and then later made a much more sas is mh its request and return the results in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania and georgia. five supreme court justices will have to vote to even hear the case. speaking of accusations, the texas attorney general who brought the suit pictured here is under indictment for securities fraud and accused by eight of his senior staff with malfesance while in office. a lot going on today in washington. we'll beic traing it itracking . you can find me @scottmcgrew. >> thanks for keeping us in the know. >>> today may be a big step towards the beginning of the end of the covid pandemic. the fda now meeting to decide whether the green light or two green light the pfizer vaccine for emergency use and the work is now under way to get those vaccines administered as soon as possible here in the bay area. "today in the bay" kris sanchez

the case is being supported by 17 other states attorney general of texas alleges that wisconsin pennsylvania georgia and michigan illegally changed their election laws and prop compromising the results of the 2020 bout certain officials in the defendant states present to the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail in voting the defendant states flooded the citizenry with tens of millions of ballots applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they're lawfully received evaluated and counted the lawsuit doesn't allege voter fraud but points to what it calls voting irregularities we asked media and legal analyst lionel why the case a significant. the reason why this is important is that under article 3 of our constitution the supreme court is the site of original jurisdiction meaning you go directly to disappear in court in cases of lawsuit or dispute between states was very rare for the supreme court to hear or the answer anything but in this particular case the supreme court is acting not as an appellate court not as an appeals court

let me summarize what they are doing in texas, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgia and michigan had unlawfulctions, that basically diminishes the votes of the people in texas, tension franchises them. does the suit have any chance? >> according to the supreme court they asked for a briefing schedule which is a better chance than not. they are saying i am here in california. california allows noncitizens to vote. each of those votes would be illegal and would cancel out my vote. this is a larger level and says because michigan violated the u.s. constitution's fourteenth amendment their entire vote cancels out our vote and changed the election in an unconstitutional manner. this is interesting. i wrote the book in a divided era. these are the state separating out red versus blue to a significant degree. it is interesting from a historical perspective, last time the state through this divided was leading up to the civil war. shannon: estate to watch. the fight continues for donald trump. here's what he had to say yesterday. >> hopefully the next administration will be the trump administration b

legislature or republican judge winning to override the verdict of the voters in michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgia, whatever, would mitch mcconnell have stood in the way? kevin mccarthy, marco rubio, would they have protected small-"d" democracy? and i don't think we have language for what is happening in the republican party and its willingness to run over democracy to maintain power. >> and i've been told i sound like i'm the biggest skeptic, and a debbie downer. i hope it does work. no, i really do. i hope joe biden can work with the other side. but given everything that susan and ron just said, how does he do it? i hope it works, i really do. but how does he work with republican legislators who want to turn over and -- i hope he can do it, again. let me just say for anyone who is watching. but i have also been doing this job for the last 12 years. and i see what is happening. go on. >> well, i think your skepticism is well justified, and the record of the last 12 years is one of blowtorch opposition from republicans to democratic presidents. first of all, though, joe biden is a white man. bara

ken paxton's longshot request that the supreme court invalidate the results in georgia, michigan, pennsylvania and wisconsineven though the high court just rejected a similar gop attempt in pennsylvania. michigan's democratic attorney general accused paxton of shopping for a presidential pardon. >> i feel bad for the taxpayers in texas that have to finance this ridiculous and frivolous lawsuit. you know, we should note that a.g. paxton, you know, is a member of the trump campaign, very involved with that. also that he is currently under federal indictment for securities fraud and also being investigated by the fbi. >> reporter: louisiana house republican mike johnson is backing the texas lawsuit writing in an e-mail to his gop colleagues that they should sign on too saying mr. trump is anxiously awaiting the final list of supporters in congress. back in september when the president was seeking to replace the late justice ruth bader ginsburg he signaled he might turn to the supreme court to bail him out. >> i think this scam that the democrats are pulling, it's a scam, this scam will be before the united sta

