Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump makes his case in Pa. as most everyone else makes the case he's done

Rudy Giuliani

Rudy Giuliani, one of President Trump's most vocal surrogates, is back in a courtroom today, trying to block the certification of the election in Pennsylvania.

Chris McGrath/Getty Images

The most ambitious of President Trump's longshot and counterfactual claims against the election is getting its day in federal court Tuesday.

The hearing in Pennsylvania comes two weeks after the nation voted decisively to deny Trump a second term, which in public he steadfastly refuses to realize — while almost all Republicans in authority continue to enable the fiction. The consequence is that the bedrock of American democracy, which by all accounts was remarkably fair and efficient despite a deadly pandemic, has been sullied as never before by a presidential disinformation campaign.

Underscoring that, 59 top election security experts and computer scientists have rebuked Trump for his baseless assertions about voting fraud and cheating by election hackers, saying "these claims either have been unsubstantiated or are technically incoherent."


"Anyone asserting that a U.S. election was 'rigged' is making an extraordinary claim, one that must be supported by persuasive and verifiable evidence," the group wrote in a statement they are posting on their websites. "To our collective knowledge, no credible evidence has been put forth that supports a conclusion that the 2020 election outcome in any state has been altered through technical compromise."

That blunt pushback was delivered at the same time President-elect Joe Biden amped up his own impatience with Trump's refusal to accept the outcome. Presumably, once Trump does admit his loss, the outgoing government could begin cooperating with the incoming administration.

"More people may die" of the coronavirus, Biden warned Monday, unless his team and Trump's team can begin coordinating now on pandemic policy — especially to allow the earliest possible start of Covid-19 vaccinations after the inauguration.

The hearing that began Tuesday afternoon is an effort by Trump's campaign to block Pennsylvania from certifying its final election result. The deadline is Monday, and with less than 2 percent of ballots still in limbo, Biden is ahead by 74,000 votes. The state's 20 electoral votes are no longer crucial to his path toward the presidency, though, because even without them he has 286 electoral votes, 16 more than the number assuring victory.

The president's most high-profile attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has been permitted to represent the Trump campaign before Judge Matthew Brann at the federal courthouse in Williamsport — apparently his first courtroom appearance since he moved from federal prosecutor to mayor of New York nearly three decades ago

During an interview Tuesday on Fox Business, Giuliani claimed without offering any further explanation that his argument hinges on 700,000 ballots that "were counted surreptitiously," adding: "Frankly, that is a case that we would like to see get to the Supreme Court."

The Pennsylvania claim, which hinges on the fact that tabulating rules were not uniform statewide, is among more than a dozen lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign and Republican voters hoping to slow or prevent the certification of election results — mainly in battleground states that Trump lost narrowly.

Suits brought by his GOP allies in Wisconsin, Michigan and Georgia were abandoned on Monday, joining a roster of more than a dozen claims that have been dismissed by various state and federal courts. And a Michigan appeals court on Monday denied another bid to stop the certification of Detroit-area votes.

But the president's team is still fighting the steeply uphill cause of getting the results in those and other states upended with more litigation yet to be filed — or with recounts. While Georgia is conducting its own recanvass that has shifted votes minimally, Trump would have to foot an $8 million bill for a do-over tally in Wisconsin. He lost both states by less than 1 point but at least 14,000 votes.

The election experts' letter followed a similarly strong rebuttal of the president's claims last week by a panel of experts convened by Trump's own Department of Homeland, who declared the 2020 election "the most secure in American history"because "there is no evidence" any voting systems were compromised.

For the four years since Russians made virgous attempt to hack the previous election, election integrity experts and good-governance advocates have been promoting an array of measures to make voting more secure, transparent and trustworthy — but legislation embodying these ideas has been spurned by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on the grounds that the ideas were partisan and unnecessary. McConnell, of course, is now the most powerful Republican allowing Trump to go unchallenged in his baseless complaints that he's being robbed of a second term by weak election security.

Another, even higher-volume Republican proponent of the president's fraud claims in recent days has been Trey Trainor, the chairman of the Federal Election Commission since his confirmation this summer. While his agency would be in charge of deciding whether money spent on election controversies was in line with federal campaign finance law, Trainor has felt unbound by any complaints about conflicts of interest.

Trainor has declared his view that many reports of voter fraud in battleground states are credible and that Democratic officials have broken federal law by making life difficult for GOP poll watchers. And on Monday he tweeted his endorsement of one of the Trump team's attorneys, fellow Texan Sidney Powell, saying he's never known her "to be anything but forthright and honest in every case she's ever taken on. If she says there is rampant voter fraud in #Election2020, I believe her."


Read More

Typing on a computer
person using laptop

America Needs a Digital Equity Policy, Not Just Tech Innovation

The United States invests billions in artificial intelligence research and development‚ semiconductor fabrication‚ and next-generation connectivity. Yet millions of Americans cannot consistently access the internet or afford the devices needed to submit an online application for social services or a job application․ This is not an oversight․ It is a policy choice that is costing the country dearly․

Connectivity is a floor, not a ceiling:

Keep ReadingShow less
The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less