Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Sidney Powell Releases “The Kraken” in Georgia and Michigan Federal Lawsuits (Updated)

Sidney Powell Releases “The Kraken” in Georgia and Michigan Federal Lawsuits (Updated)

Very detailed allegations, which will have to be proven. But the big picture is, what does Powell expect a court to do? Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anduXwcSIrc

Late last night Sidney Powell released the long-awaited lawsuits in Georgia and Michigan releasing what she has referred to in interviews and press conferences as “The Kraken” — the evidence of widespread voting fraud in favor of Joe Biden.

The tweet announcing the filing no longer is available on Twitter (archive).

https://web.archive.org/web/20201126050620/https://twitter.com/sidneypowell1/status/1331826386449915904

Twitter has placed “safety” warnings on links to the documents at Powell’s website.

I’ve never seen this done by Twitter before. It’s a reflection of Twitter’s attempt to silence viewpoints regarding the election it doesn’t like.

You can view the complaints via Powell’s website: Georgia and Michigan. Here is the full Michigan complaint with Exhibits, which I downloaded from PACER. I could not find the Georgia case in PACER yet.

Powell has not released a motion for injunction or other emergency applications. So it’s not clear what the next procedural step is beyond filing a complaint.

Yes, there is a massive typo in the court name, and as the media is harping on, elsewhere. Yes, there shouldn’t be typos, but that’s what happens when you are rushing. And the worst typos usually are in the most obvious places, the places your eyes glance over, like the caption or the spelling of your own name.

I’m not going to try to excerpt the Complaints, and they are too long and detailed for me to properly analyze in so short a period of time. You can read them, and I will add “updates” as I better understand them. The big picture is – does Powell really have The Kraken and what would a court do about it.

As to the first question, attorney Harmeet Dillon has this analysis of the Georgia case, which concludes that there are numerous specific examples of voting fraud alleged, but that the proof of the allegations remains to be seen.

There are troubling details related to the stopping of counting based upon an alleged burst pipe, with the counting resuming after Republican monitors had left.

There are many procedural questions, such as whether the named plaintiff have “standing” to sue. One of the named plaintiffs in the Georgia suit apparently is asserting he never gave final approval to be named.

Specifically on the software issue, it’s not yet clear to me whether Powell has moved from what might have happened to proof it actually did happen.

The even more important question is, what does Powell expect a court to do? Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result? Again, I need to understand the evidence better, but at first glance I’m holding by my original analysis just after the election,  You are not alone, you have over 70 million friends:

So it’s not over, but we have to be honest with ourselves that it remains a longshot. Trump needs hard evidence of major fraud, miscount, or computer malfunction to prevail in court. A specific category of ballot that was not legally cast is going to have to be identified, and it’s going to have to be in a sufficient quantity to make a difference.

UPDATE (1:35 p.m.):

I’ve now had a chance to read through the entire Georgia complaint. The allegations demonstrate an unreliable election took place in which numerous safeguards were removed and/or ignored and/or violated through open connivance and deception.

What is lacking is the who/what/when/where that would show (1) a clearly identifiable group of ballots for Biden that were unlawfully counted, or for Trump that were not counted, as opposed to some unspecified number anecdotally demonstrated through affidavits, and (2) the software actually was manipulated in this instance, as opposed to being vulnerable to manipulation. That is not something Powell could know without an inspection of the computer systems, though there is circumstantial evidence of anomolies.

In a normal case, this pleading would be enough to get into the discovery phase, at which point documents and systems could be inspected, and more testimony taken. The problem here is that we have a short deadline until the electoral college process kicks in, and there’s not enough time. This election may have been stolen, but it was stolen months ago when Democrats weakened the type of control mechanisms that would give certainty, and on election night and thereafter when Democrats concealed what they were doing from Republican view.

Democrats had zero evidence that the 2016 election was stolen by the Russians, but kept up the claim of illegitimacy against Trump for 4 years. This time there is a lot of evidence that the 2020 election was suspect, but likely not enough evidence to get a court to throw the whole thing out and to reject certification.

This allegation in paragraph 121 appears correct in its description of the unreliability of the election, but it is unlikely that the request for relief it seeks will be granted:

While the bedrock of American elections has been transparency, almost every crucial aspect of Georgia’s November 3, 2020, General Election was shrouded in secrecy, rife with “errors,” and permeated with anomalies so egregious as to render the results incapable of certification.