republican judge willing to clearly override the rule of voters in a state -- michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgia, whatever -- would mitch mcconnell have stood in the way? marco rubio? would any have them raised a finger to protect small-d democracy? i don't think we have a language in our politics to fully express what is happening within the republican party, and its willingness to run over the rules of democracy if that's what it takes to maintain power. >> so, john, listen. every time i ask this question, i come off the wrong way. i've been told i'm the biggest skeptic and that i am a debbie downer. i hope that it does work. no, i really do. i hope that joe biden can work with the other side. but, given everything that susan just said and everything that ron just said, how does -- how does he do it? i hope it works. i really do. but, how does he work with, you know, republican legislators who are doing -- and da-da-da? for anybody who is watching but i have, also, been doing this job for the last 12 years, and i see what's happening. go on. >> well, i think your skepticism is well-justified.

without those voters, the president-elect would not have carried michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgia. i have heard all these pundits with their spin, what they are not recognizing is that that are not differential in those communities made the difference in these swing states. there were many other factors, but i would say that that was the decisive factor in providing an important win for the president-elect. we want to see a diverse cabinet, white house. number two, when it comes to racial justice, we want to see important early steps. yes, a minimum wage increase, it is time for congress to pass that. the president should champion it in his 100 day plan. a voting rights act advancement. an infrastructure plan that includes housing and community facilities into it, provisions to ensure african-american businesses and workers and latino businesses and workers have an opportunity, real opportunity, to participate in the upside of such an investment. we are looking for a meaningful criminal justice reform. we think that the joe biden that i know is a person who takes his commitments s

then what they want the court to do so force the four states, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgia, michigano have special elections for new electors. i just don't think that is going to happen. i think, i think the court will say at most, they may just throw it without without comment. i think at most they will say this should have been, this should have been brought at an earlier point in time, perhaps before the election. elizabeth: yeah. it is interesting texas is not using the other states that used mail-in ballots, similar changes to mail-in ballots. constitutional issue, it is an important one you're talking about, that is what ken paxton is talking about too. >> yeah. elizabeth: they say what the states did could affect, weaken the process for future votes for generations to come and undercuts the voting process in states that abided by the rules and didn't just change the rules as these swing states allegedly did. that is what ken paxton and texas side of the aisle is saying. your word on that? >> made an interesting point. i saw his interview with lou. he made an interesting point

than 100 members, republican members of congress, to invalidate the votes in michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, georgiaresident says the fight has just begun. this is over, is it not? >> well, i think the electoral college vote which is coming up on monday will be another act of finality. i think -- obviously, victor, we can't ignore the fact that there are tens of millions of americans who have been led to believe that something was amiss with our election. whether that's right or wrong, they genuinely believe it and they do want to see this process play out and we have gone to court, the legal process has been followed. all the evidence has been presented. and i hope that it can provide some closure to those who have some concerns about the election that three of the supreme court justices who didn't take this case were nominated by president trump, and in many of these district courts and appellate courts it was trump appointees who were writing these opinions rejecting these cases. and, you know, bill barr, despite what was just said about him, he has said that the election was clean and he also wa

specifically about georgia, wisconsin, michigan, and pennsylvania at the highest court in the land. and that's notn, a all. this is truly significant. 17 other states, including missouri, alabama, arkansas, florida, indiana, kansas, louisiana, and many others filing a brief with the u.s. supreme court, and by the way, many are expected to ask to join the case in support of what would then become a landmark supreme courtha case. let's be clear. no states attorney general, you've got to understand politics here, whatever put their name or reputation on the line over a case that lacks merit on the law or without a strong constitutional basis. definitely not 17 attorneys general. that is what happened, 18 total when you include texas. no matter what political alliances they have or don't have. we will have an important analysis. lara trump, kayleigh mcenany, reince priebus. also, hand of tonight into congressman eric swalwell's former relationship with what appears to be, yep, a chinese spy. why is he on the intelligence committee? and straight ahead, a full report on new a legal troubl

