Connect with us

News

GOP Filing ‘Obscene’ Election Lawsuits Says Top Dem Lawyer Because ‘If Everyone Was Able to Vote’ Republicans Would Lose

Published

on

The top attorney for the Democratic Party, Marc Elias, is projecting optimism against Republicans’ attempts to disenfranchise voters at the ballot box, just hours before Election Day. Elias oversaw the Democrats’ battle against Donald Trump‘s baseless lawsuits attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election, winning 64 out of 65 cases.

Elias, who runs Democracy Docket, took time to talk with Nicolle Wallace on MSNBC Monday during “Deadline: White House,” after tweeting that “the GOP is getting destroyed today in court. Judges all over the country are ruling in favor of democracy and voting.”

He told Wallace, “I tweeted out that we were going to see decisions in 11 cases. We have six decisions so far today, including the two you mentioned in Michigan, which was a victory for voters there. The ACLU case in Georgia was a victory. We saw victories in Pennsylvania, we saw victories in New York, there are images online if you go look up there are voting machines literally be wheeled into Vassar College today, as a result of court victory there.”

READ MORE: ‘Have They No Decency?’: GOP Slammed as Pelosi Reveals How She Learned Her Husband Was Brutally Bludgeoned in New Interview

Indeed, there are, which his Democracy Docket posted.

Noting that Democrats still have “five more cases that I expect to come in,” Elias says, “I’m feeling good about how the courts are handling” the cases.

He says the lawsuits Republicans are filing are not as much to disenfranchise individual voters as they are to, as Wallace put it, “cast doubt and aspersions on the result, if [they] lose.”

Elias said, “take a lawsuit, for example, in Wisconsin. You know, a conservative group brought a lawsuit to throw out – not count – all of the ballots cast by our men and women in uniform serving overseas.”

“I mean, that’s just obscene,” he declared.

READ MORE: ‘Carefully, Precisely, Surgically’: Russian Oligarch Tied to Putin Admits to Interfering in US Elections

“And it’s also not going to prevail. You know, on behalf of our client, we are intervening in that lawsuit to defend those voters, but that’s gonna that’s gonna wind up failing, but why bring that lawsuit?”

“Why are Republicans bringing so many of these cases to try to disenfranchise voters? It’s not because I think they think they’re gonna win, but it’s because it gives them grievance. it gives them grievance when they lose. And if there’s one thing we know about Trump and the MAGA movement, it loves grievance more than anything else.”

Wallace, continuing, said Republicans creating the “specter of fear is the point.”

“It’s also an extraordinary moment in American democracy, that you have to feel uncomfortable, to feel uncomfortable and uneasy going in to drop off your ballot. Is there a point?” Wallace asked Elias. “And I guess my question is around these lawsuits, is it it’s not the point for them to prevail, but the point to keep you running around fighting all of their frivolous litigation? What are they so afraid of? If you weren’t having to defend against their attacks on voting?”

“I think they are afraid that if everyone was able to vote,” Elias replied, “and get an accurate count, they’d lose.”

“It’s nothing more complicated than that,” he continued. “They know they’d have, if every eligible voter was allowed to cast the ballot and that it was counted accurately, they’d lose [the] battle.”

“That has been the whole threat to Trumpism from beginning,” he explained. “Let’s not forget, you know, people say Donald Trump won in 2016. He lost by 3 million [in the] popular vote, that popular total deficit grew in 2020, so they have to find increasingly creative ways to prevent the majority will from willing out. And one of the ways you do that is you suppress the vote.”

UPDATE: 7:08 PM ET –
After his MSNBC appearance Elias announced Democrats won eight out of eight court cases today.

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Lawyers in Classified Docs Case Quit Hours After Indictment: Report

Published

on

Attorneys representing Donald Trump in the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s prosecution of the former president on what reportedly are seven categories of federal felonies have resigned from representing him, just hours after a grand jury indicted their client.

“Two lawyers who represented Donald Trump in the months before he was indicted on federal charges over his handling of classified documents quit working for him Friday morning,” CNBC reports.

“This morning we tendered our resignations as counsel to President Trump, and we will no longer represent him on either the indicted case or the January 6 investigation,” Trump attorneys Jim Trusty (photo) and John Rowley said in a joint statement, according to CNN’s Alayna Treene.

“The attorneys,” CNBC also reported, “did not explain in detail why they had resigned, other than to say that ‘this is a logical moment’ to do given his indictment Thursday in U.S. District Court in Miami.”

READ MORE: ‘Disgraced’ Trump-Appointed Florida Judge Initially Assigned to Oversee Ex-President’s Criminal Case: Report

The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports, “Trump announces on Truth Social that Todd Blanche will be his criminal defense attorney in the Mar-a-Lago docs case with another firm yet to be named. Jim Trusty and John Rowley are out.”

This is far from the first time Trump’s lawyers have quit.

Less than one month ago, as Alternet reported, “Timothy Parlatore, an attorney for Donald Trump, made a major announcement on Wednesday, May 17: He is leaving the former president’s legal team.”

Trusty appeared on CNN just Thursday night, to defend Trump.

Watch video below or at this link.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading

News

‘Disgraced’ Trump-Appointed Florida Judge Initially Assigned to Oversee Ex-President’s Criminal Case: Report

Published

on

A federal judge whose highly-controversial rulings favoring Donald Trump were derided by legal experts and judges on a higher court, has been initially assigned to the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s criminal case against the ex-president, who appointed her to the bench three years ago.

