The joke that has become Rudi Giuliani yesterday in a Pennsylvania court pretty much laid out Orange Jesus's hilarious legal strategy.
First, he wanted the entire election in PA to be thrown out when he put forward two people who said they were not allowed to cure their votes
He then displayed ignorance of basic law.
And then, the clincher
Then he went full tinfoil hat batshit crazy whacko
Then he forgot whom Trump was running against
You can't make this shit up.
If you took this as a script to a Hollywood movie studio, they'd reject it as being too implausible.
First, he wanted the entire election in PA to be thrown out when he put forward two people who said they were not allowed to cure their votes
Trump is seeking to stop the certification of Pennsylvania’s vote in the Nov. 3 election, alleging that Republican voters in the state were illegally disadvantaged because some Democratic-leaning counties allowed voters to fix errors on their mail ballots. Two voters named as co-plaintiffs with Trump’s campaign in the long-shot suit had their ballots voided and allege that they were not given a chance to correct their mistakes.
“You’re alleging that the two individual plaintiffs were denied the right to vote,” [US District Judge Matthew W] Brann said. “But at bottom, you’re asking this court to invalidate more than 6.8 million votes, thereby disenfranchising every single voter in the commonwealth. Can you tell me how this result can possibly be justified?”
He then said that poll workers were not allowed to observe the election, something his own legal team withdrew from the complaint.In response, Giuliani said that Trump’s campaign was seeking only to throw out about 680,000 ballots cast in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, because, he said, Republican observers were not allowed to watch them being counted.
But Trump’s attorneys had removed legal claims relating to that issue in an amended version of the lawsuit they filed over the weekend, the judge reminded him.
“The poll-watching claims were deleted,” Brann told Giuliani. “They’re now not before this court, so why should I consider them now?”
He then displayed ignorance of basic law.
Brann asked what standard of review he should apply in the case. “I think the normal one,” Giuliani replied.
“Maybe I don’t understand what you mean by strict scrutiny,” Giuliani said at another point.
At a different moment, Giuliani said: “I’m not quite sure what ‘opacity’ means. It probably means you can see.”
The judge responded: “It means you can’t.”
And then, the clincher
The president’s attorney opened his appearance in court with a broad claim: that the Trump campaign was alleging “widespread nationwide voter fraud.”
But he was unable to provide evidence of any fraud, and said later under questioning from Brann that the lawsuit did not allege fraud as a matter of law and that “this is not a fraud case.”
Then he went full tinfoil hat batshit crazy whacko
Without citing any evidence, Giuliani painted a sinister picture of Democratic Party machines conspiring to fix the election against Trump. He alleged without proof that mail ballots counted after Election Day in cities such as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh were somehow faked to help Democrat Joe Biden make up a lead that Trump held among in-person voters on Election Day, whose ballots were counted first.
Then he forgot whom Trump was running against
“The Trump campaign has been treated totally differently than the Bush campaign,” Giuliani said, misstating the name of President-elect Biden.
You can't make this shit up.
If you took this as a script to a Hollywood movie studio, they'd reject it as being too implausible.
