hands off

It's not been a great month for Trump lawyers keeping their hands off.


Jones Day has been targeted by protestors, its own lawyers and a $500k anti-Trump campaign for appearing to help the President undermine the US election result.

Together with another firm, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, Jones Day has filed four lawsuits in Pennsylvania alone challenging mail-in ballots.

Numerous cases brought by Trump and various Republican Party entities alleging voter fraud have already been dismissed, and the remaining lawsuits are widely predicted to fail on the basis that none have been able to muster any specific examples of fraud, and because President-Elect Joe Biden's margin of victory is too large to overcome.

A judge's interrogation of a Porter lawyer provided some insight into the quality of the arguments:

excerot

Jones Day has deep links to the Trump administration, having provided over a dozen lawyers to the White House in 2016, including former White House Counsel Don McGahn, and has boasted of its Presidential connections on its website. Like the President and his administration, it has also battled allegations of toxic culture and sexual harassment.

Some US firms such as Kirkland & Ellis refused to work for Trump, but the association proved lucrative for Jones Day, which earned more than $20 million in fees acting in around 20 cases involving Trump, his campaign, and the Republican Party.

However, it is now being targeted on multiple fronts for appearing to abet Trump's attempts to cling on to power.

Protests have sprung up outside several of its offices, including in San Francisco where a giant mural has been painted on the road outside its building. The 240 foot long message spelled out "Count every Vote", and "Jones Day: Hands off our ballots".

A well-funded group of Republican 'never Trumpers', The Lincoln Project, has launched a $500,000 TV and social media campaign targeting Jones Day and its clients for the role it is playing in the Republican Party's attempts to overturn the election result.

“I’d like to know how General Motors justifies working with a company that’s aggressively seeking to undermine the validity of a free and fair democratic election”, Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist and co-founder of the Lincoln Project, told the Washington Post.

The Lincoln Project has encouraged people to email and phone the office numbers of the lead Jones Day lawyers in the Pennsylvania litigation, Ronald Hicks and Carolyn McGee, and to deluge Jones Day with objections.

linc

Enough have answered the call that anyone stumbling across Jones Day’s social media posts would be forgiven for thinking it is supporting a coup.

japan

Another group, The Meidas Touch, has posted a YouTube video titled 'Shame on you Jones Day'. Targeting potential employees, it asks "Are you a law school graduate looking to work for a big law firm? Are you interested in sedition and overthrowing democracy in the United States?  Well, do we have the place for you! Jones Day!" The video has garnered 44,000 views in two days.

In an attempt to repel the attacks, Jones Day released a statement this week insisting that it was "not representing President Trump, his campaign, or any affiliated party in any litigation alleging voter fraud" and that it "also is not representing any entity in any litigation challenging or contesting the results of the 2020 general election". 

Calling media reports to the contrary "false", it said that it was merely representing the Republican Party of Pennsylvania in an attempt to force the review of an order which extended the deadline for mail-in ballots in the state. Given that mail-in voting just so happens to be overwhelmingly used by Democratic Party voters, and handed Biden his lead in many states, Jones Day's clarification appears unlikely to silence its critics.

"Jones Day will not withdraw from that representation", insisted the firm, adding that it "expects that the media will correct the numerous false reports given the facts set forth above, all of which were readily verifiable in the public record".

Some lawyers within Jones Day are understood to be unhappy that, even as it appeared Trump openly sought to undermine the rule of law, the firm continued to behave like a heat seeking missile aimed up his ass.

“To me, it seems extremely shortsighted,” a Jones Day lawyer told The New York Times.

"I imagine those lawyers will be told that they can take their discomfort, and shove it where the sun doesn't shine", suggested a commentator on the RollOnFriday Discussion Board. Although, pointed out another poster, Jones Day's gross revenue for 2019 was around the $2.08 billon mark, "so there's a lot more that $20m to lose if big clients leave over this".


Hi there - don't bother donating the price of a cup of coffee to RollOnFriday - just scroll down and take our survey instead. Thanks!

