@coldjoint,
Quote:A state appellate court judge in Pennsylvania ruled in favor of the Trump campaign on Thursday, deciding that Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar (D) lacked authority to extend a deadline for first-time vote-by-mail participants to show their ID.
Am I right in saying this is the only legal 'win' so far for Trump? (I have only loosely been following this process).
If so, it seems a petty complaint "give those voters a few days to prove their ID" (that's what it seems like the ruling was). So it's not a complaint of fraud, but rather of not whether someone had the authority to extend the deadline for the provision of ID (feel free to corret me if this is wrong).
While searching for what that ruling actually means (in practice) I found this:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pennsylvania-appellate-judge-hands-trump-campaign-extremely-small-legal-victory/ar-BB1aXOTz
Quote:Following a torrent of court swift and sometimes embarrassing court losses over the last week, a Pennsylvania appellate judge on Thursday handed the Trump campaign a legal victory in the state, albeit a minor one, ruling that election officials cannot include a small portion of mail-in ballots in the state’s total vote tabulation.
Donald Trump wearing a suit and tie© Provided by Law & Crime
In a brief two-page order, Commonwealth Court President Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt said that Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar (D) exceeded her authority when she pushed back the deadline—from Nov. 9 to Nov. 12—for voters to cure problems with their ballots stemming from lack of proof of identification. Boockvar, a Democrat, moved the deadline two days prior to the election, citing a state supreme court decision allowing mail-in ballots received up to three days after Election Day to be counted.
“[T]he Court concludes that Respondent Kathy Boockvar, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked statutory authority to issue the November 1, 2020, guidance to Respondents County Boards of Elections insofar as that guidance purported to change the deadline […] for certain electors to verify proof of identification,” Leavitt, a Republican, wrote in the court order. “Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Respondents County Boards of Elections are enjoined from counting any ballots that have been segregated pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Court’s order.”
While the ruling is a welcomed change for the Trump campaign, who filed the initial complaint along with the Republican National Committee, the ballots that are subject to the order have not yet been counted towards the state’s reported vote total and will likely not affect a significant number of ballots.
“Here’s the deal: Biden’s lead in Pennsylvania is over 54,000,” University of Kentucky College of Law professor Joshua A. Douglas wrote in an email to Law&Crime. “There’s surely nowhere near that number of ballots subject to this decision to make up that kind of lead.”
The Trump campaign is scheduled to return to court on Friday for a hearing in a separate legal challenge in Pennsylvania, where the president’s legal team will attempt to get thousands of ballots tossed out claiming they lacked required information and were improperly counted.
So far, in trying to understand the widespread allegations of fraud...I haven't been able to find any indicators - other than Trump and his team claiming it. Am I to believe that people take a leaders word for it, and argue it black and blue...without evidence? (and I've asked several people on this forum what evidence exists, and not been given any, and not found any in the articles I read)
