RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/19/democrats-and-media-are-reaping-fruit-of-4-years-of-anti-trump-conspiracy-theories/

If taking claims to court undermines democracy, how to defend Democrats’ vociferous and repeated claims that Donald Trump stole the election in 2016 with the help of Russia?
A prominent liberal legal academic who spent the last four years pushing outrageous, discredited, and debunked conspiracy theories about Donald Trump stealing the 2016 election said on Fox News Sunday that refusal to accept the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election threatens the country.

“He is undermining democracy because there are millions of people who will believe him even though there is nothing to his arguments and no evidence to back them,” Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe said of President Trump’s litigation regarding the November election.

As Trump and many of his 74 million voters express concern about the security of the 2020 election, in which many states rushed to expand mail-in balloting while dramatically lowering scrutiny of mail-in ballots, many media figures have condemned their efforts to litigate the results. The Washington Examiner’s executive editor Philip Klein wrote:

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/federal-election-commission-chairman-trump-campaign-bringing-legitimate

The Trump campaign is bringing “legitimate accusations” to court through affidavits of credible witnesses and other evidence used in its challenges to electoral outcomes in various states, Federal Election Commission Chairman Trey Trainor said.

Trainor said his review of evidence, including numerous affidavits claiming voter fraud and a sworn statement by a prominent mathematician flagging up to 100,000 Pennsylvania ballots, met the first level of legal scrutiny under what’s known as motion to dismiss or “Rule 12(b)(6)” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which would dismiss less credible claims.

Noting the subsequent legal threshold beyond a “motion to dismiss” is the “summary judgment phase,” Trainor said that under this phase, the credibility of witnesses is presumed to be accurate, especially given the caliber of the testimonies Trainor has observed to date.

“When considering a motion for summary judgment, a judge will view all evidence in the light most favorable to the movant’s opponent,” explains Cornell University Law School’s Legal Information Institute website.

“What I would be concerned with, if I were on the other side of these election contests that are going on around the country, is that if you look at the level of evidence that has been provided by these affidavits — hundreds of affidavits that corroborate events that have happened on the ground — in a summary judgment phase of these cases, you have to take the evidence of the plaintiff as being true,” Trainor told “Just the News AM” television show Friday morning.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/mathematics-prof-says-sworn-statement-many-56000-gop-ballots-pa-may-be

In a sworn declaration, a respected mathematician says his analysis of election data and phone interviews with Pennsylvania voters raises questions about as many as 100,000 absentee ballots requested in the key battleground state where President Trump and Joe Biden are separated by just about 82,000 votes.

Williams College Professor Steven Miller, a Yale and Princeton trained math expert, said he analyzed Pennsylvania ballot data collected by former Trump campaign data chief Matt Braynard as well as 2,684 voter interviews conducted by a phone bank and found two concerning patterns. One involved possible votes that were not counted, the other ballots that appeared to be requested by someone other than a registered voter.

“I estimate that the number of ballots that were either requested by someone other than the registered Republican or requested and returned but not counted range from 89,397 to 98,801,” Miller said in the sworn statement provided to Just the News. 

File
Miller_DeclarationAndAnalyisPA_GOP_BallotRequestData_2020_Final.pdf

According to Pennsylvania state data for early and absentee ballot requests, there are roughly 165,000 ballots requested in the names of registered GOP voters that had not been counted as of Nov. 16.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/intimidation-tactics-against-trump-lawyers-undermine-justice/?utm_source=

Two-hundred and fifty years ago, a young lawyer named John Adams risked professional and economic ruin when he defended British soldiers who were accused of firing into a crowd of protesters, killing five of them, in the Boston Massacre. Adams’ representation saved all nine soldiers from murder convictions and execution.

Today, both conservatives and progressives are disregarding Adams’ example and organizing campaigns to intimidate law firms who work for the Trump election effort. These efforts ignore lawyers’ role in our legal system as advocates for clients, including those who espouse unpopular positions, and confuse representation with approval of the clients’ actions or views. Regardless of how one views the Trump lawsuits, bullying the lawyers undermines the fair administration of justice.

The Lincoln Project – a group of Republican Never-Trumpers who campaigned against Trump and other Republican candidates this past election – has been urging lawyers at two firms representing Trump in election challenges (Jones Day and Porter Wright Morris & Arthur) to resign and has been calling on the firms’ clients to change their representation if the firms continue working on the lawsuits. At the other end of the political spectrum, ShutDownDC has organized protests outside offices of Jones Day, Porter Wright and a third firm, King & Spalding, and circulated the names, phone numbers, and email addresses of lawyers at the firms so they can be harassed.

The efforts appear to be succeeding. Late last week, Porter Wright announced it is withdrawing from a lawsuit it filed in federal court in Pennsylvania on behalf of Trump just a few days before, and a Jones Day partner was quoted as saying the firm would refrain from taking on additional election litigation.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16773/trump-lawyers-cancel-culture

Now, the Never-Trumper “Republicans” of the Lincoln Project… have dreamed up a way to self-righteously interfere with legal due process.

Reminder: our system of justice guarantees citizens the presumption of innocence and the ability to access the courts to address torts and grievances.

The larger point to consider is that should a Biden presidency come about, these sorts of tactics — and the general, national shift to centralized government control — will increasingly be compulsory. It is a philosophical thing. Big Government, Big Media, Big Tech, Big Medicine, Big Solutions — all at the expense of the individual: Individual rights, individual property, personal wealth, personal privacy, individual responsibility, personal conscience. Those will all have to be compromised supposedly for the greater good — especially if you supported Trump.

Thanks to The Lincoln Project, attorneys at Jones Day and Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur LLP are on “the List.” What list? The List of people to be identified, catalogued, written about and punished for cooperating with Republican election campaigns. Bloomberg News reported it a week ago and we have The Lincoln Project’s own Twitter feed explaining their thinking.

In their tweet announcing their project against the law firms, The Lincoln Project stated: “Whatever you think of the Administration’s legal arguments, targeting the sanctity of our elections is immoral & ineffective.” One wonders if they apply the same election integrity standards to themselves.

Attorneys with these two law firms (among others) are representing the election interests of President Trump and Vice President Pence. Legal representation, according to The Lincoln Project, must be suppressed and intimidated. People who help Trump-Pence must be put on The List. This was precisely the sort of list maintained by the Ministerium für Staatssicherheit in the not-so-distant past.

Just when you had deciphered and comprehended the consequences of today’s practical application of the Frankfurt School’s critical theory — how “deconstructing” people is the Cancel Culture — many (and here I include The Lincoln Project crew) take things to whole new low.

You are familiar with the tactics of the Cancel Culture: Target a person who says things (usually very effectively) they do not like; then manufacture some outrage over a supposed offense (real or imagined); whip things up exponentially, to a hysterical pitch via social media; maximize the controversy with additional murky claims and/or threats to anyone who may support the person or be within their “blast radius” (also known as “isolation”); issue non-negotiable demands for the person’s silencing, firing, removal, banning, etc. Viola! Cancelled.