'Trump has no new arguments': Ex-president skewered for last-minute immunity filing

[LetMyPeopleVote]

I read this filing. It is so bad that it is funny. TFG's attorneys are citing TFG's truth social posts and excepts from his speech.

Link to tweet

This brief is really so bad that it is funny

Link to tweet

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-horse-arguments/

Donald Trump late on Tuesday night filed a reply brief to an appeals court defending his claim for presidential immunity, but one legal expert said the former president has "no new arguments."

Trump, who is responding to Special Counsel Jack Smith's briefing in which the prosecutor challenged Trump's key assertions, has continued to insist that he deserves immunity for his actions allegedly attempting to overturn the 2020 election. In fact, he has argued that it was his duty to "investigate" the supposedly rigged 2020 election......

But legal analyst Allison Gill wasn't impressed.

"Trump has no new arguments. It also seems that he doesn’t address any of the amicus briefs," Gill wrote on Tuesday.

There is a new low. TFG's attorneys are citing TFG's truth social post where TFG pushes a bogus study on voter fraud

Link to tweet

I looked and this truth social post is NOT cited in the table of authorities.

This brief is so bad that it is funny

[tanyev]

1. Time to start sanctioning his attorneys for this nonsense.

[scipan]

2. When you let your client dictate your brief.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

3. TFG's brief makes a lot more sense if you believe he STILL IS President

TFG's brief does not list the crazy study that TFG posted on Truth Social but does list TFG as POTUS

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[gratuitous]

4. This pleading is so lame

It should have come with a set of crutches.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

5. Trump lawyers' doozy of a filing on voter fraud

The Washington Post is calling out TFG's attorneys on TFG's weak brief and the fact that TFG's attorney is citing a bogus study that TFG cited on truth social. The concept that any attorney would cite such material is surprising to me and to the Washington Post

Link to tweet

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/03/trump-lawyers-doozy-filing-voter-fraud/

Tucked into Trump’s latest legal brief in his appeal for presidential immunity in his federal Jan. 6 case is a remarkable citation. His attorneys refer to a social media post from Trump the same day of the filing — Tuesday — which links to a report from an unnamed source running down various voter-fraud claims......

The report goes on to cite purported evidence of voter fraud and irregularities in five key states. A sampling:

For Wisconsin, it begins by citing how the state Supreme Court declared ballot drop boxes illegal — but that was in 2022, two years after the 2020 election.

For Pennsylvania, it cites the idea that there were more votes than voters. This is an oft-cited claim based on lagging data from a database called the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE). Such claims were debunked both before Jan. 6 and long after.

For Arizona, it begins by claiming Maricopa County illegally accepted 20,000 absentee ballots after the deadline of 7 p.m. on Election Day. Multiple fact checks have noted that this assertion relies on a misreading of the dates; the dates actually indicate when the ballots were handed off to a private vendor for scanning, not when they were received.

Perhaps most remarkably, it cites this anecdote from Michigan: “A city clerk in Muskegon witnessed a woman drop off between 8,000 and 10,000 voter registrations at the clerk office on Oct. 8, 2020, many appearing to be fraudulent.” We’ve already known that those registrations were caught even before the election and that no fraudulent registrations appear to have resulted in actual votes. But as it happens, on Wednesday morning, The Washington Post’s Sarah Ellison published a thorough debunking of claims linking the Muskegon situation to any fraudulent ballots.

These are just a few examples of the claims that have already been debunked or have no actual proximity to voter fraud. Many of the claims don’t appear to have been publicly lodged before the report’s release Tuesday and are difficult to trace because of the scant sourcing. Most of the report is devoted to supposed procedural irregularities that say nothing about a stolen election.

The fact that any lawyer would include this material in a filing shocks me. It seems that TFG may have demanded that this crap was included in this filing.

Again, TFG's last filing before the DC Circuit on the immunity issue was pure crap. I am looking forward to oral arguments on Jan. 9

[onenote]

6. Odd criticism. Parties aren't expected to put forward "new" arguments in a reply filing.

They are expected to respond to the arguments in the opposition brief, which is what Trump's attorneys attempted to do.

[senseandsensibility]

7. That's funny, CNN treated

it as a very serious, very valid filing. They had several panelists, and I didn't hear any negative comments. If anything, CNN has become more Cheato friendly lately. I notice they amp up the flattery when they have rightwing "townhalls" coming up. Absolutely desperate for republican eyeballs and approval.