Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andy McCarthy looks into the legal battles of the election on 'Fox & Friends Weekend.'
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jedediah, we appreciate it
with the Trump team pursuing
legal challenges in number of
states. Where do things go from
here?
What happens next
lets ask Fox NEWS, contributor,
former assistant: U Dot S attorney
Andrew Mccarthy,
thanks for being on the show,
I watched you all week and you
have been giving fantastic
insight on all of this.
Obviously, a couple of lawsuits
in Georgia, Michigan have been
thrown out.
Many others remain.
Give us insight what you think
happens next,
if you can do so in the context
of election fraud and voter
fraud and what would need to
happen to actually affect the
outcome of the election,
a lot Jed,
he would probably the president
would probably have to flip
Pennsylvania and at least two
other states, which is a tall
order.
There is one bright line, legal
issue, and that is the one in
Pennsylvania.
The other ones are situations
where you have to come in and
prove factual fraud or
impropriety.
The big ticket item in
Pennsylvania is that the state
Supreme Court changed the rules
of the election prior to the
election that had been set by
Pennsylvania State LAW by the
legislature.
They gave three extra days for
receiving ballots
under the constitution. The state
legislatures, not the courts,
not a bureaucracy, are charged
with setting the rules for
elections,
so they have a very significant
legal issue that so far the
Supreme Court has been. I think
too timid about and hasnt
jumped in.
I think they should have ruled
on this two or three weeks
before the election.
But the straight question is:
should those votes count from
the fourth fifth and sixth
of November?
You dont have to prove any
fraud with that. That is a
straight up legal issue,
the rest of it, I think, is you
know we could all see. There was
a lot of potential for fraud,
because we have this
unprecedented massive use of
mail in voting which just
innately is not as safe in terms
of election integrity as coming
into the polls physically and
voting.
So you have to kind of compare
what the potential is, which we
can all see, what theyre able
to prove as a matter of hard
fact,
and then it is not just. Can you
prove instances of fraud, but can
you prove so much that it would
actually make a difference in
the outcome of the election
PETE as you reference the with
the mail in mail out balloting,
you remove safeguards like
signature requirementing.
You can understand why people
would be concerned.
The Gore contest took thirty. Seven days
were only five days in
some people are alleging. Oh, I
havent seen the evidence yet
have you talked to any of the
litigators and how could we have
all the evidence if it hasnt
play out in court yet
doesnt this have to play out.
I heard from a couple of them
and you know theyre theyre,
gathering information.
They say theyre getting
affidavits from relevant people
and the like
im, not one of these people who
worries too much about this.
There is no crisis of the regime.
Here
we have a process whereby the
beginning of December
statutorily it is
December. Eighth,
as a practical matter. It is
December 14th.
That is when the states have to
not only have certified their
results but sent them to
Congress.
So you have from now, until
December 14th to play a lot
of this stuff out
and it is going to get as far
as the courts are concerned. It
will get expedited treatment.
Weve already seen. Some cases
come in and get dismissed pretty
quickly, just because there
wasnt enough quantum of fraud
evidence it would have made a
difference, even if you allow
for the fact that there were
irregularities which there are
in every election.
I dont think this is a crisis.
We have a presumptive result.
It looks at the moment like what
happened to President Trump is
kind of what happened for him in
two thousand and sixteen in the sense that you have
a handful of states that are
really razor thin.
They can pursue recounts.
It is appropriate to do that.
The likelihood that it would
change ten of thousands of votes
is not high, but we have a lot of
places where its really tight,
so they should pursue their
remedies and we got plenty of
time to do. It
will Andy. We dont have much
time
nice to see you again.
It has been quite some time.
Hey will
will, let me see if I understand
completely where we are when we
began this interview.
The context of this election is
highly irregular.
It is high potential for abuse,
skepticism would be well earned.
There are instances of
irregularities or fraud that
evidence needs to be brought
forward.
You are skeptical anything
amounts to enough votes to
change. Any state election for
the President is that a fair,
characterization
yeah will
just to layer on top of that.
What were talking about here is
not just changing any one. State
right
were talking about changing
Pennsylvania and at least two.
Transcript generated on 2020-11-08.