Judge tosses one Republican bid to throw out Massachusetts election results, but we've got two more cases to go; one guess who's involved in those

CommonWealth Magazine reports a judge in Worcester Superior Court on Monday dismissed a suit by a bunch of Massachusetts Republicans, including two failed Congressional candidates, to overturn the November election results.

That election boat has sailed, the issues raised are pining for the fjords and the suit is moot, the judge ruled on the challenge, which the five GOPers brought after they initially filed in federal court, where a judge "suggested" the case belonged in state court.

But don't worry, Republican electoral drama fans: We still have Shiva Ayyadurai, who has not one, but two pro-se cases in federal court against the state for the way Secretary of State Bill Galvin and his allegedly evil minions conspired to make him lose, by allegedly destroying one million ballots and by getting Twitter to suspend his Twitter feed at critical points in the campaign. And he is now seeking to formally add Twitter as a defendant in one of the suits.

State officials have denied both claims and their filings are increasingly filled with the sorts of phrases one doesn't often see in federal pleadings, such as "unfounded and inflammatory prevarications" and "ever expanding and completely fact-free conspiracy theories contradicted by reality and dressed up in the guise of a lawsuit."

For its part, in response to a query from US District Court Judge Mark Wolf on whether it wanted to be added to the suit, Twitter responded, essentially, no.

Wolf has set a May 20 hearing to discuss key questions in the suit - in which Ayyadurai originally sought $1.2 billion - including whether the state officials are covered by qualified immunity for whatever it is they did while acting as public officials.

Wolf also wants to hear from both sides on whether Twitter's terms of service, which alleged Father of Email Ayyadurai had to agree to to get the account he wants back, bars suits brought against it by users anywhere but San Francisco and why he should even hear Ayyadurai's First Amendment complaint against Twitter for actions that included banning him permanently, since it is a private company.