THIS ALL HELL WILL BRAKE OUT. I JEST READ WHERE BIDEN IS MAKEING THEM 11 MILLION LEGAL . WHEN THEM AND THE MILLIONS MORE TAKE THE JOBS OF THEM THAT VOTED DNC . THEN AND ONLY THEY WILL THEY KNOW. (THAT THEM DEMOC-RATES LOOK OUT FOR EVERY ONE BUT US AMERICANS

    • Kenneth Mazikowski says:

      Mt. Biden is intent with the Left to infest our Nation for all time by making 11 million illegal alien law breakers to have the ability and obliged to vote for Democrat/Communists to insure they will never loose any election in the future. I see that the Harris regime will be in charge as soon as they can invoke the 25 the Amendment.

  • Matt says:

    Tossing out fake ballots is not disenfranchising anyone.

  • There is an old saying..”you can give a thristy horse water but you can’t make him drink it.” Same with this fraudulent election. Over 73 million will turn their back to Biden and NEVER call him the President. He can sweet talk us all he wants..wrong is wrong. Your turn now Joe..4 years of shunning, rejection, vitriole and ridicule.

  • Margaret j. Jaeger says:

    The judges must be in the fix as this report says there was ample testimony to the mishandling of ballots supposedly all Mailed in. And again, they stated the idea that ‘they find a million supposedly mailed in ballots were fraudulent was not proven. They were surely told that counties had many after hours deliveries of incorrectly filled in ballots but the judges supposed they were all legit. They didn’t seem to take into account that there were more ballots …voters…than were registered. No legit voter would have their ballots tossed either as the fraudukant ones could be ifentifued in most cases. I hope to heaven I didn’t dumbly bite for such judges in my state.

  • CF

    News

    New Details Emerge on Antifa Activist Charged for Role in Capitol Riot

    Published

    on

    The self-described left-wing activist recently arrested for allegedly taking part in the storming of the U.S. Capitol — later claiming he was there to “document” it — allegedly wore a gas mask and had a knife at the time of the siege, court papers show.

    John “Jayden X” Sullivan is due to appear in court at 4 p.m. local time Friday in connection with charges for civil disorder, violent entry or disorderly conduct and entering a restricted building or grounds.

    The 26-year-old self-described journalist and activist was arrested Thursday and has been in the custody of Toeele County, Utah, authorities, officials previously said. Sources told Fox News Sullivan is not known to be affiliated with Antifa.

    In addition to the ballistic vest Sullivan was previously reported to have worn while inside the Capitol, court papers show he also wore a gas mask and claimed to have had a knife.

    Sullivan, who filmed his time in the federal building — including the fatal shooting of California Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt — later shared the footage with authorities.

    In one clip, Sullivan can be heard saying: “Hey guys, I have a knife. I have a knife. Let me up,” court documents state.

    In one video, Sullivan can allegedly be heard cheering on the crowd as they broke through the final barricade before the Capitol and saying: “We did this together. … We are all a part of history.”

    In at least two encounters, Sullivan can be heard on video telling officers to stand down so they don’t get hurt and saying “the people have spoken,” according to an affidavit.

    Sullivan, who founded activist group Insurgence USA, told Rolling Stone he was acting in such a way because he “had to relate to these people.”

    He continued: “And build trust in the short amount of time I had there to get where I need to go … to the front of the crowd to see the dynamic between the police and the protesters, because nobody wants to see the backs of people’s heads from a far-off distance.”

    He told Fox News was at the Capitol siege to “document” the events, and said he frequently attends and films protests.

    “As far as being able to understand who is in the crowd, based on being around protests a lot … I didn’t see any people who were originally at BLM protests,” he told Fox News at the time.

    He could not be reached for comment following his arrest.

    Sullivan was also charged with rioting and criminal mischief on July 13 following a June protest in Provo that resulted in an SUV driver being shot while driving through the two opposing groups. The case is still pending.

    Continue Reading

    News

    Secret Service Refutes WaPo Story Claiming that Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner Denied Agents Restroom Access in Their Home

    Published

    on

    The Washington Post reported Thursday that U.S. Secret Service agents assigned to protect Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump have been forced to go to great lengths to use the bathroom because the couple forbids their protectors from using the facilities in their home.

    But a spokesperson for the Secret Service says The Post’s claims were not true.

    The Post made waves with a story alleging that Kushner and Trump told agents they were not allowed to use any of the six restrooms in their Washington, D.C., home, causing the guardians major inconveniences whenever nature called.