in these four states, michigan pennsylvania, wisconsin, georg georgia. the probability of that in one state is one and one quadrille hquadrillionquadrillion. because fake new cnn and others can't wake up and find enough energy to go read a public court filing, i did it for them. can find these sworn declarations by charles kashani, who by the way, phd from rutgers, tenured professor, expert testimony and hundreds of court cases. go through meticulously how he used disease scores and standard deviation from a medium to come up with this number. so, it's enough for a reporter to go find this. it's the duty on the job that each of these reporters have, to not look into this, to not look into what is available for all to read and see. >> sean: just to emphasize what you found in detroit, they list 174,384 absentee ballots out of 566,100,000 absentee ballots. 30% of those counted without a registration number four precincts in the city of detroit. i hope america is watching. these are real numbers here. thank you. when we come back, hunter biden confirming to

michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin, georgia. and for the vote to swing by as much as it did. the probability of that, in one state, is one in one quadrillion. that's one, comma, 15 zeroes. to happen in all four, it's one, comma, 15 zeroes to the fourth power. >> yeah. it's making that up. doesn't make sense. minority-republican lawmakers dissented from that kind of nonsense, including senator john cornyn of texas. a former judge, who said he did not see the theory of the case. and senator mitt romney, who called it madness. congresswoman, liz cheney, one of four house leaders not to sign on to the brief. a spokesman for president-elect biden said the decision was no surprise, adding quote, dozens of judges, election officials, and trump's own attorney general have dismissed the baseless attempts to deny that he lost the election. lots to talk about with cnn's abby phillip. also, john dean. john, does the ruling mean president trump's efforts to overturn the election in the courts are completely over? >> i would think so. while, there are a couple lower-court cases, it's not l

what we can't have, again, are states whether it's pennsylvania, georgia, wisconsin, michigan, changingthose votes diluting the votes of other states like arkansas. that's why arkansas is all in this fight. is because i want to protect the votes of the people of the state of arkansas. todd: finally a.g. rutledge all eyes on the clock when it comes to cases, contesting the election throughout the course of the last couple weeks. but, specifically, with regard to this case. the number of legal experts have said there is, quote, a fatal flaw because of an unreasonable delay going against the legal laches because nobody knows what that is. that is an argument that seems to be very, very front and center. how do you respond to that argument? >> well, the same critics if we had filed this suit before the election would have said well it's too early it's not ripe in legal terms. now it's too late according to the experts. let's let the supreme court decide whether or not this case has merit and whether or not we can move forward and protect the votes of the people of our respective states. aga

house side and the senate side, to object to the counting of electors coming in from pennsylvania and wisconsin and georgia and michigan, the swing states that they're upset about. and if they can indeed get a bicameral objection filed by members under the electoral account act, the house and senate will have to resolve separately into our chambers to consider the basis of their objection. and undoubtedly there will be lots of flowery giuliani-style rhetoric about fraud and corruption and nonsense with no evidence behind it. the house will undoubtedly vote to reject this objection. it's unclear what the senate will do. if both houses reject it, it's over. if there's a split between the house and the senate, under the electric count acoral count act the certificate of ascertainment of the governor of the state where the objection is brought gerngs. fortunately i think the governors of all those states will stand by the legitimate constitutional process, the election process of michigan and wisconsin and pennsylvania and georgia. as the officials both democratic and republican in those states have been stand

i would assume that republican house members from michigan and wisconsin and georgia and pennsylvaniagned onto this suit would summarily resign from the house. criminal election.elected in a certainly this ilgality they allege out of thin air wasn't limited just to the presidential vote. i just find it beyond -- when i say they want the trump voters without donaldhe trump, can't wait for donald trump to be gone. they quiver in fear about him. they are terrified. it is not born of affection or high regard. it is born rank fear. that has to beea dng for every republican in the house who signed on. z chene the third in the house, did not. good for her. judy: let me ask you about oimething congress is not, and that is finding a way to come up with relief, help for people suffering in this pandemic they have come down to the wire. they'veigured out how to fund the government, but they still don't have covid relief. what is the hold up, and do you see them getting through that? david: if the faith ogod collapses, the church collapses. if our faith intu our inson collapses, our nation collap

