Crushed by Judge: Transcript of Oral Argument in Pennsylvania Trump Lawsuit (vital)

VT: The transcript below is complete and unedited, even uncorrected for formatting. Mr. Goldstein, Trump’s lawyer, has to explain why he is there. This is a short read, very to the point and clearly demonstrates that Trump sent out lawyers with nothing while trying to fake evidence through bribing witnesses through hoaxter “Project Veritas.” This is an epic fail. Trump’s attorney, Mr. Goldstein, is simply doing his job, and that is to waste time and provide cover.

Trump v. Montgomery County Board of Elections

…argued that the new election code has eliminated, either restricted and/or eliminated, the right of third

4       parties to challenge any deficiencies such as you’re

5       doing right now.  You didn’t file a reply brief.  They

6       only filed their materials yesterday.  What is your 7 reply to that?  You touched upon it.

8                                    MR. GOLDSTEIN:  Yeah.  So our reply is

9                                    that they misperceived what is going on.  These

10                                  challenge procedures are still in the statute.  They’re

11                                  still viable and vital.  And the place where they say a

12                                  challenge could be made is a place where a challenge

13                                  cannot be made.  The Friday before the election, those 14  ballots are still locked in a sealed container, so I

15       can’t examine them.  I can’t challenge them.  And what

16       they propose as a scheme for challenging defies the

17       plain language of the statute, defies the procedures

18       that are in use everywhere in the state.  We have to be

19       able to challenge them in this way or it yields the 20 certain results I’ve indicated.

21                                    If the Board had allowed somebody to

22                                    vote and they couldn’t vote and we all knew it, under

23                                    their scheme, we would just have to allow it because this person applied for something some manner of weeks ago.

THE COURT:  In your petition, which is

right before me — and I read it several times — you

4                                    don’t claim that any electors or the Board of the

5                                    County were guilty of fraud, correct?  That’s correct?

6                                    MR. GOLDSTEIN:  Your Honor, accusing

7                                    people of fraud is a pretty big step.  And it is rare

8                                    that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the

9                                    Board of the DNC or anybody else involved in this a

10                                  liar.  Everybody is coming to this with good faith.

11                                  The DNC is coming with good faith.  We’re all just

12                                  trying to get an election done.  We think these were a

13                                  mistake, but we think they are a fatal mistake, and 14   these ballots ought not be counted.

15                                    THE COURT:  I understand.  I am asking

16                                    you a specific question, and I am looking for a 17    specific answer.  Are you claiming that there is any

18                                    fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?

19                                    MR. GOLDSTEIN:  To my knowledge at

20                                    present, no.

21                                    THE COURT:  Are you claiming that there

22                                    is any undue or improper influence upon the elector 23    with respect to these 592 ballots?

MR. GOLDSTEIN:  To my knowledge at

present, no.

THE COURT:  Does it make a difference

whether a claim of irregularity or technical

4       noncompliance with the election code is made with or

5       without an accompanying claim of fraud or improper 6 influence?

7                                    MR. GOLDSTEIN:  It does not.  I mean, to

8                                    claim the technical defects are immaterial, which is in

9                                    some sense some of the thrust of what the DNC argued,

10                                  is really to misperceive what is going on in the 11  election code.  The election code is technical.

12                                    These requirements are all technical.

13                                    And some of them sit in that code for reasons that are

14                                    a mystery for all of us.  I mean, I sort of recounted

15                                    for you my view of why the elector signing in his own

16                                    hand is material.  The DNC have their reasons for why

17                                    they think it is material or immaterial.  The fact of

18                                    the matter is, it is in the code.  The code is itself

19                                    technical.  Those technicalities are part and parcel of 20   the law and a violation of the results in a ballot that 21  can’t be counted.

22   THE COURT:  All right.  I don’t have any 23   questions for you.

I have a question for generally whoever

prepared the stipulation.  So I will ask it of you and