The Wall Street Journal is one of the most conservative editorial voices in the nation. Today its editorial says that the Electoral College has decided the election. Biden won. Trump lost. Trump should concede.
The Electoral College meets Monday to cast its votes for President, officially marking Joe Biden as the election winner. President Trump’s legal challenges have run their course, and he and the rest of the Republican Party can help the country and themselves by acknowledging the result and moving on.
Mr. Trump’s last legal gasp came Friday evening when the Supreme Court declined to hear the Texas lawsuit seeking to overturn the election results in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. As we predicted, the Court cited Texas’s lack of legal standing to challenge how another state manages its elections.
Some on the right claim that Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, but this is wrong. The Justices said they would have taken the Texas case as a “bill of complaint” when states sue other states.
This is a technical point that concerns the Court’s case management, and the two Justices have a long-time view that the Court should hear more of these direct state appeals. We happen to agree, but in this case the Texas claim was outside constitutional bounds. Justice Alito (joined by Justice Thomas) added that he would “not grant other relief.” This was not a dissent on the merits of the Texas claim.
Mr. Trump and his camp are attacking the Court, and the President is deriding the “standing” point as a dodge. It is much more than that. Limits on standing are fundamental to a conservative understanding of the proper judicial role under Article III of the Constitution. If anyone can sue without a cognizable injury and the possibility of remedy, the courts would be overwhelmed with frivolous claims.
There is more to the editorial but I don’t subscribe and this is the free content available to me. Note: Even if Alito and Thomas had dissented, which they did not, the vote would have been a decisive 7-2 against Trump’s frivolous claim. It was 9-0 against Trump’s frivolous claim. At what point do courts begin to fine and punish lawyers for repeatedly filing frivolous claims?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
At $1,000 an hour lawyers will file as long as someone is willing to pay them ..
More like $1600+ these days.
IF Trump pays them……. the man has a notorious M.O. of stiffing people that work for him.. As well as throwing them under the proverbial “bus” if they fail to achieve the results that he wants.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/12/donald-trump-pac-has-pocketed-most-of-the-cash-he-bilked-from-his-supporters-to-fund-election-lawsuits-report/
I agree. They should charge a penalty for frivolous cases.
The time for Trump to concede was when all the networks called the election for Biden. He’s BOTH a big baby and an opportunist who is sowing this distrust of the elections so that he can play the rightful president in exile to his base base.
Here’s a link to an article about Rule 11 ( Federal Civil Practice Law and Rules) which addresses some of the questions concerning frivolous lawsuits:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11
For further reading:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-lawyers-sanction-explain-idUSKBN2851FW
Rule 11 is the reason for the gulf between what Trump’s lawyers have said in public and what they’ve said in court filings. For all the cynicism about the judicial branch, there is a real limit on the amount of bullshit that judges are willing to tolerate and, consequently, attorneys are willing to spout. There are a lot of sleazy lawyers, but not so many at the prestige and price-point that is involved at this level of litigation.
The fat boy will never concede. He is a big baby and he is still having a tantrum because he lost.
Yep. Accepting reality is simply not part of the Trump brand. Why expect new branding now? It was a fad.
The legal cases and the losses mean nothing to 3/4s of the Republican Party. On January 20th their extra legal challenges should be treated as sedition.
18 U.S. Code § 2384. Seditious conspiracy
“If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”
The “deep state” will be happy to oblige .
I count myself as one who is fairly familiar with the Constitution, but I will confess that I never looked closely at section 3 of the 14th amendment, probably because the scenario it raised was unimaginable to me…until Rep. Bill Pascrell made us all aware of it as a suggested remedy for the 126 traitors who signed on the Texas “empty” suit:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
We got us a double justification here, Joel.
But not the 2/3 majority.
Perhaps Trump will have a debilitating stroke before he gets to issue the dozens of pardons. Or the next Attorney General should challenge the pardon power . If you can shoot someone on Fifth Avenue .If you can be above the law by pardoning those who cover your crimes. You can change the composition of the Supreme Court overnight. There must be a way to phrase that politely.
I don’t think the framers anticipated a Trump enabled by the Republicans. That a party would put power in service to the Oligarchy that feeds them ,over country to this degree. A President who would use the Pardon to cover his own crimes. They gave a political solution to a President who abused his power . Yet they neglected to give a legal remedy to an attempted coup by that President. You can not be seditious when the President says Je suis l’Etat. So Trumps thugs on the street only become seditious on Jan 20.
I suspect that they all from Flynn and Miller to his Neo Nazi thugs will be very careful after Jan 20th .
The odds of getting a 2/3 vote by the House and the Senate are not just small, they are nil.
Cartoon:
The Supreme Court ruled the Dred Scot case too. Bet you are not complaining about people refusing to accept that.
Believe what you want, but don’t appeal to the power of the Supreme Court to decide as proof of anything.
Hey, Anonymous,
Trump couldn’t even get a vote from any of the three people he chose for the Supreme Court! This ain’t the Dred Scott case, kiddo!
LOL. Exactly, Diane!
And the 77 cases that he lost that did not make it to the Supreme Court. Many of them in front of Conservative Judges . He did win one case that allowed his observes to cough Covid droplets on poll workers. However you are right about the Court. it is purely political in its decisions from Heller to what will surely be decisions that gut ACA a women’s right to chose and Unions.
So for Trump not to receive even a single vote from the 6 who heard the 2 appeals or even the 3 who he appointed , says an awful lot about what type of housing he deserves. After the Secret Service drags him out feet first on Jan 20th, if he is that stupid .
Some of the best critiques of meritless claims by Trump’s “elite” legal team came from judges appointed by Trump.
The whole Trumpian debacle has pointed out several flaws in our system. We cannot allow the presidency to hinge on a “gentleman’s agreement,” particularly now that we have a global economy. We need clear rules. Future candidates must reveal their taxes and must abide by the emolument’s clause. We cannot afford to have a leader that is unduly influenced by other governments.
Interesting that you mention the emoluments clause. There is no question that Trump violated it every day he was in office. He never really disassociated himself from the Trump Organization. He let his sons run it in his absence. I recall that he said shortly after he won the 2016 election that he could easily run the country and the Trump Organizatuin at the same time. Foreign dignitaries took fabulous suites at the Trump Hotel ($20,000 a day) to curry favor. They patronized his businesses for the same reason. The Constitution is clear that all of this is forbidden. But the Senate would never consider any curbs on Trump’s business dealings.
Trump’s #1 guy, Bill Barr resigned yesterday. He would not create evidence they way Trump wanted him to. Why not? He mis-represented the Russia report. He supported other outlandish policies eschewed by the hopelessly reactionary Sessions. So why not?
Prosecutors, of which Barr is one as the att gen, are subject to severe sanctions for bringing up material that is not true. There is a huge risk to the individual to lie in a suit brought before the court. Being thrown out of the bar is just the beginning.
The reasons there have been so many dismissals of suits is that the people bringing them cannot lie in court without serious consequences. Thus they must content themselves to lie in the press.
The time to concede was a month ago!
Concession is not in Trump’s makeup.
It’s how he got where he is absent any redeeming value.
He has a single mindedness to win at any cost which does not include the words “You win” and particularly not “I lost”
Hidden in the small print – this little gem: any donation to his “defense fund” under $5,000 goes directly into puppet Trump’s pocket!
You can’t fix stupid….
Grifter gotta grift.
Are the 3 justices trump appointed, independent? In a different scenario, those who enabled the judges’ selection and confirmation may have decided Trump wasn’t an asset at this juncture.
The foot dragging by McConnell et al could be political theater to distract.