特朗普和他的律师团在媒体上宣称大选有舞弊欺诈行为，并掌握了大量证据，但在法庭却承认他们打的不是一个舞弊欺诈的官司。“The Trump Presidential Campaign asserts that Pennsylvania’s 2020 election was unfair. But as lawyer Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign 'doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.' Mot. to Dismiss Hr’g Tr. 118:19–20, 137:18.... The Campaign never alleges that any ballot was fraudulent or cast by an illegal voter. It never alleges that any defendant treated the Trump campaign or its votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or its votes." Donald J. Trump For President, Et Al V. Secretary Commonwealth Of PA, et al., No. 20-3371 (3rd. Cir. Nov. 27, 2020).

那么问题就来了，为什么他们在媒体信誓旦旦，上了法庭却矢口否认呢？原因在于美国联邦民事诉讼法的两个条例。

其实进美国法院的门槛很低，只要交400美元加一纸诉状。诉状只需简单说明：1. 属法院管辖；2. 讼点；3. 诉求。（联邦民事诉讼法第8条明确强调 “a short and plain statement.”）而且提告人有至少修改一次诉状的权利（法官允许的话还可以多次修改）。但是指控欺诈则有更高要求。

联邦民事诉讼法第9条规定，指控欺诈必须在诉状中列举详情，（否则不予立案）。

9(b) Fraud or Mistake; Conditions of Mind. In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind may be alleged generally.

而第１１条则规范律师行为，其中包括律师作出不实指控将受到惩处的条例。由于据其作出的惩处对律师的名誉有毁灭性的打击，法官一般很少动用第１１条，但几年前还是出现了律师因为在指控欺诈案中的不端行为受到第11条惩罚的先例。City of Livonia Employees' Retirement System v. Boeing Company, 306 F.R.D. 175 (N.D.Ill. 2014). 

如果特朗普律师拿不出证据，却又在法庭空穴来风，信口开河，显然也将被法官遵循先例加以处罚。

附记：特朗普大选舞弊欺诈案被联邦地区法院驳回以后，今天又被上诉法院驳回。“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”（自由公正的选举是民主的命脉。说选举不公正是严重的指控，但空口无凭，必须有法律的根据和事实的证据，本案中两者皆无。)

“Voters, not lawyers, choose the President. Ballots, not briefs, decide elections.” （选民，而不是律师，挑选总统。选票，而不是诉状，决定大选。）