President Trump's campaign is moving to amend its Pennsylvania election case again, this time to "restore claims which were inadvertently" deleted the last time plus add some other new stuff.

Since the campaign has already amended its complaint once, it needs either consent from the defendants [which it won't get] or leave of court.

The Trump campaign's latest lawyers say things got pretty mixed up when its previous lawyers all quit, and "because of a lack of clear communication ... certain counts were improperly withdrawn."

Meanwhile, the Trump campaign seems to have missed its deadline for responding to various motions to dismiss. It was due 10 minutes ago.

The Trump campaign also says it's challenging a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that basically rejected its assertions that poll-watchers couldn't watch votes being counted. It says it will do this "under Bush v. Gore."

[It's not at all clear how that would work because the Pennsylvania court was deciding a question of state law; there wasn't a federal-law issue in the case on which a federal court could weigh in.]

Trump's lawyers say they will ask a federal court "will seek the remedy of Trump being declared the winner of the legal votes cast in the 2000 General Election and, thus, the recipient of Pennsylvania's electors."

And now these filings have been deleted.

Here's the amended complaint the campaign tried to file, helpfully redlined. They've updated it to make some arguments that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court didn't have the authority to decide whether poll-watchers were close enough to "observe" counting.

Link: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.169.0.pdf

Trump's proposed amended complaint asks a court to prevent Pennsylvania from certifying its election results. If the court won't do that, the campaign wants it to rule that the results are "defective" and instruct the state legislature to choose who won.

The Trump campaign also filed a response asking the court not to dismiss its case. It's a doozy. It says the state and several counties engaged "under the cover of darkness in an illegal scheme to favor Joseph Biden over President Donald J. Trump."

(That scheme isn't currently in the case.)

Trump's campaign says officials treated voters differently based on their location and who they were likely to support.

But the county defendants appear to have treated all of the voters in their jurisdictions identically -- the claim is that voters in those counties got an opportunity voters in other counties didn't.