pennsylvania alone. the texas lawsuit argued that widespread fraud and irregularities in 4 states. wisconsin michigan, pennsylvania and georgia had somehow burden the people of texas and left the results in those states so tainted they should be overturned. if it had somehow succeeded those states and their 62 electoral votes could have been taken away from joe biden and awarded to president trump if that happened the president would win a second term, but the case relied on many of the same claims stuff ballot boxes corrupted machines late night vote drops all made in lawsuits across the land the judges have tossed out of court over the last month. still 18 attorneys general supported the lawsuit and more than a 100 republican congressman signed on as well though by extension the suit cast doubt on their elections too. republican tim walberg of michigan was one of them. i don't accept a that joe biden won anything yet until we've exhausted all the resources that are legal in those states whose elections were being questioned attacked the lawsuit. >>pennsylvania's attorney general josh shapiro called the effort a seditious ab

stunningly joined by 106 house republicans to overturn all the votes in michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, and georgiathe ruling. state of texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under article iii of the constitution. texas has not demonstrate a judicially

but at the same time, while we're talking aboutmy, wisconsin, georgia -- michigan, wisconsin, georgia and pennsylvaniathe texas lawsuit, according to "the new york times" the attorney generals of pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin and georgia have all asked the supreme court to reject the texas lawsuit. ainsley: you know what's interesting, they have a good cause in the fact that under article iii of the constitution, they have to go to the supreme court if there are disputes between states. it says they have to go to the supreme court. also it says in article ii that if they violate it -- if they didn't go to the state legislature to change the election laws, we keep hearing they changed the rules in the middle of the game, you're not supposed to do that, you're supposed to go to the legislature, and this can vote however they want to change things. the problem is there were so many changes needed because of covid. people did not want to go to the polls, so i wonder if they'll take that into effect. but the legislators still should have been asked to change the rules with covid in mind in these four s

i am convinced that fraud took place in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, georgia, and possibly arizonaidence out there now. all the electoral materials selection materials have to be presented. >> okay. congressman palmer, we appreciate your time. we have to note there has been no evidence of widespread fraud in the election. that's a determination made by judges and not mens of t -- memf the media. >>> coming up, the clock is ticking. we're staying on this topic. why president trump's window for trying to push lawmakers to act on the claims of widespread fraud that doesn't exist is closing. closing. rakuten to get cash back in-store and online. i just go to shop online with rakuten and i get cash back. i love using rakuten during the holidays, because i can get the sale and i can get cash back. all the stores are having sales, they are doing extra cash back, there's coupons. it's just deals on top of deals. you're stacking your savings. i'm definitely going to use rakuten for my holiday shopping, i got a lot of family, so i might as well get some cash back. and it's so easy and the be

he's asking the supreme court to block electors in pennsylvania, georgia, michigan and wisconsin from voting on monday. that's the day when the electors gather together to determine who the next president of the united states will be. what paxton wants is for the supreme court to throw the issue back to the states and let the legislatures in those states decide. should point out, the legislatures in all four states, the house and the senate are controlled by republicans. it's more than likely if it did go back to the states, they would seek trump electors as opposed to biden electors, which would be something. >> bill: jonathan turley is coming up. john roberts on the north lawn. right now, an fda advisory panel getting very close to voting on emergency use of the covid vaccine. that panel is in a break. they have about two hours to deliberate. we don't know when they take the vote. it's not the final step. fda officials have to sign off if the vote is yes. dr. marc siegel with me now. good day to you. i know you've been listening. what is your read on this hearing so far, doc? >> bil

the elections in four states tht joe biden flipped from republican to democrat, wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania and georgiaat those elections were unconstitutional and bar the stat from using thet outcomes, the results -- the outcomes, the results to decide their electoral votes. instead, they want the state legislators, they want t court to order the state legislators in those states, all controlled by republicans, to ecide the electoral votes. this is because the aumentt here is e about fraud, it's about how the rules were changed. they say tha because the constitution says that state legislatures control presidential elections, that the atedministrators changing to election law because of the covid pandemic are unconstitution. now, the constitutional also says that, in order to file a suit in fedal court, you have to have suffered a real injure, and the four states say that their election laws have not injured texas. >> woodruff: and, john, they have a pretty considerable support now from16what, 17 others states, plus a lot of support from washington, from the congress. >> that's right. they've got abou

changes to the state voting systems were unconstitutional, the supreme court telling pennsylvania, wisconsin, georgiato respond to texas lawsuit by this afternoon. in the 8:00 a.m. hour i will be speaking with texas attorney general ken paxton about the lawsuit. your reaction on where we are with this and whether or not we will see the supreme court take up this case where basically it says because of the pandemic it may have been well intentioned and all, but several states changed the way we vote unconstitutionally? >> well, 70 plus million americans have a question right now. it's the gold standard around the globe. our election system should be the gold standard around the globe. and so to think that there's any question about that and 18 states as other guests have mentioned is quite a number. so we will see what happens today but the original jurisdiction to the constitution lays out, it's very important. we need to get to the bottom of this and people need to have confidence in the system and who we elect. maria: yeah, don't forget, we know that china unlearned this virus on the world. they sa

texas that the high court reverse joe biden's victory in four other states, wing states pennsylvania, wisconsin, georgia, and michigan. the court dismissed the claim in two short sentences, saying essentially that texas has no reason to interfere. the president's legal team has lost all of its lawsuits so far. >>> so much needed rain is on the radar. let's take you outside and show you some of our traffic cameras across the bay area. we saw some light rain earlier today. plenty of gray skies out there and a lot more rain is in the forecast for us. chief meteorologist jeff ranieri is here. jeff, you said the rain was coming, and the rain has arrived. >> yeah, and it definitely feels good with our fire danger that's been so high the past couple of weeks. now, so far today we've seen trace amounts to about 0.05 inch. our mobile doppler radar, you can see it's all light showery activity here, a little bit over the north bay, the east bay, and also the peninsula. we'll get a closer look and put a track on this. it's moving to the south and off towards the east. that would keep some of these showers rolling i

results in four states none of them texas all of them battleground states, michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, and georgial of them states that donald trump lost. this asks the supreme court to disenfranchise 20 million voters. that's what they're asking. let's bring in jessica snyder. can you take us through this lawsuit? >> reporter: first the supreme court has to agree to let texas file this case and that is a major procedural hurdle in itself. the supreme court it does have this what's called original jurisdiction in state versus state disputes but that's typically meant for border disagreements or lawsuits over water rights. this is a case where texas is suing to stop millions of votes in four battleground states from being counted and it's a case where texas is calling into question the election procedures in those states. mind you, election procedure is typically left for states to decide for themselves, that's all spelled out in the constitution. in this case the texas attorney general is asking the court to stop the certification process and in turn let the republican led legislatures of these fo

and so, this is why the president has lost every single suit that he's brought in pennsylvania, in wisconsin, in georgia. this week we have republican election officials in georgia demanding that the president stop this ceaseless and baseless attack on the american electoral system which they say is going to get somebody hurt or killed because of the nonsense and paranoia that it is promoting, which the caller seems to be a victim of. there's not a double standard here. any democrat that violates the law should be subject to the law, just like any republican that violates the law. but what's happening for really the first time in our memory is we have a president of the united states who refuses to accept the honest election result that has been certified by every state in the country. he's refusing to accept that. and continues to promote this paranoid delusion, deep state conspiracy theory. the president said he was going to drain the swamp. the president moved into the swamp, he built a hotel on it and began renting out rooms to dictators from around the world and lobbyists in america. so the corrupt

