A federal conservative judge, Judge David O. Carter, of the California District Court, Central District of California, evaluated the facts and said this about the effort of Trump and Eastman to get around the constitution: President Trump’s efforts to pressure Mike Pence to act illegally by refusing to count electoral votes likely violated 2 Federal criminal statutes and also said this:
“If Dr. Eastman and President Trump’s plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution. If the country does not commit to investigating and pursuing accountability for those responsible, the Court fears January 6 will repeat itself.’
As Elizabeth Cheney said, “Every American should read what this federal judge has written.” The same judge, David Carter, issued another decision the week of the Capitol Assault hearings in Washington, where he said John Eastman and other Trump lawyers knew they had little chance of being successful with their legal arguments in court, but they relied on those arguments anyway “to overturn a democratic election.”
Later Eastman realized that what he had done might get him in trouble with the law and advised Giuliani that perhaps he should get a pardon, proving that he too was at home in the swamp that Trump claimed to be draining.
Congresswoman Lofgren of the Select Committee said this at the hearing:
“Over and over judges appointed by Democrats and Republicans alike, directly refuted his false narrative [Trump’s false narrative] They called out the Trump campaigns lack of evidence for his claims, even in cases where they could have simply thrown out the lawsuits without writing a word.”
As Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren pointed out, the lack of evidence in the Trump cases was criticized by judges across the political spectrum. In Pennsylvania a Trump appointed judge concluded,
Charges required specific allegations and proof. We have neither here. Another Trump appointed judge warned that if cases like these succeeded ‘any disappointed loser in a presidential election able to hire a team of clever lawyers could flag claimed deviations from election results and cast doubt on election results.’ The list goes on and on…The rejection of Trump’s litigation efforts was overwhelming:
“22 federal judges appointed by Republican presidents including 10 appointed by president Trump himself and at least 24 elected or appointed Republican state judges dismissed the president’s claim. At least 11 lawyers have been referred to disciplinary proceedings for bad faith baseless efforts to undermine the 2020 presidential election. Rudy Giuliani had his license to practice law suspended in New York and just this week a newly filed complaint will potentially make his suspension to practice law permanent.”
Here are some samples of some actual statements made by the judges in those 62 cases:
“Sheer unreliability of the information”
“speculative accusations”
“harm the public in countless ways”
“breed confusion, undermine the public’s trust in elections”
“Plaintiff’s claims fail on the merits”
“mere speculation by plaintiffs”
“unsupported by the evidence”
“derived from wholly unreliable sources”
“reach implausible conclusions’
“This court has allowed plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits”
“Plaintiff’s interpretation of events is incorrect and not even credible”
“rife with speculation and guess-work about sinister motives”
“did not prove by any standard of proof that any illegal votes were cast”
“charges required specific allegations and proof. We have neither here.”
“strained legal arguments without merit”
“hazy and nebulous inference”
“nothing but speculation and conjecture”
“an amalgamation of theories, conjectures, and speculation”
“public sphere of gossip and innuendo”
“largely based on anonymous witnesses, hearsay, and irrelevant analysis’
“allegations are sorely wanting of relevant or reliable evidence”
“fundamental and obvious misreading of the Constitution”
Clearly the judges wanted to express their displeasure with the Trump campaign’s frivolous charges. As Republican lawyer Ben Ginsburg said “The Trump campaigns unprecedented efforts to overturn its election laws in court was deeply damaging abuse of the judicial process.”
Perhaps Justice David Carter of the US District Court said it best: “This is a coup in search of a legal theory.” He also added, there was evidence that Trump “more likely than not” committed felony crimes.
Again it is clear, the American judiciary, whether appointed by Republicans or Democrats could not stomach Trump’s lies about a stolen election. And they listened to legal arguments and weighed the evidence. Republican who continue to believe the lies have done neither.