Whether federal courts can undermine constitutional rights by finding state court rulings reasonable under Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) in habeas corpus claims based on ineffective assistance of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1. In applying Harrington Vs. Richter, 562 U.S. 86((2011), to a habeas corpus claim based on the state's unreasonable application of Constitutional standard for effective assistance of counsel in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), can the federal courts undermine Constitutional guaranteed rights to the Petitioner to find . the state courts' rulings are a. reasonable applications of controlling precedent. . 2. In applying Harrington Vs. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011). to a habeas corpus ' lain based on thé state's unreasonable application of Constitutional standard for ; effective assistance of counsel in ‘violation of 28 U.S.C. §.2254(d)(2), can* the federal . courts affirm a possible "tactical choices'.. trial counsel made.on the basis of ; facts which are known to be false .and-misleading pursuant to: 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a)(1), underminded by clear and convincing evidence in the state court record, \ .