The other thing worth noting is that much of the mockery of Powell has been undeserved. She has evidence, a lot of evidence, that this was a severely problematic election. If she had months or years to pursue this through the normal litigation methods, maybe she would prove that what was possible actually happened. Her biggest enemy at this point is the calendar.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“It’s a reflection of Twitter’s attempt to silence viewpoints regarding the election it doesn’t like.”

Wrong. This is an attempt to silence FACTS, not viewpoints. It is utterly despicable.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to irv. | November 26, 2020 at 11:25 am

    Some great Kraken Snackin’…..

    Sidney Powell Drops MAJOR Lawsuits In Georgia and Michigan – Internet Goes CRAZY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Fjo1ocI8zE

    Paul in reply to irv. | November 26, 2020 at 12:11 pm

    At this point anybody who still uses Twitter is a complete twit. Like an abused spouse who gets punched in the mouth and then gives a blowjob. For fuck’s sake people, just delete your Twatter accounts. If they lost tens of millions of users overnight they’d go into a financial death spiral, and then we wouldn’t have to listen to that insufferable sanctimonious twat with the goat sack hanging from his chin.

      henrybowman in reply to Paul. | November 26, 2020 at 2:37 pm

      “Twitter has placed “safety” warnings on links to the documents at Powell’s website.
      I’ve never seen this done by Twitter before.”

      I’m confident that when someone hoists their a*ses over it, it will turn out to be “just one more inadvertent error.” (Albeit one they had to pay three coders for two hours each to commit.)

        JusticeDelivered in reply to henrybowman. | November 26, 2020 at 5:40 pm

        Twitter did that on an LI embedded link a few days ago, claiming that the item was false, with a link to a piece claiming that there was little election fraud in America.

        The wits at Twitter deserve to have their wings clipped.

        Also note that media, pretty much all media comment sections were taken down last year, I think intentionally to allow their propaganda to be published with virtually no criticism.

        I think that was organized, another facet of widespread coordination to place the Biden-Harris criminal syndicate in power.

          henrybowman in reply to JusticeDelivered. | November 27, 2020 at 1:14 am

          Cynical as I am, I don’t believe that was coordinated; even if it was, there was no reason to do so.

          When you are getting your lunch publicly eaten by 90% of the commenters, deplatforming the commenters is the obvious thing to do. It doesn’t take a swamp committee to decide that.

      whatevermily in reply to Paul. | November 30, 2020 at 12:50 pm

      Trump uses Twitter – ALOT.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to irv. | November 26, 2020 at 12:23 pm

    Irv look what Shwitter big lie is being put on President Trump”s true statements of facts.

    “Voting by mail is legal and safe, experts and data confirm
    Experts and fact-checkers have continued to assure American voters that voting by mail is a safe and secure option, especially in the middle of a pandemic. While the rules varied from state to state, millions of people cast legal votes by mail in the weeks leading up to the November 3rd election….”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/i/events/1306326582017945601

    Btw

    Data Group Exposes Widespread Mail-In Ballot Fraud

    https://www.oann.com/data-group-exposes-widespread-mail-in-ballot-fraud/

      Note the misdirection: “millions of people cast legal votes by mail” happens to be true, but it says nothing about illegal votes.

        Dliefsarb Yrral in reply to randian. | November 27, 2020 at 12:01 pm

        With misleading pablum like “millions of legal votes were cast”, the would-be intelligentsia demonstrates their contempt for the credulous masses and understanding that such drivel will be lapped up and regurgitated to placate any who might be beginning to wonder and think for themselves. It is never intended for those who already think for themselves.

        The early state founders had the right idea when the voting franchise was limited to property owners.

    CorkyAgain in reply to irv. | November 26, 2020 at 1:22 pm

    What exactly is “unsafe” on Powell’s website, according to Twitter? I don’t see how any of the listed categories apply.

      henrybowman in reply to CorkyAgain. | November 26, 2020 at 2:39 pm

      Ideas.
      Don’t want the sheeple even hearing that Biden may have cheated. Bad for Amerikkka.
      My 102-yo mother in Florida still hasn’t heard word one about the Biden laptop on her TV news.

    arlene2007 in reply to irv. | November 27, 2020 at 2:22 pm

    Where there is smoke, there is fire. Just need to know which blaze is easily verified and go from there.