Tip Off ROF

Comments

Onanymous 13 November 20 08:56

Screw this. Anyone may seek repesentation and it is dumb to go after a law firm based on guilt by association. Leave Jones Day be.

Ex-JD 13 November 20 09:03

Having worked previously at Jones Day I am now immensely embarrassed to feature the firm on my LinkedIn profile. Urgh.

Count legal votes 13 November 20 09:07

The Trump claims have not been shown to be “false” ROF. Just because they are dismissed without investigation by CNN, the BBC and the left wing establishment doesn’t mean they are “false”. Thankfully, media establishments don’t decide who wins elections, voters do.

There is widespread evidence of fraud including dead people voting, Republican vote watchers who are legally entitled to verify votes being kicked out of voting booths as van loads of votes, nearly all for Biden, arrive and are counted without verification at 4am, postal workers being told to backdate the dates on ballots, clear evidence of multiple ballots with the same signature, bags of votes for Trump being found in garbage cans etc etc.

The Dominion software being used to count votes has also been shown to be easily manipulated and at least one example of votes cast for Trump being allocated to Biden (6000 votes) has been uncovered.

I don’t know whether all the allegations are true but there are 100s of sworn affidavits and video evidence. Neither do I know if there are enough discrepancies to change any results. But neither do CNN, BBC, the Guardian or ROF. Let’s wait until the evidence is properly examined and the courts adjudicate before trying to shut down concerns.

 

left wing commentator: “you have a right to free speech”

man in the street : “I am concerned there may have been some fraud. I want it looked into properly please to ensure the election was free and fair”

left wing commentator: “shut up. You are probably racist”

Booh 13 November 20 09:11

One may of course disagree with a suit on the substance, but trying and intimidating lawyers is a totalitarian tactic.  

Poller 13 November 20 09:20

1.Where has rof said that Trump’s claims have been shown to be false, Count Legal Votes?

2.you mad 

Anon 13 November 20 09:24

Haha, well said Count Legal Votes. I am no Trump fan but there are definitely discrepancies that need to be looked into properly, not least to stop this happen again. The way the media are refusing to countenance any allegations of dodgy behaviour is not helping create any confidence in the results. If there is no proper looking into of allegations, the presidency will forever be tainted and Biden will be fighting for credibility. The establishment should welcome a proper investigation. “Nothing to see here” is not good enough!

SeeNoEvil 13 November 20 09:32

Did you not read the article Poller? ROF say that Trump “seeks to undermine the rule of law” . Plus they talk about cases predicted to fail and no evidence of fraud. And that Trump is “undermining” the result. Open your eyes Poller

Paul 13 November 20 09:45

So let me get this straight.

It's bad to criticise lawyers who keep illegal immigrants in the country.  They are heroes, standing up for the human rights of the individual.

It's good to criticise lawyers who investigate voter fraud.  They are seeking to undermine democracy.

 

Anonymous 13 November 20 09:56

How intellectual vogues change, eh?

For the last four years we've been celebrating lawyers who went to court with a view to challenging and undermining the results of national plebiscites. It was 'holding power to account', and ensuring the sanctity of the 'rule of law', and all that good stuff. If you'd suggested that using the legal process to do such a thing was in any way immoral or improper then you'd have been labelled as some kind of proto-fascist (or perhaps just an apologist for them).

But now it's a voting outcome that we all approve of so the legal challenge thing is suddenly terribly out of fashion and exercising one's right to make such things in relation to a voting event is undermining the foundations of democracy itself.

Anonymous 13 November 20 09:57

They are just going to have to suck it up. There’s no cab rank here and firms choose their clients as well as the other way around. It’s like free speech. You can say what you want, but not escape consequences. You can choose to work for a particular client, but not escape criticism. No-one is saying they can’t help Trump try and fix an election. People can say they shouldn’t and that perhaps other clients should consider their choice of firm.

