Lou Dobbs and guest suggest Justice Barrett “will come through” for Trump in Pennsylvania
Harmeet Dhillon: “Hopefully, Amy Coney Barrett will come through and pick it up. There's no guarantee of that”
Published
Citation
From the November 5, 2020, edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight
LOU DOBBS (HOST): I'd like to start with Pennsylvania, get a sense of where the interest of the president and the republic are and how, how the fight for a fair election is going. If you could, first Pennsylvania.
HARMEET DHILLON (GUEST): Sure. Well, I will tell you that in Pennsylvania we have hundreds of lawyers, mostly volunteer lawyers, on the ground. They're fighting hard, and they have been since before Election Day. So no worries that we are short on resources there. This morning the court of appeals there in Philadelphia ordered the Philadelphia election officials to allow Republicans access to witness how the ballots are being handled, and Philadelphia officials are in contempt. They are ignoring that court order and going on with the counting without Republican election monitors there to witness it. And the kind of shenanigans that can occur there, by the way, in Philadelphia, you have election workers with Biden/Harris 2020 masks on, and they're the ones who look at ballots, and they see if a ballot is defective in some way. They may fill it in or fix it, and there's nobody on the Republican side to witness it. And because that election is so close, because the president's lead is declining, that is where we can lose it, and it is an outrage that those people are in contempt of court.
And, meanwhile, we're waiting for the United States Supreme Court which the president has nominated three justices to step in and do something and, hopefully, Amy Coney Barrett will come through and pick it up. There's no guarantee of that, Lou, so we have to fight this on the ground and make sure that we challenge every place and we are.
DOBBS: No guarantee of that, in fact, the court before Justice Barrett was there even a day it had already, excuse me two days, they ruled without her because she hadn’t had time to prepare for the decision on the case. They ruled that this nonsense could go forward. It was an outrageous decision in my opinion, in my judgment, and it is one I can’t imagine a so-called originalist could have made.