Courts Refuse Considering Trump’s Election Claims On The Merits

The last election case from 2020 ended on Monday. They rejected Trump v. Wisconsin Election Commission.

The internal disagreements always counted on the court as a pressure-relief valve. The judges could bring peace and correct decisions from the car dealer to divorces and kids’ alimentations.

Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here:  https://t.me/TheTrueDefender

Currently, America is so divided, so we need the courts to bring us back. The most important thing now is that the losing side knows that it was given a fair shake. Justice was served, even though it wasn’t in your advantage.

Besides all the legal things in America, Americans remained divided.

According to numerous studies, Biden didn’t win the elections legally.

A Rasmussen survey proved this, and said that this answer gave 61% from the respondents. From them. 34% said that something happened, and some illegal things occurred.
But now, the election is over, and Biden is in the White House, inauguration happened. Following all these things, why did ABC’s George Stephanopoulos ask the U.S. senator-

“Can’t you just say the words: This election was not stolen?” Why must he shout, “There were 86 challenges filed by President Trump and his allies in court. All were dismissed!”

Taking Stock Of The 2020 Election Case List

The Election Case List included more than 80 cases that appealed in different courts and those who didn’t connect with Trump or his team.

Twelve were in Pennsylvania, 6 in Georgia, and two or three in different states. Of course, there was a lawsuit from Texas to Pennsylvania, which could have changed the results. For sure, there are a lot of other cases. We need to dig deeper and see what they told us about the cases and what they have hidden.

According to the Federalist:

“A review of them shows that, contrary to a common narrative, few were ever considered on the merits.”

Death by Technicalities.

Firstly, we need to separate the cases which are helping us and which aren’t! For example, the lawsuit was dismissed by a Georgia judge because the plaintiff sued an improper party, we didn’t learn anything. But instead of this, we can discover a lot by hearing the merits of why the ballot rejection rate significantly fall due to the 2020 election.

Secondly, why did 20,000 people vote in Georgia who don’t live there, and when Georgia’s electoral votes were allotted by around 12,000 margins to Biden?

No one gets to know the answers to these questions. The reason why this is so is that Brad Raffensperger wasn’t a potential candidate, so per state law wasn’t liable.

It is the same case with the Trump lawsuit in Michigan. He stated that the law was violated and asked to stop counting the votes.

The Federalist said:

“The judge simultaneously relieved the secretary of state of responsibility for any wrongdoing because she had issued guidance requiring admission of credentialed challengers.”

The judge commented that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson didn’t have responsibility for video monitoring of drop boxes.

A lawsuit in Pennsylvania stated:
“Approximately 144,000 to 288,000 completed mail-in and/or absentee ballots”, and there may have been illegal based testimonies.
“The contractor said he was hired to haul a truck of what he believed to be this many completed mail-in ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. The complaint also alleged there was “evidence” of ballots that were backdated at a postal facility in Erie.”

The State’s Election Code required that the requests need to be filled in 20 days since the alleged violation. So, we could never know whether that truck in the pallets brought completed ballots, sufficient to change the election results completely.

In Wisconsin, the Trump v. Evers suit accused and pointed that violations happened in Milwaukee and Dane Counties when municipal clerks issued absentee ballots without the written app, so they are illegally filled.
But the Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to hear the lawsuit.

Absurd: Shall doesn’t mean Shall.

A state Supreme Court judge from Pennsylvania should check the eligibility of 2,349 mail-in ballots that were inappropriately filled.

In the court’s decision, he said:
“We agree with the Campaign’s observation that…the General Assembly set forth the requirements for how a qualified elector may cast a valid absentee or mail-in ballot … We further agree that these sections of the Election Code specifically provide that each voter ‘shall (emphasis added) fill out, date, and sign’ the declaration on the outside envelope. We do not agree with the Campaign’s contention, however, that because the General Assembly used the word ‘shall’ in this context, it is of necessity that the directive is a mandatory one …”

My question is, why all of them wrote laws? Maybe everything would have been better If Pennsylvania Supreme Court would do everything differently if the rulings were from open interpretation.

Another lawsuit said that Democrats implemented a “notice and cure” policy, so the defective ballots could be fixed and counted, but the Republicans disagreed.

The denial of their votes harmed two different plaintiffs, but they had a deficit of sanding, and the democrat counties had no relation with the denial of Individual Plaintiff’s ability to vote.
Resulting from it, the “Catch 22” was created. One must present direct harm from an unrelated party to prevail.

Too Early and Too Late

Very commonly, Republicans found themselves in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation regarding the challenges to election laws.

Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue sued before the U.S. Senate run-offs, alleging harm would happen from unconstitutional election procedures.

The counsel shared that the court “dismissed the case for lack of standing, reasoning that ‘the Supreme Court instructs that a theory of future injury is too speculative to satisfy the well-established requirement that threatened injury must be certainly impending.'” The reason for this dismissal was that it was too early.

In the same state, Sidney Powell’s lawsuit was dismissed. The reason here is: he was too late.

Another example happened in Trump v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, where the judge dismissed the president’s lawsuit saying: “issues he plainly could have raised before the vote occurred.”

This is the evidence that there were illegalities.

The Clock Ran Out: January 6.

According to the Federalist:
“Trump had filed suit on December 4 in Georgia (Trump v. Raffensperger) alleging violations of state election law and the inclusion of specific ineligible votes: 66,247 underage votes, 2,423 persons not registered, 15,700 who had changed address, 1,043 who illegally listed a P.O. box address as their address, 8,718 who died prior to their votes being cast, 92 absentee ballots counted prior to the date those voters requested a ballot, 217 ballots shown as applied for and sent out and received on the same day, and 2,560 votes from felons with uncompleted sentences. These were significant numbers in an election that was decided by fewer than 12,000 votes.”

Also, 305,701 had applied for a missing ballot, precisely 180 days before Election Day.

The suit was withdrawn on January 7, and there wasn’t even one issue solved.

“The legal battle continued, and the state’s counsel eventually demanded in a January 3 letter that all lawsuits against Kemp, Raffensperger, and the State Elections Board be dropped to “cooperatively share information.” Otherwise, they would remain in a “litigation posture”—quite a telling comment. Why was cooperation ever resisted?”


In these elections, Trump was forced to play six-dimensional chess, in six different states, and everything was planned months before the elections.

The election in 2020 included more than 155 million votes. But, 300,000 votes in six different states decided America’s future.

“The one thing many voters seem to have learned through the legal chaos is that it’s easier to commit election violations than to stop them. So the electorate remains divided—even after “86 election cases.”


The Federalist

Addison Wilson

A passionate teacher in English Language and Literature ready to give her best! Developing and implementing diverse curriculums covering a wide range of subjects. With my problem-solving skills, every job will be easily completed, so punctuation is my strength. Highly skilled at motivating students through positive encouragement and reinforcement of concepts via interactive classroom instruction and observation. My working style fits every personality type, so it makes me a great team player. I have completed numerous journalistic projects successfully, so digging for further information is my field. Fighter for freedom of speech! The truth must be revealed!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

For continue reading on the site please disable the Ad-block