Federal judge rejects Trump campaign’s Pa. lawsuit, saying it lacks factual proof

A federal judge has dismissed the Trump campaign’s Pennsylvania lawsuit attempting to overturn the 2020 election, issuing a stinging opinion that blasts the president’s legal team for a filing a disjointed lawsuit that lacked a compelling legal argument or factual proof to support it.

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann wrote that he would not “disenfranchise almost seven million voters,” as the Trump campaign had sought.MORE: Michigan GOP lawmakers reject Trump’s brazen effort to overturn election results

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote. “That has not happened.”

The judge, a Barack Obama appointee, dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the Trump campaign cannot resubmit the case. The defeat levels a blow to the most high-profile case brought by the president in his multi-state effort to challenge the results of the Nov. 3 election.

The crux of the Trump campaign lawsuit was that its poll watchers were not able to observe the counting of mail-in ballots, creating opportunities for “Democratic counties” to accept fraudulent and technically deficient ballots and “diluting” the power of voters in other counties.

Federal judge rejects Trump campaign’s Pa. lawsuit, saying it lacks factual proof (msn.com)

%d bloggers like this: