Blanche on CBS says his suit against Alaska is "asking the court to step in where the Alaska Supreme Court didn't, which is to look at federal law and if necessary to allow a process for Alaska to decide who should be certified as the winner."
(So, the voters won't get to decide. Got it.)
Does federal law have a different standard of “confused voters” which the Alaska Supreme Court failed to apply? And does that standard create a process the Alaska Court failed to recognize?
I’d say he’s so full of shit his eyes are brown, but…
BRENNAN: The DOJ lawsuit demands the Alaska result not be certified if voters are confused. The confusion is defined as Sen. Sullivan not winning.
BLANCHE: That's not what it says
BRENNAN: I'm quoting from it. You are telling them not to certify it. What right does the federal government have telling a state not to certify?
Brennan beat me to it, with the critical question: what right (i.e., legal basis) does the federal government have telling a state not to certify?
Is there anything quite as breathtakingly brazen as watching top administration officials insist on camera that they wouldn't dream of interfering in an election, while their own legal team is concurrently filing federal court papers demanding to do precisely that?
When Attorney General Todd Blanche stepped up to assure Brennan that it was "never our intention" to improperly interfere with state election certifications, the ink was practically still wet on the Department of Justice’s complaint in Anchorage.
Because right there in black and white the complaint explicitly asks a federal judge to step in and block Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate results if incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan loses a tight race where votes for the other Dan Sullivan could have tipped the balance.
As I’ve said before: extraordinary relief requires an extraordinary showing. And “Our guy lost because someone else had the same name,” ain’t extraordinary. It’s stupid.
When the Supremes decided Bush v Gore, they didn’t rule on who won, they ruled on the deadline imposed by the Electoral Count Act. Even then it was a per curiam opinion, because it meant they had effectively elected the President. But that power goes to the people, not the person with the most lawyers. So the Supremes not only didn’t sign it, they declared it non-precedential. And they had clear grounds, based on the Act, for their ruling. Blanche ain’t got shit; but Trump is making demands, and we, the people, are footing the legal bills.
Is this a great country, or what?
Lagniappe:
I just wanted a piece of Blanche’s Twitter argument. This is BS, and Todd knows it. What he claims to be asking for here is what Alaska already does (preserve records). He’s implying a separate action if they don’t like the outcome (hence, preserve the records), although the complaint seems to question the outcome preemptively. So the DOJ position depends on who you asked last. Todd is keeping the elephants away: DOJ is interfering directly. It’s all my balls to set up a complaint in the press after the counts are finished. Trump is going to do that anyway, but the crucial questions are: 1) who cares?; and 2) what does that get him?
Answers: 1) nobody; 2) nothing.