Anonymous 13 November 20 10:02

Also, it'll be enlightening to hear how the press describes lawyers acting for Trump and to compare and contrast those descriptions with the verbiage they've used over the last four years in relation to similar legal actions.

I can't help but think that they will suddenly tire of describing the makers of these kind of applications as being 'Constitutional Law Experts' and 'Senior Human Rights Lawyers'.

Perhaps I'm a pessimist, but I fear that those descriptions may suddenly fall out of favour, to be replaced by a trend for noting that these are particularly 'expensive lawyers' from 'big international firms' - with the cost of these legal jamborees suddenly becoming of crucial importance to assessing the morality of bringing them.

Then we can all go back to scratching our heads as to why the pubic say that they no longer feel the level of trust and respect for traditional media as they once did. Doubtless the Russians will be to blame for it all.

Anon 13 November 20 10:05

The left are not content with demonising and silencing those who have different opinions. Now they want to go after those who provide services to their political opponents. This intolerance is so divisive. 

Anonymous 13 November 20 10:22

@Paul - it is odd isn't it?

Only a couple of weeks ago we were told that the Home Secretary making critical remarks about a very particular type of legal practice represented a grave threat to lawyers everywhere, and that even suggesting that some kind of reform was necessary put us all at risk of serious violence. Irresponsible speech which she needed to retract and apologise for immediately.

But now we've got mobs quite literally baying outside of a firm's doors and it's all ok. Nothing to worry about and no implications for the wider profession. See, apparently this kind of criticism is fine because it's all just a natural consequence of their actions. Free speech and stuff, innit?

It's really very odd to watch.

 

(and, faod, I say this as someone who is sure that Trump's legal actions are all meritless and doomed to fail)

Warren 13 November 20 10:31

Of course they should be demonised for accepting instructions to bring claims I know are false, its as bad as all those lawyers who defend murderers and rapists that I know are guilty

Old Fart 13 November 20 10:40

I am delighted that Trump has lost the election.  However... In the US, one of the primary means of holding officials to account and ensuring adherence to the law is litigation; the Trump campaign has every right to litigate and to ensure that electoral law is respected.  For the Trumpers to win in the courts, they need to produce valid evidence that the law has not been followed correctly (in which case, surely that is a good thing?) or they need the courts to be hopelessly incompetent and/or biased in their favour. If the latter is true, democracy is doomed anyway, regardless of the outcome of this election.

Anon 13 November 20 10:44

Just let the investigations run their course with transparency. And let both sides have legal representation  without judgment or smears. Save the conclusions until the evidence has been examined. 

Lemon 13 November 20 10:46

I think it's wrong to dogpile JD lawyers as individuals, but come on, as a corporate entity if it plays with the big dogs, it should expect to get some bites. The violins on here or a huge law firm are hilarious.

Also, Trump definitely is seeking to undermine the rule of law - not necessarily via JD, but via tweets like this: 

“REPORT: DOMINION DELETED 2.7 MILLION TRUMP VOTES NATIONWIDE. DATA ANALYSIS FINDS 221,000 PENNSYLVANIA VOTES SWITCHED FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP TO BIDEN. 941,000 TRUMP VOTES DELETED. STATES USING DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS SWITCHED 435,000 VOTES FROM TRUMP TO BIDEN.” 

This is false, or so misrepresentative as to be false. By endorsing this rubbish and tweeitng things such as "Rigged election!", Trump is openly undermining the rule of law.

Real 13 November 20 11:07

Lemon,

What about the 9000 votes in Nevada from people out of state, the thousands of votes from dead people and the fact that in Pennsylvania, the republican vote watchers were all told to leave (by law, they have a right to be there) just before huge swings to Biden were detected? Is this worth at least investigating? Pennsylvania has a history of voter fraud. That’s a fact, even though you may not like it.

how do you think the tens of millions of voters who do think there has been fraud will react if the establishment refuses to investigate?

Neither of us know how this will pan out. Just let the investigations happen without hysterics and the truth will come out.