Judge Aileen Cannon, known for agreeing to Trump’s request by assigning a special master to review the entirety of federal government documents the FBI retrieved from Mar-a-Lago last summer during the execution of a search and seizure warrant will, at least for now, oversee the government’s case allegedly charging Donald Trump with seven different felony categories in its classified documents probe, according to ABC News.

“The summons sent to former President Donald Trump and his legal team late Thursday indicates that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon will be assigned to oversee his case, at least initially, according to sources briefed on the matter,” ABC News reports.

READ MORE: Trump Lawyers Blindsided by Existence of Bombshell Recording – ‘They Don’t Know How to Defend This’: Maggie Haberman

“Cannon’s apparent assignment would add yet another unprecedented wrinkle to a case involving the first federal charges against a former president: Trump appointed Cannon to the federal bench in 2019, meaning that, if Trump is ultimately convicted, she would be responsible for determining the sentence – which may include prison time – for the man who elevated her to the role.”

Cannon, agreeing to Trump’s request to appoint a special master last September, also halted the Dept. of Justice’s use of those materials, which included at least one hundred classified documents, in its criminal investigation into Trump.

Harvard University professor emeritus of constitutional law, Laurence Tribe, called Judge Cannon’s special master decision “utterly lawless,” and said: “She has disgraced her position as an Article III judge.”

ABC News notes that “Legal experts [had] accused Cannon of handing Trump a series of head-scratching victories over the course of those proceedings,” and added, “Cannon’s order was ultimately thrown out in its entirety by an 11th Circuit Court of appeals panel, which found she overstepped in exercising her jurisdiction in the probe.”

The 11th Circuit issued a scathing rebuke of Judge’ Cannon’s decision to appoint the special master. One week later, without explanation or reasoning, she overruled the special master’s decision and extended deadlines – decisions which favored Donald Trump.

RELATED: ‘Pure Essence of Judicial Corruption’: Morning Joe Panelists ‘Stunned’ by Cannon’s Ruling on Classified Docs

Cannon is not the only judge whose name appears on the summons.

“In addition to Cannon, Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart’s name also appeared on the summons sent to Trump on Thursday, the sources said,” ABC adds. “Reinhart, who was sworn in as a magistrate judge in 2018, is also familiar with the proceedings against Trump: he signed off on the initial search warrant of Mar-a-Lago last year and later ruled to unseal the search affidavit – decisions that made him the target of antisemitic jabs on the internet.”

The New York Times in August of last year reported, “in a segment on Fox News, a host showed a manipulated photo that appeared to show Judge Reinhart seated on a plane with Ghislaine Maxwell, Mr. [Jeffrey] Epstein’s companion who had been convicted last year of aiding Mr. Epstein in sexually abusing minors.”

Brian Kilmeade, the Fox News host, the following day tweeted: “Last night while subbing for Tucker Carlson, we showed you an image of Judge Bruce Reinhart w/ Ghislaine Maxwell that was sourced on screen to a meme pulled from Twitter & wasn’t real. This depiction never took place & we wanted to make clear that we were showing a meme in jest.”

READ MORE: SCOTUS ‘Surprise’ Voting Rights Decision Could – and Did – Have Big Implications for Democrats, Legal Experts Say

The Times noted “the scrutiny of Judge Reinhart has also prompted the local authorities to step up security. His synagogue canceled a Friday night Shabbat service last week in response to multiple antisemitic threats, and the police in his neighborhood said officers had intensified patrols near his house.”

Professor of Law Joyce Vance, an NBC News/MSNBC contributor and former U.S. Attorney responded to the news of Cannon’s assignment. Pointing to an earlier case as precedent, Vance says: “This is persuasive authority that Judge Cannon must step aside if the case falls to her as a permanent assignment. Her court & certainly the 11th [Circuit] won’t tolerate the damage it would do to their credibility if she failed to voluntarily recuse.”

Continue Reading

News

Trump Lawyers Blindsided by Existence of Bombshell Recording – ‘They Don’t Know How to Defend This’: Maggie Haberman

Published

on

CNN on Friday morning obtained a bombshell transcript of a recording in which former President Donald Trump boasts of retaining “secret” military information that he never declassified while he was president.

Appearing on CNN shortly after this news broke, New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman revealed that the former president’s team was essentially blindsided by this recording’s existence.

“I don’t think they quite know how to defend this… from what we have heard,” she said. “They were… startled by the existence of this tape. This tape was something that they learned existed when this aide to Trump testified. The prosecutors were already in possession of this tape. They didn’t get it from the aide, although it appears the aide had a copy when it was subpoenaed later, but this is has been described to us by multiple sources… as a really problematic piece of evidence for Trump.”

Haberman predicted that the recording’s existence would not change the Trump legal team’s overall defense strategy, however.

READ MORE: ‘He’s just not that smart’: Trump buried by Morning Joe for handing investigators all they need

“I think they are going to stick that their line: ‘He says things, he didn’t mean it a certain way,'” she said. “I am sure they can come up with all kinds of explanations for why he used the language he used. But it’s on tape.”

Trump is due in court in Miami next week to face seven felony counts related to his handling of top-secret government documents.

Watch the video below or at this link.

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.