@jackiegardina I'd say folks asking that are falling into the pattern of begging the question, assuming the answer to the very question on the table and approaching it that way.
There were some really high stakes questions to be answered, so a lot people worked on them.
Unfortunately, the general public was told that the answer was one way, when it wasn't.
@volkris I agree that it is appropriate to challenge potential election irregularities in court. It happens all the time. There are election law attorneys dedicated to ensuring that election laws are followed. It is not appropriate for attorneys, however, to make allegations that lack basis in fact, to fail to diligently investigate before making allegations, or to present false information in the course of their duties.
These lawyers acted inappropriately.
@jackiegardina Oh, I disagree! 🙂
Courts are generally not the appropriate venue under the US system to challenge these irregularities, which was largely what the courts said, basically, Why are you bringing this to us?
That's just not how the US system works, and Trump's team was too damn ignorant to know. Or they were playing some sort of PR game with it, but I don't believe they were smart enough for that sort of next dimensional thinking. I think they honestly didn't know how US elections worked.
@volkris I wish the courts would not get involved in election issues but they do get involved all the time. So I am not sure that it is accurate to say that the courts are not the appropriate venue. SCOTUS made a determination about vote counting in 2000.
@jackiegardina remember that the Supreme Court involvement in 2000 was to knock down a lower court that improperly got involved.
Courts don't get involved all the time. So often what people are really complaining about is courts hearing a case and saying, hey, we don't have any jurisdiction here.
That's largely what happened once Trump started complaining to them.