 

 

Bi-Partisan Observer 13 November 20 11:12

We're in the middle of a nationwide lockdown with record unemployment, and nasty little tossers are harassing Associates online about who their law firm represents? What are they expecting? That everyone will just up and leave Jones Day. 

There are valid legal challenges to be examined. Nasty Fascists.

Anonymous 13 November 20 11:12

Hey all you Biden Democrats! Your party refused to recognise the legitimacy of Trump and have demonised him and his supporters for 4 years. You tried to impeach him on fake Russiagate charges. So you were happy to use the system to question outcomes.

So stop being so salty now it looks like real fraud has been uncovered. Shame on all those trying to suppress this. 
 

let’s all Make American Great Again. 

 

Anonymous 13 November 20 11:15

@Lemon

Hang about? Are you saying that Jones Day are managing Trump's Twitter account now? 

I ask only because it feels a bit like you are trying to use a handful of unconnected tweets as an excuse for attacking anyone, or any organisation, who provides any form of goods or services to a particular individual. As if one's right to proper legal representation is contingent on one's compliance with Twitter's terms of use.

But I'm sure that can't be right and that you'll explain the connection you're suggesting exists at some point later this morning.

Also, good work on the "huge law firm" descriptor.

Anonymous 13 November 20 11:16

Hilarious how some commenters are drawing a parallel between this and the right to representation for murderers (or asylum seekers if you prefer). Multi-billion law firms make choices about the clients they represent. There is no cab rank rule at play. The idea that they should not be criticised for some of those choices on the basis that everyone has the right to legal representation was outdated 20 years ago.

Anonymous 13 November 20 11:24

@10:02 - don't bring the Russians into this!

They have no time to bring down the Media, they're too busy rigging all of the elections taking place across the Western World to undermine democracy.

They've been doing it relentlessly for years. Just ask Carol.

Except for this one particular election, which they haven't touched and which is totally clean. Don't even bother looking. No testing for corruption or graft is required. Taking steps to robustly test it for suspected outside interference (thin though such suspicions might be) would be to undermine democracy.

Chris L 13 November 20 11:53

This just raises Jones Day even higher in my estimations. I can only speak for the London office but they've always had a fantastic reputation for working hard and playing even harder. Some big characters in the office and the social side is absolutely top notch.

L 13 November 20 12:06

its astonishing how so many lawyers are trying to stop the allegations being properly investigated. threatening and intimidating a law firm for acting for one side! its so typical of the left. instead of listening to the arguments and trying to persuade that their position is correct, they want to silence and censor the other side and intimidate and attempt to shame those who dare to have a different view. the left is so intolerant. and the hissy fits of outrage are juvenile

Honest Dave 13 November 20 12:16

ROF is a garbage publication, of course, but this is poor even by their standards. The silencing of lawyers has a very, very ugly history.

Anonymous 13 November 20 12:25

@11:16 - yeah, that's right!

This "Multi-billion law firm" has no right to allow its clients to bring legal challenges in line with applicable law.

It's far too expensive for that to be legitimate.

If only some reputable Constitutional Law Experts could be found to oppose them and uphold democracy for us all (for an undisclosed and unexamined but presumably modest fee of course).

Bev 13 November 20 12:34

The news: Jones day is getting criticised for helping trump. 
 

Trumpers in the comments: it’s wrong to criticise JD for helping trump! JD shouldn’t be silenced! The fact JD is getting criticised shouldn’t even be reported! The news should be silenced!

Anonymous 13 November 20 12:38

Trump lost. Get over it. He's entitled to legal representation and multi-billion dollar law firms are no more shielded in terms of their reputation from their choice of clients these days than multi-billion dollar accountancy or consulting firms. Put your big boy pants on if you're upset about this. They will just go and hire an expensive PR agency but the idea that some how law firms are special in being shielded from contamination is for the birds. 