members of the presidential electoral college from texas call on the state legislatures of pennsylvania, wisconsin, georgiad michigan, to convene and appoint accordanceors in with the true constitutional vote of the people, or if undeterminable, by appointing their electors directly. and be it further resolved that in the event of a failure of the four legislatures to act as the above, that the congressional delegations of those states states' those four unconstitutionally public electors when read january 6. be it further resolved a copy of this resolution be sent to each member of the united states supreme court, president donald j. trump, and vice president mike pence, the governor and lieutenant governor of texas, and the speaker of the legislative bodies of each respective state. members,, mr. chairman, i move adoption. ramseytringer: elector has moved adoption. is there a second on the motion? one moment. we have to have a second first for objections. >> i second this motion. name,ase state your congressional district. >> mr. chairman, jim pickel, congressional district 3. i'm in favor for the resolu

attorney general, can you explain how the electors clause in georgia, michigan, pennsylvania and wisconsin were violated? >> yeah. in all of the cases that we have states that allowed mail-in ballots in cases they were not supposed to. they allowed for nonsignature verification, which is really important. so when you request a mail-in ballot, you have to sign for that application and then they'll verify when you send your ballot in on a sleeve of the ballot, usually they'll verify that signature to ensure those two signatures match. if you just waived those requirements, you have no way to verify that the person that requested the application is the person voting. that's a pretty important thing when in pennsylvania you go from 233,000 mail-in ballots to 2.5 million and a difference in the election was only 81,000. that's a very important issue to ignore. >> hannity: what's fascinating about this suit is that at no point do you even have to go to the area of proving fraud, which i think was proven in a lot of these states. that's separate and apart. those cases run independently in a lot o

"resolved: the elections in pennsylvania, michigan, georgia, and wisconsin were free and fair.we will seat our 18 colleagues." that way, the g.o.p. either has to vote that biden won fairly, or vote that these 18 idiots lose their jobs. either way, it's a win-win. in the end, even having a spineless lackey heading the justice department wasn't enough to let this president steal the election. because moments after biden clinched the electoral college, the president announced that attorney general bill barr resigned. it's a fitting end to mr toadie's wild lies. in a bid for attention, the president tweeted, "bill will be leaving just before christmas to spend the holidays with his family." if only there was something called "vacation" so you didn't have to quit your job in the administration to see your family for christmas. hopefully, barr will leave office by being seized by anonymous federal agents and being stuffed into an unmarked van. this doesn't come as a huge surprise. sources say the president was frustrated with barr over his recent comments that the justice department

: exactly, the question was how is texas directly affected by what happened in wisconsin, pennsylvania, michigan or georgiahe texas lawsuit and it should read how the election was conducted in four states. so how is texas affected by what the four states to? >> their argument it was interesting and like i told you it was clever and it was not substantive enough and too clever, we are a neighboring state we conducted ours in a certain way and the due process and equal protection clause of the constitution dictates the other states run it in a way that is constitutional so our votes have now been harmed and the ability to proceed in the public is hard. standing is a direct injury rule of law and you have to have a direct injury and the court looked at it and probably said we cannot find a direct injury to texas. liz: let's talk about what's going on in georgia, georgia has not seen a democrat senator in two decades, there is an issue of the democrats when it's over, the republicans lose control of the senate, the president has questionquestions about how was conducted in georgia, trump loyalist in georgia ar

after the six states in question, michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, and georgia, and arizona -- i intendterje interject. >> raymond: you need a senator to second it. >> no, to sponsor it. >> raymond: it seems congressman brooks and his allies are moving towards a contingent election. is there a path here, realistically, when pelosi has the votes and therefore could control the outcome of every electoral challenge? i mean, they will debate it for a couple of hours. and then the vote goes to the floor whether to accept the challenge or allow the votes to be certified. isn't that the process? >> that is the process, raymond. and thanks for having me on tonight. not only is it going to do that, but you also have this very interesting lawsuit challenging the discretion of the vice president has as to which votes he can or which slates of electricity can in the or not accept. at that a lot of people think that's a long shot. i think there are many people that not only think this is about this year's election and a lot of the irregularities, but it's also about future elections. because the ame

