On Tuesday, November 17, 2020, Rudy Giuliani entered a courtroom for the first time since 1992 to attempt to prove that re-election was stolen from President Trump. His antics in the courtroom call his abilities into question, as he mistook one judge for another, was active on his Twitter account and fumbled the meaning of “opacity.” At times he treated this case as if it were a criminal case, citing “charges.” He answered questions about specific case law with responses in plain language, rather than in legal terms. He also noted in court that he’d once been a law clerk and hoped he was properly handling the evidence, “In case,” he quipped, “I need a job after this.”

Mr. Giuliani acknowledged that the lawsuit as filed did not allege election fraud, despite his claims to the contrary. He made allegations that counties could not legally assist voters, and said that the process was fraudulent, saying the Pennsylvania election was rife with fraud. The former mayor of New York accused Democrats of a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election. No evidence of such a conspiracy has come to light.

Since the election, Mr. Giuliani has been more visible than usual, spouting conspiracy theories and promising legal results that have not yet appeared. He claimed the Trump campaign had been blocked from watching ballot processing in major cities, suggesting that the Democrats could have committed election fraud by miscounting or falsifying absentee votes. This theory has already been rejected in courts as unfounded or wrong by judges in multiple states.

At almost the same time that Mr. Giuliani was arguing before Judge Brann in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court voted 5-2 that Philadelphia election officials had properly handled the voting observation process.

The Trump campaign wants to prevent Pennsylvania from certifying its election, proposing that six counties led by Democrats in Pennsylvania allowed voters to correct mail-in ballots that would otherwise have been disqualified. The number of mail-in ballots in question is not clear. Opposing lawyers say there would not be enough votes affected to overturn President-Elect Joe Biden’s 80,000 vote lead.

The problem seems to be that in some counties, voters’ mail-in ballots were rejected, and those counties advised the voters about the rejection so they could then vote in person. Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar issued directives to all Pennsylvania counties, encouraging them to tell voters if their ballots were rejected. Mark Aronchick, an attorney for the counties, said “What in the world is wrong with telling counties they can advise voters that their mail ballot is rejected so they can go to the polls and exercise their right to have their vote counted?”

Federal Judge Matthew Brann asked Mr. Giuliani Tuesday how disenfranchising every voter in Pennsylvania could be justified. The suit brought by the campaign alleged that two individuals were denied the right to vote, but sought to discount the 6.8 million votes cast by Pennsylvanians. The judge also asked Mr. Giuliani why the allegations came to a federal court when they would be more appropriately brought in state court since they dealt with local officials.

On Wednesday, Trump’s campaign asked Judge Brann to declare President Trump the winner of PA’s 20 electoral votes without regard to the actual votes cast by Pennsylvanians. Judge Brann refused and canceled the planned evidentiary hearing on the case, where the Trump campaign lawyers had hoped to have witnesses testify about wrongdoing during the election; instead, he issued a 5:00 p.m. Wednesday deadline for the Trump campaign to respond to a motion to dismiss the case.

He further refused to allow Linda Kerns, a Trump campaign lawyer, to withdraw from the case. Ms. Kerns said she’d been the victim of a variety of types of harassment, including accusations of treason, for representing the President’s campaign.

This is just one of eight cases filed by the Trump campaign to attempt to reshape the election into pro-Republican results. Only two attorneys remain on the Pennsylvania case. All the other lawyers who were on the filing have quit. Marc Scaringi, a radio talk-show host in Pennsylvania, was added to the team of attorneys on Monday, November 16. His addition was odd, in light of his comment on his radio show on November 7: “In my opinion there really are no bombshells that are about to drop that will derail a Biden presidency, including these lawsuits. At the end of the day, the litigation will not work. It will not reverse this election.”

Mr. Aronchick, the counties’ attorney, argued that the Trump campaign had no standing or evidence to pursue its case further. He also accused Giuliani of variously living in a fantasy world or of disgraceful behavior in the courtroom. He asked of Judge Brann, “Please dismiss this case so we can move on to the real business of this country. We need to get this election certified.”

The current timeline for certification of votes in Pennsylvania is Monday, November 23, 2020.