“Beyond the embarrassing situation,” legal experts say of Trump and Giuliani’s court efforts

Rudy Giuliani was introduced as a “elite strike force“Lawyers are directing President Donald Trump’s legal challenges to the 2020 election, but their efforts are‘ unworkable ’and‘ embarrassed ’, based on‘ unsubstantiated evidence ’and‘ outside allegations ’,” legal experts told NBC News.

“It’s over the awkward situation,” said attorney Glenn Kirschner. “Both are very bad lawyers and have the worst possible motive behind it. It’s all in the name of overthrowing the will of the American voter.”

Election lawyer Matthew Sanderson unfavorably likened Giulian to James Baker, who led George W. Bush’s legal efforts in the 2000 presidential election.

“It’s like Bush v. Gore, but replace James Baker with a subredited editor of QAnon,” he said. “It’s not a competent legal practice. There are strategic mistakes, typographical mistakes – you can make all kinds of mistakes in a case.”

“It’s as dysfunctional a strategy as I’ve ever seen,” Sanderson added.

On Monday, the campaign filed an appeal against a federal court decision rejecting the campaign’s Pennsylvania lawsuit, in which it disputed some postal votes.

The appeal complained to Judge Matthew Brannt of “misinterpreting the remedy sought. The campaign is not seeking to end 6.8 million Pennsylvania disqualifications,” as the judge wrote in his shameful decision – and Giuliani admitted at last week’s court hearing.

According to the appeal, the campaign wanted to put aside only a few ballot papers that they thought could be flawed – and then notes that one of the remedies they are looking for is the ‘order that the results of the 2020 presidential election be flawed, which would allow the Pennsylvania Assembly to elects Pennsylvania voters “- in other words, 6.8 million Pennsylvania deprivators would be free from power by rejecting their votes.

At one point, the submission calls the ballot papers “ballet,” and an earlier submission on another day of the campaign mentioned “President Donald J. Trump” instead of the president.

This earlier submission, which said the campaign attracted only part of Brann’s order but later added that it could appeal to other parts of the order, led to confusion among other defendants in the case, who said it was incorrect and could not understand exactly what had happened. campaign sought.

This was not the first such petition since Trump appointed Giuliani as his lead attorney. Earlier in the same Pennsylvania case, Giuliani sought to supplement it with arguments rejected by his predecessors, presumably because there was no evidence to support their claims. “The lawyers thought they were losers,” Sanderson said.

Also on Monday, the campaign lost another lawsuit in the state court of Pennsylvania – the sixth series of court losses in six swing states since the election was the most recent, much of it initiated by Giuliani’s predecessors.

“I don’t think any team of lawyers can save this case. Electoral lawsuits aren’t designed to decide tens of thousands of votes. It just doesn’t happen. But even with this warning, this strategy hasn’t been implemented well,” Sanderson said.

He noted that Giuliani appeared to have struggled with certain legal conditions during his court appearance last week, and his allegations of a huge, nationwide electoral fraud system did not help his credibility.

According to Myrna Pérez, director of voting rights and election program at the Brennan Center, Giuliani’s efforts are not aimed at overcoming court challenges – they are aimed at strengthening Trump’s attacks on the democratic process.

“I think it’s a strategy that is trying to whistle its base,” by attacking minority voters in democratic citadels, ”he said. “The aim is to make political differences cheaper in a peaceful way and to cast doubt on the outcome of elections in which he is not the winner.”

“This is a damaging, problematic attempt to fragment our democratic processes,” Pérez said, adding that the legal campaign was full of “unsubstantiated allegations, inadequate evidence and special claims.”

Some of those allegations were clearly too much for the president – he fired lawyer Sidney Powell from his team over the weekend after he suggested Republicans paid salaries to put Georgia’s election in order. Here you can grab two seats that will determine U.S. Senate control over the January election.

Giuliani Powell made statements similar to some, but never accused any Republican of irregularity.

A source familiar with Trump’s mindset told NBC News on Monday that the president was unhappy with Powell and Giuliani’s top performance at a press conference at the Republican National Commission headquarters last week where they both shared an unfounded conspiracy theory about the election. According to the source, Trump is worried that his team is “made up of fools who make him look bad.”

Pérez Giuliani called his “various legal conspiracy allegations” the “legal equivalent of shark jumping.”

“It will eventually fail, but it will still be harmful,” he said.

Kirschner, a legal analyst at NBC News, said: “It is outrageous to hear Donald Trump’s lawyers and advocates say,‘ You have every right to bring these cases. “Not really. You have every right to start a winning case. You have no right to initiate a frivolous lawsuit for purposes other than winning the lawsuit, such as trying to undermine public confidence in the election.”