    There could also be a smoking gun which has not be presented yet. Wouldn’t it be unwise to show a full hand at this point? Perhaps the information presented is a way to ferret out an admission from someone who is very scared of being implicated in election interference/fraud which carries a severe legal penalty.

The truth (or lack of) regarding the dominion machines will be apparent once the hand recount of actual pieces of paper is accomplished. The numbers will either match the dominion tallies or it won’t.

The rest of it is interesting and I look forward to some of it getting a chance in court. Though I expect it won’t.

    stablesort in reply to f2000. | November 26, 2020 at 11:51 am

    Not necessarily, the Dominion machines print the ballots and then encode the vote as a QR code. No human I’m aware of can read those QR codes to confirm that the machine accurately encoded the voters ballot.

    Worse, the machine scans an internal image of the ballot for the actual vote, not the printed ballot. The internal image is then deleted and never sees the light of day.

      Yes, the machines scan the QR code. They also retain the actual 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper that both the voters selections and the QR code are printed on in a giant bin under the scanner. The hand recount will be humans reading the human readable selections, not the QR code. Those human counts and the machine counts will or will not match. If they don’t, dominion is in a pile of trouble. If they do, then the dominion allegations in the lawsuit are a load of bunk.

      By 2018, we already didn’t trust the machines, so when GA decided to get new machines we demanded that the new ones have an auditable paper trail. We got that paper trail. Personally, I don’t see a group of conspirators leaving themselves that vulnerable to easily provable fraud, so I expect the vote count to come up right on target.

      The remainder of the lawsuit, primarily on absentee ballot handling is the part that interests me.

        f2000 in reply to f2000. | November 26, 2020 at 1:14 pm

        fwiw … the machines in other states may or may not have the same process. I am only speaking about the new GA machines.

          rebelgirl in reply to f2000. | November 26, 2020 at 4:20 pm

          So I vote in Georgia..that is exactly what I asked the poll worker standing by the scanner…how do I know that my QR code matches what I voted for? Of course, she shrugged her shoulders.

          f2000 in reply to f2000. | November 26, 2020 at 10:15 pm

          That’s what the audit and hand count validate.

    Milhouse in reply to f2000. | November 26, 2020 at 4:50 pm

    As I understand it that has already happened, and the numbers matched. So we know that whatever tricks might be possible with the Dominion machines they didn’t happen in Georgia. The machines counted the ballots they were given, and they did it correctly. The fraud was all upstream.

      Oh, so feeding the same data through a proven (in earlier court cases) fraudulent piece of software, when there were no observers actually permitted, is proof? Sorry, no. The first step is to require Dominion to release the source code, re compile it to executable in the presence of independent software auditors, and then compare it with the executable code in a random selection of machines to make sure they match. This has not been done.

        Milhouse in reply to SDN. | November 26, 2020 at 7:07 pm

        No, you idiot, they did a hand count. Did you not read f2000’s comment to which mine was a direct reply? They did a hand count and it came out the same as the machine count. Therefore the machine count was accurate. Any fraud happened upstream of the counting. End of story.

          JusticeDelivered in reply to Milhouse. | November 26, 2020 at 9:51 pm

          Milhouse, I normally do not take exception to your comments, but in this case you are the idiot. getting source code, or using a decompiler to analyze the code, is the right approach.

          I would go further, and release the code to the public to tear apart.

          for clarity, they did a specific audit after certification that was required by law. There is a hand count that will be ongoing for a while. In my county that hand count of all ballots starts on Monday. The initial audit indicated the numbers were all correct, but it wasn’t as thorough as this second process will be. It’s possible some significant discrepancies will turn up, but I’m skeptical.

          I read it. You need to read the definition of a hand recount, you Leftists apologist.

        randian in reply to SDN. | November 26, 2020 at 7:58 pm

        That test is easily thwarted. Voting machines have been reported to have been connected to the Internet in violation of law. The goal is not to expose them to real time hacking, it’s to enable remote downloads and wiping. The hack was prepared ahead of time by Dominion. Upload the vote massaging version of the software when the election is live, run it to skew the election as desired, then wipe it and replace with a legal version. When audited the software works as claimed and the offered source code compiles into it. It’s real source code if anybody bothers to read it, which you should. The alternate version of the source code is hidden on Dominion’s servers. It’s a classic “two sets of books” setup, what the IRS often looks for when it suspects tax fraud.

