support the federal government function. and that is the statement you write which i think is true. yesterday in principle to be legitimate. but then became corrupt of time. and i think that is where it gets very difficult. and i come back again to the well-known standard of reasonable doubt. it only takes one juror with a reasonable doubt to hang the jury on that count. mark meadows is barely mentioned in this indictment. does that raise questions for you? well it certainly seems to indicate that he has been cooperating. i know his lawyer, a former doj w. attorney general, george to really are, very well. we worked together on the famous florida recount in 2000, and georgia s a great lawyer. i m sure he has had some interesting discussions with the prosecutors. so meadows could turn out to be a prosecution witness against
Former Montana Gov. Marc Racicot has written an open letter to the state Republican Party to express his dismay at the rightward lurch that he helped to facilitate as a surrogate for George W. Bush in 2000.
time without any integrity questions. nobody without confidence and the results, why can t you follow what they re doing? the officials in nevada say the can t possibly count any faster. this is the best they can do. i mentioned marco rubio carried it only counts can we bring those people and ship them out to nevada and arizona? even the inept governments in canada and france and great britain, they are able to tally their paper ballots on election night. guess what? they don t have to work it worr about broken tabulator spray don t industrialized nation on earth regularly experiences the kind of election mayhem that we are seeing in arizona, nevada, and something has to change for the sake of the american people. make no mistake, it can be done. we can send people to the moon, we can fix our election system and it must be done after the frenzied 2,000 florida recount,
2004 and 2012. you played a key role in the 2000 florida recount that led to the supreme court decision in bush v. gore. you served as the co-chair of the presidential commission on election administration. i think it is fair to say that you are the most prominent republican lawyer who has litigated in the election field. now, you have analyzed the trump campaign s litigation pretty carefully, what s the normal process for post election litigation? how is the trump campaign different from the kind of post election litigation that you have been involved in and know about. in a normal course of doing, any campaign on the night of the election and days after will do a couple of different things. one, is it that they will analyze precinct results and look for abnormalities in the results, and they will send people to those precincts to ask more questions.
after further discussion acknowledged, well, yeah, you are right, we would lose 9-0. dramatic testimony that the president knew his plan to overturn the election was illegal. so did the trump lawyer leading the campaign to keep trump in office. joining me now is ben ginsburg, a republican election lawyer, a celebrated lawyer who testified to the january 6 committee and played a key role in the 2000 florida recount. ben, it s great to see you. let s talk about the january 6th hearings. to a non-lawyer, john eastman acknowledging, according to the testimony, that he knew all along that this would have gone against the election count law of 1887 and that both paths going to the states or stopping the count and putting their own electors up would have been illegal. one less illegal than the other.