https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-representative-mike-johnson-thinks-that-the-election-isnt-over
This guy actually seems reasonable and smart, which is what makes the interview so surreal to me. He truly believes Trump is all about protecting the Constitution and our election process.
Smart, he seems. Reasonable he does not.
He talks about the need to be intellectually honest, but when he talks about all the lost lawsuits, he mentions that in some they lost on standing... but he fails to address that in the bulk of them, which
were tried on merits, there was
no evidence of fraud or error or anything and even that in many of them no accusation of fraud was ever made!
This is not about inadequacy of lawyers, but lack of any (meaningful) evidence of fraud.
He talks about the Texas suit, but ignores the point that Steve Bullock made that if this was really about the constitutionality of the process, rather than the loss by Trump, the suit would have included places like Montana and California, where the result is not in doubt, but according to the Texas description the process was.
And he fails to acknowledge that the powers wielded were given to those various bodies
by the legislatures and if those legislatures had not wished those bodies to retain that power, they could have taken it back... which they did not.
The PA lawsuits come to mind.