          f2000 in reply to randian. | November 26, 2020 at 10:25 pm

          If you can tell me how to connect the paper ballots to the internet so they can be wiped after they are scanned, I’d greatly appreciate it. If you don’t know the specific setup in GA, don’t make up some stuff to fit your theory. I live in GA. I spoke with my state senator multiple times while the commission was exploring the option and I was a credentialed poll watcher observing the process from the morning zero to the final tally. Yeah, the machines could make up whatever count they want. But as soon as someone picks up a stack of the papers they scanned and compares the numbers, the scheme would be found out. That’s why we insisted on the setup we have. Dominion would have to be damned fools to do something so detectable. The initial audit indicated they did not and an ongoing hand count will further test the vote-swapping theory.

          Oh, they didn”t connect the paper ballots to the internet, they brought in shredder trucks to destroy evidence, also in violation of the law.

          https://www.waynedupree.com/2020/11/ga-shredder/

          “Regular and third-party envelopes with voter info on them”
          So ballots can’t be matched with envelopes they supposedly arrived in.

          “Sticky notes and phone messages with voter phone #s or email addresses”

          Like the sticky notes that supposedly labelled disputed ballots…. and were dislodged in the containers when a judge opened them for review.
          “White privacy envelopes after the election is certified.”

          Which certification was illegal until challenges resolved.

          “Duplicates of faxed applications (when voters fax multiples copies of the same app all at the same time)”

          Yeah, it’s real inconvenient when we sent out multiple ballots to the same address.

      arlene2007 in reply to Milhouse. | November 27, 2020 at 2:32 pm

      *WATCH: 19,598 votes switch from TRUMP to BIDEN right before your eyes! 40k VOTE SWING! HAMMEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ficae6x1Q5AR TIME!

      Can someone explain this???

The media and Democrats keep saying that no evidence has been produced for voter fraud.

But as soon as the good guys attempt to provide such evidence, the media and democrats scream that they shouldn’t even be allowed to try to show the evidence. Or even talk about it.

If they are not allowed to even have a court hearing, then the media et al will once again say they didn’t produce any evidence.

It takes a sick, twisted evil mindset to try so hard to stop the truth from getting out.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to JOHN B. | November 26, 2020 at 11:37 am

    The DEMS and their COMMUNIST Chinese bribed MEDIA are DEAD DEAD DEAD.

    While media and big tech were scamming us all year the DEM run media confessed they are fascist racist Democrats who are not going to give the levers of media until they are carried out in pine boxes.

    Media Reporter
    Published Jun. 12, 2020

    Condé Nast is standing firmly behind its most high-profile employee despite internal and external calls for her resignation over the ongoing diversity scandal roiling the company.

    The legacy magazine company, which publishes GQ, the New Yorker, Vogue, and Vanity Fair, among others, has been shaken by reports and testimonials from current and former staff about the organization’s lack of diversity, along with insensitive comments and discriminatory practices by top managers.

    “…… Vogue editor and Condé Nast’s artistic director Anna Wintour acknowledged in a note to staff that “it can’t be easy to be a Black employee at Vogue…”

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital. | November 26, 2020 at 11:54 am

      “……Wintour began gathering top editors from every magazine in a corporate boardroom for regular off-the-record chats with …..

      Hillary Clinton,

      Tim Cook,

      Lena Dunham talking about the newsletter business. (Condé had an ad partnership with Dunham’s Lenny Letter.)

      NYT & Inteligencer

      “it can’t be easy to be a Black employee at Vogue…”

      The business environment is not “easy” for most people, even owners. I have not seen any significant racism for decades. What I have seen and am really tired of, are lazy or stupid, people using claims of racism to get away with collecting unearned income.

      Business, government, academia and nonprofits are carrying a staggering load of underproductive people. That is in its own right a form of socialism. When does this load break the back of these places?

      I do not care about race, I do care about how PC crap is destroying American productivity.

As of now the courts seem to have the power, not the people who voted. Not the kind of country I grew up in.

    avi natan in reply to goomicoo. | November 26, 2020 at 1:49 pm

    the country you were born into allowed a steal in 1960 in which a rank amateur arranged for the destabilizing murder of the President of South Vietnam leading to governmental collapse and the intervention and death of 58,000 of our boys.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to goomicoo. | November 26, 2020 at 6:06 pm

    We need to give the courts a chance to correct the problem, if they do not that more aggressive measures will be needed.