Anonymous 13 November 20 12:46

@12.25 - you miss my point. Probably deliberately. Of course a client can appoint a law firm to defend them. I didn't imply otherwise. Absent there being a cab rank rule or it being a matter of business survival then if people want to have a pop at the firm for their choice of client then that comes with being a big law firm these days. I know it's hard for some lawyers to understand business services folks play important roles in firms these days, but this sort of thing is why big firms have PR functions.

Anon 13 November 20 12:48

so [email protected], should the multiple law firms acting for Biden and the democrats be criticised too? Or only the law firm acting for the side that has a different political opinion to you?

Count every vote 13 November 20 13:19

The lefties are not really after Trump. They are after his supporters (the “deplorables” as Hilary Clinton used to describe them). It’s just Trump is in the way.

why are Lawyers trying to stop fraud allegations being properly investigated and threatening retribution against a law firm who takes on the mandate? The lefties = the new fascists. They think they are liberal but refuse to allow any opinions that do not match their own and heckle and try to silence those with differing views.  It’s shameful and anyone on this thread defending the appalling smears against a law firm should reflect on that. 

Anon 13 November 20 13:22

In the 1930s, the nazi party used to threaten that anyone in Germany who did business with the Jewish companies would suffer retribution. Sounds familiar? 

TRUMP FAN 13 November 20 13:55

Its funny that out of all the previous elections, major fraud has only been espoused by one....Trump. The last four years have been hysterical... I haven't seen so much controversy on a daily basis with the Presidency than Trumps. He has been proved to lie on a daily basis and has created such a toxic regime that is it any wonder that people doubt his claims! The only tangible evidence I have encountered is Trump getting the US Postal Service CEO to make postal voting and delivery of votes extremely difficult. To me that is the behaviour of an undemocratic dictator, not the leader of the free world. We may as well start calling America.... Americanski...... they have polluted the word democracy for an awful long time!

Lemon 13 November 20 13:56

“Neither of us know how this will pan out. Just let the investigations happen without hysterics and the truth will come out.”

I do know how this will pan out, Real. It will pan out as it has been panning out, with every single case alleging electoral fraud thrown out, because they are baseless, because they are abject attempts by trump’s sycophants and enablers to appease him. 

Also Gentry 13 November 20 14:17

It never seeks to amaze me quite how right-wing ignorant and biased the legal profession is when I read ROF comments. Some of you need institutionalising if you don't think Trump is undermining (or at least causing severe damage to) the rule of law and democracy.

Anonymous 13 November 20 14:43

@12:46, could you be a bit clearer about when a firm becomes a 'big law firm' and thus fair game for harassment?

Where do I find the boundary between the small uncriticisable guardians of the rule of law, and the big 'expensive' corporates who can be intimidated, harassed and criticised at will?

Like, where is Leigh Day on this continuum? How about Mishcon?

Anon 13 November 20 14:53

Lemon, your assertion that all cases have been thrown out is factually incorrect. I suggest you take your hands off your ears, stop screaming you are not listening, open your eyes and do some research. Try Google. 

Anon 13 November 20 15:00

Also Gentry, the law says that leal challenges against the result can be made. So how is making that challenge undermining the rule of law? 

And how is democracy being undermined when all they are trying to do is ensure that cheating by the Democrats is uncovered? E.g. ballot harvesting, votes from dead people, republican official vote watchers being escorted out of the ballot centres just before tens of thousands of votes nearly all in favour of Biden magically appear etc etc

LiberalMind 13 November 20 15:11

I am not a Trump supporter at all, I am very much left of centre. I was very sceptical about the claims of fraud but have spent some time looking into it and I am now convinced the allegations are not groundless. If you get your news from mainstream media, even publications usually seen as conservative, you wont find the evidence of allegations and they will dismiss them out of hand. The media have taken the view that the allegations should not be aired (and lets face it, the media detest Trump). You need to dig a little deeper, and you can then finds the videos and evidence, including interviews with witnesses, sworn affidavits and some whistleblowers, together with what seem to be to be very concerning evidence of the allegations e.g. in some cases there are more votes than registered voters. Try NewsMax or search Tucker or Hannity in YouTube. Just listen with an open mind. If there are no proper investigations, the whole presidency will be tainted and nearly half the electorate will feel cheated. 