income integrity -- tonight, that texas suit challenging the election results in pennsylvania, michigan, georgia, wisconsin rejected by the u.s. supreme court although they have original jurisdiction. they have refused to even hear the case, remember a very serious legitimate challenge that garnered widespread support, 18 attorneys general, th18 states with briefs in suppt of the case, 126 members of congress supporting the case including minority leader kevin mccarthy signing on to support the brief and a very real concern, your real concerns not even considered. kayleigh mcenany and rudy giuliani the presence of tourney respondent cannot we will have a hannity investigation also -- remember that candidate protection program i told you all about? we turn our attention tonight to the supreme court and the fight for what is election integrity -- the u.s. supreme court rejected what was a real lawsuit and the decision was not unanimous. dissenting opinions of both justice thomas and justice alito, they wanted to hear the case. they were absolutely right -- this was an original jurisdiction case, this is one

how exactly was arkansas harmed by what georgia, michigan, pennsylvania, and wisconsin did?nstitutionally adhere to the election laws. if they did in fact have a judiciary change the election laws right before at the election. if the state signed off as in georgia on a consent decree the constitution of the united states is clear that the election laws are set by the legislature. in these states they weren't. if those states voted otherwise and illegally cast votes and it is not repaired, arkansas's six electoral votes will be diluted because these states didn't follow the same rules. >> trace: you look at the "wall street journal" and saying it's water under the bridge. it is too late. they quoted here the legal analysis will upset many readers who believe the election was stolen. democrat used the election as an excuse for mail in voting but gop should have fought those changes more competently before the election. in other words, had their chance and they didn't do it. >> well, had we filed these suits beforehand they would have said the issue is not right. you don't know

ken paxton, arguing 62 electoral college votes in georgia, michigan, pennsylvania and wisconsin shouldvalidated claiming they acted unconstitutionally when they moved to expand mail in voting at only state legislators can govern election laws. kayleigh mcenany had this to say last night. >> for goes state-by-state it shows how what happened, the unconstitutional enactment by democrats secretary of state in contravention of the legislature, could be outcome determinative. >> support for the case was welcomed by the president who tweeted 17 states joined texas in the extraordinary case against the greatest election fraud in the history of the united states, thank you. these are the states backing the suit. one of the first to do so was missouri was missouri attorney general eric schmidt said he is fighting for election integrity. >> free and fair elections are the cornerstone of this republic and it is important every legal vote is counted and every illegal vote is not counted. >> next week the senate homeland security committee, holding here on election irregularities as house republica

we're talking about michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania and georgia.nd the response of these states are scathing and indicate just how weak the case is. the pennsylvania attorney general called it seditious, the georgia attorney general said it was a suit about generalized grievance, which is a polite way of saying they are just mad that they lost the election and i would add in particular the attorney general of georgia doesn't say this, they're mad that they lost the election because of the votes of non-white people. these are essentially white legislators who are upset that african-americans who live in large cities vote in large numbers for the democratic candidate and they lost and they don't like it and they are trying to overturn it. it's not going to work. supreme court is not going to take this case. the only question is when they let us know that. >> right. it could come at any moment. john, thanks very much for the reporting at the white house. >>> let's talk about all of these headlines with a cnn election law analyst. always good to have

have disenfranchised all of the voters of your home state of michigan, as well as wisconsin, pennsylvania, and georgia>> jake, you know, i believe that any candidate has the ability to request a recount to go through the legal processes if they think there is some basis that the votes is not reasonable or some founded conspiracy concerns or concern about fraud. but we have gone through the process. as i saw that amicus brief and through the national media it became clear to me i could no longer be associated with the republican party that the leadership does not stand up and say is the process, the election is over. it's over today. i saw the president tweet over it's not over until january 20th and somehow he will continue to combat this. the people have voted. as i said in my letter, i voted donald trump. i supported the administration policies 95, 96% of the time the last two terms. i've been actual in the national state party. but this party has to stand up for democracy first, for our constitutional first and not political considerations. it's not about a candidate. it's not simply for raw politi