So now there is substantive litigation pending alleging fraud in numbers large enough to explain the Biden ‘win’ and reverse the results if proven for 32 electoral votes.

Meanwhile 26 additional electoral votes are on hold via a TRO in PA and NV. A look at the NY religious liberty per curiam decision says to me these TRO’s are not mere trifles as the standard for issuing a TRO or injunction is steep.

“They have shown that their First Amendment claims are likely to prevail, that denying them relief would lead to irreparable injury, and that granting relief would not harm the public interest”

It’s not a low bar that appears to have been met. The relief sought is a big pill, but newsmax is suggesting that even at the end of the day if the courts are reluctant to overturn the election results, the state legislatures have the authority to not send it to the EC and decide the election internally.

“Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result?”

Consider the alternative. Will a Court really allow to stand an election that is a proven* fraud?

*Powell will easily prove the fraud. Once that evidence is entered into the court’s proceedings, evidence that the defendants will not be able to deny except through self-serving declarations (which Powell on cross-examination will be able to impeach), the court will have no choice but to issue findings of fact that fraud took place.

    Right. When a fact is proven in court by evidence (which comes in various forms, testimony, business records, exhibits, contemporaneously-created documents) and is not effectively rebutted by the opposing side, that fact becomes a fact.

    And the court must so find.

    So if Powell enters all the necessary facts backing up the complaint’s allegations, and the defendants are unable to disprove her allegations, she’s met her burden by the preponderance of the evidence, then these have to be accepted by the court.

    The court won’t be upsetting the election. The court will simply be ruling that a proper election never took occurred in the first place.

    TX-rifraph in reply to fscarn. | November 26, 2020 at 1:11 pm

    1) It was not an election. It was a sham that the left is trying say was an election.
    2) The court has a choice – Overturn/negate the sham “election” or, by default, endorse the sham “election.” by letting it stand.

    They cannot overturn an election that did not happen. Can they turn the sham into an election by discarding the fraudulent ballots counted as votes? Maybe.

    Voyager in reply to fscarn. | November 26, 2020 at 3:03 pm

    And ultimately, if the courts choose to allow it to stand, even with evidence of sufficient fraud to change the election, then they will have, de facto, endorsed using fraud to determine elections, and such fraud will, of necessity, become common place in politics.

    Either the rule of law applies, or it does not. There isn’t some middle ground here were the rule of law sort of applies, except when it requires someone to do something they don’t want to.

      zennyfan in reply to Voyager. | November 26, 2020 at 9:03 pm

      Just as CA Republicans mastered ballot harvesting after the 2018 debacle, national Republicans will master mail-in and other ballot fraud. It’ll be too late to stop Biden from taking office, though.

    randian in reply to fscarn. | November 26, 2020 at 5:34 pm

    Will a Court really allow to stand an election that is a proven* fraud?

    Yes, they will. Courts in both Washington State (2004 governor) and Minnesota (2008 US Senate) did nothing to stop in your face fraud to ensure the Democrat won the election. The Pennsylvania supreme court’s ruling this year was clearly intended to enable fraud, so I presume they would double down and reject attempts to prove fraud.

Read a shorter version of Sidney Powell’s complaint this morning. That this pattern on Trump leads only to lose it by a massive vote dump in possibly 7 states shows it’s a computer manipulating.

That the Democrats Watch Dogs the social media and the Democrats Propaganda ministry will squash this as best they can and dismiss it is a given.

Sounds like we are closin’ in on that third of three boxes.

Baby Walt is one year old. The “Kracken” has been released. The Supremes finally smacked down a rabid Governor. We have a new grandson. And it is Thanksgiving Day. There is much good in the world. Rejoice.

For me, Sidney Powell only has to show enough evidence to show that democrat vote fraud crimes occurred in order to trigger the DOJ to do a real and complete investigation of obvious democrat vote fraud crimes in a federal election. Powell does not have the resources to do a complete investigation on her own nor does she have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt of democrat vote fraud crimes, all Powell needs to show that there is enough evidence for the DOJ to start a real investigation since the DOJ has the resources and legal standing to do a complet and full investigation into democrat vote fraud crimes. It would seem that this concerns a federal election and so every American has Standing regarding democrat vote fraud crimes. If democrats were certain that there was no democrat vote fraud crimes then the democrat party would agree, encourage, and fully cooperate with a DOJ full investigation into democrat vote fraud crimes.