Peachy 13 November 20 15:19

Love it, LiberalMind. 
 

‘i am not a Trump supporter, in fact I am on the left, but having looked into it, I found that he is a GOD AND WAS CHEATED BY THOSE THIEVIJG GODLESS DEMOCRAT SCUMBAGS ALL HAIL TRUMP ALL HAIK TRUMP WWG1WGA HRC DRINKS BABIES BLOOD anyway that’s just what I found, all I can say that I’m on the left.’

Anonymous 13 November 20 15:24

The best way to assure people that an allegation is false is to hastily dismiss it, deny it a public forum for rigorous investigation, and to deploy whatever coercive tools are available to deter legal professionals from representing the maker of it.

It would also help if we could demonise the people making it as ill-intentioned scum who were working to bring down our country from within.

Trust me, that's the best way to defend democracy and to uphold the publics' trust in it. Only a fascist would think otherwise.

125yearoldvoters 13 November 20 15:40

Lemon, the reason the Trump supporters are moaning is just because dead people tend to vote almost exclusively democrat, right? 

 

Zombies for Biden!

Anonymous 13 November 20 16:49

Randall Eliason, a law professor at George Washington University who specializes in white-collar criminal law, says the constitutional principle of everyone having a right to a lawyer isn’t at play in this case.

“The distinction here is this is not a criminal defendant who is being prosecuted by the government,” he said. “[The Trump campaign] is playing offense by affirmatively bringing these cases, and the firm is not obligated to represent them.” Eliason, who explored the issue in a Washington Post column, added that Jones Day is not a small civil rights firm but a corporate behemoth that should not expect to be exempt from public criticism over the clients it represents.

Anonymous 13 November 20 17:09

Why are the Trump trolls invading the Roll on Friday boards? In any event, let's be clear what has happened here:

- Trump has lost. Biden's margin of victory is too great for there to be any sensible argument about this.

- Trump has raised a series of bad faith allegations of corruption and voter fraud.

- Why are the bad faith? First, there is no evidence to support them, which is why his team keep losing lawsuits. Second, they are clearly intended to delegitimize the election and undermine democracy.

- Many of the lawsuits are also in bad faith. Brought without proper evidence and based on obviously bad law.

So for me the question is the strength of the cases Jones Day are bringing. If they are bad faith (no proper evidence or arguable case) then that is not acceptable. Even if they are legitimate cases, there is a question about whether Jones Day are tainted by the overall bad faith motivations of Trump.

Anonymous 13 November 20 17:41

Gosh, are all these people expressing reservations about the precedent set by a campaign of harassing lawyers because of the identity of their clients 'Trump Trolls' now? They'll be 'apologists' too no doubt?

I'm looking forward to four years without dissent or calls for introspection. Just as soon as we cast out these 'Trump Trolls' we will be free of such things. Just as true democracy demands.

 

Anonymous 13 November 20 17:51

@17:09 - Is this 'Bad Faith' and weak cases stuff new?

I can't help but feel that I must have missed all of the anger about 'bad faith' litigation on constitutional and administrative issues that stood no real prospect of success over the last four years?

Did we feel that way about the many failed challenges relating to the Brexit Referendum, or did we save up all of our outrage for the doomed Presidential Impeachment stuff? Surely that was all precisely the sort of thing that would have really got our backs up?

No? But why not? Surely it can't be that these principles are only very newly fashionable and that we felt somewhat differently about them just last month.

Oh, wait, whoopsie me. Don't look at that particular elephant. I forgot for just a moment that we only put it there to catch out the 'Trump Trolls'. Everyone go back to calling the Others fascists - dirty little trolls trying to steal our country away. 

After all, how better to reinforce public trust in the principle of the Rule Of Law?

Which we care about very deeply of course, and not just in a transient way that comes and goes at our convenience.