    “After resorting to a porta-potty, as well as bathrooms at the nearby home of former president Barack Obama and the not-so-nearby residence of Vice President Pence, the agents finally found a toilet to call their own,” the newspaper reported, adding, “But it came at a cost to U.S. taxpayers. Since September 2017, the federal government has been spending $3,000 a month — more than $100,000 to date — to rent a basement studio, with a bathroom, from a neighbor of the Kushner family.”

    According to The Post—which published pictures and details of the Kushner-Trump residence—”a spokeswoman for the Secret Service initially declined to comment, writing in an email that the agency ‘does not discuss the means, methods or resources utilized to carry out our protective mission.'”

    Yet, after the allegations went trending on Twitter and spurred on additional headlines, the agency spokesperson corrected the record.

    The Post reported:

    But on Thursday evening, eight hours after this story appeared online, she sent a second email with a new statement, saying that the Secret Service tries to have minimal impact on households it protects. “In accordance with this practice, Secret Service personnel do not request access to the facilities at private residences,” she wrote. “Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner have not denied Secret Service personnel access to their home to include use of the restroom.”

    The White House also denied the claim, with spokesman Judd Deere telling the outlet:

    “When discussions regarding protecting their home were initially had in 2017, Ivanka and Jared made clear that their home would always be open to the incredible men and women on their detail. It was only after a decision by the [Secret Service] was made that their detail sought other accommodations,. The Kushners have a tremendous amount of respect for the servicemen and women on their detail and for the United States Secret Service as a whole. Their home will always be open to them and they have immense gratitude for their service over the last four years.”

    After the Secret Service spokeswoman issued her statement to The Post refuting the claims, an assistant to President Donald Trump tweeted, “The @washingtonpost story about Jared and Ivanka today was a lie. The story never made sense, and was simply not true. Now the Secret Service has even denied the story.”

    Continue Reading

    News

    Jacob Blake Opens Up on Police Shooting, Says He Didn’t Want to be the ‘Next George Floyd’ — Which is Why He Walked Away from Police — and Admits He Was Armed

    Published

    on

    Jacob Blake, who was shot at least seven times in the back by a Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officer — says that he was worried he was going to become the “next George Floyd,” which prompted him to walk away from responding officers.

    He also admitted that he was armed.

    A Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officer shot Blake in the back seven times during an Aug. 23 call for a domestic dispute. The officers who shot Blake were ultimately cleared, and not charged with any crimes after the investigation revealed that Blake was, in fact, armed with a knife at the time he was shot, and that the officer reasonably believed that Blake might harm him or the children in the car.

    The attorney for the officer who shot Blake has noted publicly that the officer believed that Blake was attempting to kidnap the children in the purportedly stolen car that precipitated Blake’s interaction with the police.

    Following the shooting, riots and protests erupted across Wisconsin, after Blake was repeatedly and erroneously described as having been “unarmed” at the time he was shot.

    Blake, who is partially paralyzed as a result of the shooting, spoke to “Good Morning America’s” Michael Strahan on Thursday about the August shooting that took place outside of a Kenosha-area home.

    On the incident, Blake recalled, “I was like, ‘He’s shooting me.’ I couldn’t believe it, so I kind of sat down in the car … put my hands up, because I didn’t want him to shoot me in my face or in my head or nothing. He just kept shooting, kept shooting. My babies are right here, my babies. So after he stopped shooting me, I said, ‘Daddy loves you no matter what.”

    “I thought it was going to be the last thing I said to them,” he admitted. “Thank God it wasn’t. I didn’t want to be the next George Floyd. I didn’t want to die.”

    He told Strahan, “I resisted to getting beat on. What I mean by that is not falling, not letting them put their head on my neck. That’s all I was thinking.”

    According to CNN, “Blake [said he] picked up the knife and began to walk toward the driver’s door of the SUV, away from the officers” during the altercation.

    “I shouldn’t have picked it up,” Blake said, admitting that he “wasn’t thinking clearly” at the time.

    Blake said that he “intended to put the knife in the SUV and then lay on the ground to submit to the police officers.”

    “If they did it there and they killed me there, everybody would see it,” he reasoned.

    A September report from the Kenosha Police Union stated that Blake reportedly confronted responding officers following the domestic dispute call.

    The report alleged that Blake reportedly put one of the responding officer in a headlock position, and was reportedly armed with a knife that he refused to drop.