Don't cancel me 13 November 20 18:02

Saddam Hussein was allowed legal representation. That's completely normal. The people trying to cancel Jones Day are against the right to legal representation and the constitution of the United States. It is disgusting. 

Anonymous 13 November 20 19:33

Hi Trump Trolls, 

I think your case would be easier if Trump stopped shouting “I won” (he didn’t) or “It’s fraud” (without evidence). 

This is not about enforcing his legal rights; it’s about undermining democracy. If a law firm wants to help him undermine democracy, they should expect to be criticised. 
xx The UK

Anon 14 November 20 01:45

Trying to stop the allegations being investigated properly smacks of cover up. Threatening retribution against Lawyers acting for someone whose political views differ to yours is on the edge of fascism. Even people who think there probably was not fraud (at least not widespread fraud) are troubled by this behaviour. 

Anonymous 14 November 20 02:12

Both Republican and Democrat lawmakers in Pennsylvania have asked for an audit of the vote. The latter have taken the view to support a review because they understand there is a lack of trust in the process. And whilst they have not said so, I suspect they can see the voting systems in Pen were a train wreck and it is bad for democracy if so many don’t accept the result and consider there is evidence of partisan interference. 
Why can’t the armchair liberals in the UK stop shrieking and just wait for the investigations to run their course. If they are correct there was no fraud, that will come out. And to try and stop one party to the dispute from having legal representation. Well, words fail me.

Anon 14 November 20 02:22

The Democrats and their supporters never gave Trump a days peace. The impeachment hoax was downright fraud. They never accepted his legitimacy and they used every process, every law, to try and bring him down. And now they are bleating that he is returning the favour. Grow up babies. Let the truth come out. 

Shame 14 November 20 03:06

If Biden legitimately won, the Democrats would have no problem with a proper constitutional  audit of the votes. There is evidence not just of voter fraud, but also election fraud. We have to wonder why so many on the left are screaming that there should be no audit and why they even don’t want the side calling for an audit to have legal representation. 

Peter1 14 November 20 03:44

I just spent 10 minutes scolding my grandparents for voting for Jo.

Then I left the cemetery 

Hm 14 November 20 05:42

I didn’t think there was any shananigans. But now I am not so sure. Why is one side of the dispute saying they won’t support an investigation and “nothing to see here”. Don’t they want a proper investigation so that can then show the allegations are not true? Why are conservatives being censored by twitter and FB? Why are no news organisations looking into the allegations? Why is the mob baying against a law firm acting for Trump? It’s quite disturbing.

Better off out of there 14 November 20 13:53

I tell everyone I know not to use Jones Day.

And I only worked there.

Now I know about their support for Trump that's another reason.

Tweeter 14 November 20 14:58

Over 6M votes cast, there’s been exactly 2 cases of criminal voter fraud found in Pennsylvania:

-Republican voting for a dead mum

-Republican voting for a live democrat son.

10 days of Republicans frenetically searching, that’s what they turned up.

Anon 15 November 20 04:49

That is false Tweeter. Looks like you get your news from CNN and the Guardian. Wait and see. The fraud uncovered is not just voter fraud, it is systematic electoral fraud. 

Dean 15 November 20 06:25

The evidence of cheating is compelling and needs to be looked into in an open and transparent manner. The Trump haters can’t shut down the voices demanding a proper investigation or threaten their lawyers. It’s astonishing that even on a thread where presumably most contributors are lawyers, they are trying to stop allegations being investigated. Why would this be? What do they have to fear?

Biden voters will be turning in their graves when the truth comes out. Literally.

Bandy 15 November 20 08:02

Uh huh, uh huh, sure thing bud (backs slowly out of graveyard where Dean is laughing and muttering to himself about fraud while digging up skeletons)

Anonymous 16 November 20 08:36

Who is directing Putin's social media disinformation budget? 

Do they understand that RoF is UK site and the UK has no influence over the US elections? 

Someone is really going to catch it here...very poor resource allocation.

toomuch 16 November 20 14:21

I see the cancel culture mob now seeks to erase not only views they disagree with, but also the ability to seek legal representation by those who have different politics to them. And they consider themselves "liberal"! 

Maybe 16 November 20 17:38

It's basic professional ethics that you don't allege fraud unless you have the evidence to back it up.  Some law firms have, at the very least, come perilously close to crossing that line, and deserve to be called out for it.  As they already have by a few federal judges.

Anon 17 November 20 02:13

There are legitimate questions to be asked. We should not block these being looked into. If they are not, in the eyes of half the population, the election will be seen to have been tainted.

There are 923 sworn affidavits, given under risk of perjury, evidencing irregularities. 

Sore loser? 17 November 20 06:29

Biden easily won the vote amongst the following demographics:

- computer bots

- dead people

- people whose votes mysteriously arrived in cooler boxes after 4 am the day after the election 

- people who votes were counted after the lawfully empowered republican election watchers were kicked out and covers put over the windows so they could not see in

Anonymous 17 November 20 08:18

Christ - there are so many reasons for not using JD and Trump is not even no.1. Taking years to boot out the handsy partners in London, the perilous nature of a UK office with not one PSL (I kid you not), recording time in 15-minute units, tired staffers working 2000 hours a year. Take your pick...

Anonymous 17 November 20 09:43

Better off out of there 14 November 20 13:53

I tell everyone I know not to use Jones Day.

And I only worked there.

Now I know about their support for Trump that's another reason.

Heh.

Me too.

Anonymous 17 November 20 15:04

Biden only won because he used 5G to exert mind control over the US population to believe fake news CNN.

There is compelling evidence of this and Trump is entitled to bring legal action to defend his position, which will definitely show he was the WINNER!

The liberal and radical LEFT are just exerting cancel culture by criticizing Trump's legitimate right to bring legal proceedings. These are legitimate questions to be asked. This is just the same as lefty lawyers going to court and wining in immigration cases where the UK government has actually broken the law.

These cases must be brought. We should now allow the transition to Sleepy Joe until all these cases are heard even if it causes significant risks to national security and the fight against Covid.

(Is that right Trump dudes? Because this is where you are at)

Anon 17 November 20 15:28

In Georgia, they just “found” 2600 previously uncounted votes, most for Trump. They are saying it’s “human error”. I am sick of this cheating. It’s the tip of the iceberg. 

Anon 18 November 20 02:00

So if you have political beliefs which differ from the left wing mob, you are not allowed to have lawyers ? This is not just bullying, it’s economic terrorism. Some of the lawyers involved now have to have full time security. 

Open minded 18 November 20 02:11

They have so far found three batches of votes in three separate Georgia counties which were all in favour of Trump and none of which had been counted. It’s funny how all these “errors” are in favour of Biden, isn’t it? Should we beat up the lawyers who are advising the republicans on this? 

Toby Greenlord, Freeman on the Land 18 November 20 08:29

In France they call The Magna Carter The Royale with Decrees.

Anonymous 18 November 20 10:30

@anon 02:00

Sarky news article in RoF = "economic terrorism"

Lol.

Though I am coming round to the idea of continuing these court cases given Trump is not just losing but being humiliated, e.g. Rudy's drubbing yesterday.

Anonymous 18 November 20 12:38

"they"

Heh.

"They" found a million votes for Biden hidden in Trump's voluminous bottom.

It must be true.  I read it in some comments on the internet underneath a completely unrelated article.

I'm sick of this cheating.  It's the tip of the arsehole.

Toby Greenlord, Freeman on the Land 18 November 20 17:38

They have found fistfuls of votes for Biden hidden inside Trump's voluminous bottom.

And even more under his wispy blonde hat.

WHY ISN'T THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA TALKING ABOUT THAT?

Anon 20 November 20 08:01

Dangerous.  Everyone is allowed legal advice regardless of whether you agree with their politics.  If it wasn’t JD it would be someone else.  

Related News