    When Blake attempted to get back into his vehicle, the officer shot him multiple times.

    Officers reportedly saw a knife on the floor of Blake’s vehicle during the attempted detainment.

    At the time, Kenosha Police Union Attorney Brendan Matthews said that officers were responding to the residence of Blake’s ex-girlfriend, with whom he has children. The unnamed woman accused Blake of sexual assault in May, and in August, phoned police to report that Blake was reportedly attempting to steal her keys and her vehicle. Previous reporting noted that Blake was not supposed to be at the woman’s residence due to the purported May assault.

    Last week, Kenosha County District Attorney Michael Graveley said that the officer who shot Blake would not be charged, and said that the officer fired in self-defense as Blake was “actively resisting” arrest.

    Blake is suing the Kenosha Police Department for reportedly violating his civil rights during the incident.

    Continue Reading

    News

    GOP Congressman Who Lost Legs In War Responds To Attack From CNN’s Tapper On If He Supports Democracy

    Published

    on

    Disabled war veteran Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) slammed CNN host Jake Tapper on Wednesday after Tapper called out Mast’s “commitment” to American democracy after Mast asked whether members of Congress had questioned individuals involved in last week’s riot before initiating impeachment this week.

    “On January 6th, thousands broke the law by taking siege of our capital here with us inside. Has any one of those individuals who brought violence on the capital, been brought here to answer whether they did that because of our president?” Mast asked on the House floor, which was highlighted during an interview that he did Thursday morning on Fox News. “It appears I will receive no answer. I will yield my time back.”

    Tapper responded to Mast’s remark, saying on live television, “Congressman Brian Mast, a Republican from Florida, who lost his legs, by the way, fighting for democracy abroad, although I don’t know what his—I don’t know about his commitment to it here in the United States.”

    Mast initially responded by writing on Twitter: “I lost two legs for @jaketapper’s right to say whatever the hell he wants, but that free speech also protects the Republicans he is so eager to condemn for asking Constitutional questions about the election.”

    During his interview on Fox News this morning, Mast said that the message he wanted to deliver on the House floor was:

    The message was simple. You have 430 plus members of Congress, they’re responsible for making the highest laws in the land that pertain to all-Americans and they are about to vote one way or another on whether the president incited other people to do something and there wasn’t one of those members that could say they heard any questioning of the people that were said to be incited. Nobody was asked do you do this because of the president? Do you do it because of something he said he year ago or something something Giuliani said on January 6th? Did you go there because of the president but violence was your own thing? Did he tell you to be peaceful? Nobody can say they spoke to one of those individuals and that has to be the most dangerous precedent for this body to set to say if you are an American out there this is how we are going to hold you accountable for inciting somebody else. We’re not going to bother to ask any questions at all, we’re just going to jump to a conclusion and rush to judgment. That is totally un-American, wholly in opposition to the due process that every American is owed.

    Mast was also asked to respond to Tapper’s remarks, to which he responded, “I’m going to say to Mr. Tapper the same thing that half of America is saying right now: Hold me to a high standard, don’t hold me to a double standard.”

    “And me asking if any of these lawmakers that are about to vote have gone through any questioning, any hearings, and asked any questions of anybody, that’s an appropriate question and it speaks to the foundation of our democracy. It doesn’t diminish it,” he continued. “And I would give this statement to him as well, it is not as important in America, especially today with all the division that we have, that I say this is what I think about you. We got to get to the point that we’re saying, this is why I think something, now I can say this is why I think you’re wrong and we can have a real debate and hopefully you end up learning something about each other instead of just coming away with two people that are pissed off at one another.”

    When further pressed by one of the co-hosts on Fox & Friends about how he felt about what Tapper said, Mast said, “My commitment to democracy, to my country, is unwavering.”

    “I love this place so much. It literally breaks my heart to see the divide that exists in it. I love our democracy,” he continued. “For all of our problems, there is no government that I would rather be a part of anywhere in this world. And to strengthen that and keep it strong, we have to ask those questions. It’s not the opposite of that where we don’t ask those questions, don’t ask lawmakers, ‘did you take the time to ask somebody or interview somebody or have a hearing?’ That has to be the foundation of having justice. It’s asking questions and waiting for the answer in silence until somebody gives it to you or taking their silence as an answer. That’s my response to him, I love this place.”

    Continue Reading

    Trending Today

    >