Consider that her lawsuits — and the others — are each individual trails.

The trails converge in the past — the “Transition Integrity Project”; Marc Elias’ traveling around the country filling lawsuits to bypass legislative requirements for the conduct of elections; whoever was monitoring and calling the shots to have multiple states stop counting on election night. And who got this all started, and funded it.

This could all converge on a RICO charge, and escalating to sedition / treason charges against enemies foreign and domestic.

The real question is whether our judiciary retains some semblance of legitimacy, or is it too coopted and corrupt? If the faux election results of this coup are upheld in court, we’ll know the answer.

Just more evidence of extensive vote fraud and election law violations. And the question is, “Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result?”. The answer is the court had better follow the law and do exactly that.

In this case, these has been sufficient documentation presented to establish the almost certain existence of election law violation which would have facilitated vote fraud and that said fraud did in fact occur. The only thing which is in dispute is how much fraud actually occurred? Was the likely fraud enough to change the current election results? And, determining that is exactly what a temporary injunction stopping certification of the vote count is for. And That is what is being asked for, here. And, granting such an injunction should be a slam dunk. Such have been granted in other cases for fr less compelling evidence.

However, it may also be that Powell, as well as he counterparts Wood and Giulianni realize that the judicial fix is in and these reasonable injunctions will not be grants for spurious reasons. It is possible that they are building a case, in the final court of popular opinion, to justify extreme action to correct the existing situation. It is possible that these attorneys realize that they are not simply hired judicial guns, but actually have skin in this game. A game that, if they lose, will significantly change this country and not for the better.

Do you see a pattern of citizens doing the hard work? I’ve given up on the DOJ, FBI and some of the courts. We the people still have a chance. This is not going away.

    henrybowman in reply to r2468. | November 26, 2020 at 3:44 pm

    This is what “eternal vigilance” was always supposed to look like. And when that fails, refresh the Tree of Liberty. God bless Thomas Jefferson, who understood it all.

If Powell is no longer of counsel for the President, does she have standing to file a suit in states other than her own?

“Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result?”

If that is how the issue is framed to the court(s), we deserve to lose. It should be framed as

“Will the courts, presented with a preponderance of irrefutable evidence backed by eyewitness testimony and facing the wrath of the citizenry who know the election was rigged have the integrity to CORRECT the state elections results?”

We are talking about a LANDSLIDE victory being blatantly stolen by desperate, incompetent desperadoes! If we have to state million-man marches at the doorstep of each court along the way, let’s do that! If the court system is THAT corrupt, let’s force them to show themselves before the world for what they are! Face the wrath of the people as they take down the world’s last hope for freedom!

    “If we have to STAGE million-man marches…”

      alaskabob in reply to Pasadena Phil. | November 26, 2020 at 12:31 pm

      Marching around with signs and good intentions doesn’t go anywhere. President Obama said change requires making politicians and administrators “uncomfortable”. Considering what the Left IS comfortable in letting what happened in their own cities…well….

        Excuse me, but having crowds numbering in the hundreds of thousands of angry citizens voicing their dismay at the corrupt election process on the courtroom steps would fall on deaf ears? Really? They would take responsibility for being the latest corrupt cog in the machine as they pass it on to SCOTUS? And this is like Obama? How?

        I believe the correct historical analogy would be Martin Luther arriving in Rome after a long journey from Germany where he was greeted as a hero at each stop by large throngs of eager supporters.

        The Vatican were presented with Martin Luther’s famous challenge: “Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.” having been educated about the consequences of executing Luther, gave him a warning and let him go. The Vatican caved to the inevitable of the truth about their corruption.

        You know, for years it has been really annoying to suffer the incurable failure of visualizing success here at LI. Many of you need to get used to what it is like to think like a winner. Always arguing that we are going to lose, that the our latest situation is hopeless, is tedious. We are winning! Enjoy it!

          henrybowman in reply to Pasadena Phil. | November 26, 2020 at 3:54 pm

          Yes, it precisely would “fall on deaf ears.” At most what you would get is some mook apologizing and “taking full responsibility,” but you would gain no actual victory.

          If 2020 has proven us anything (thanks to Virginia and Michigan), it’s that “civilized” marches with no real threat of violence are passé and easily ignored. They’re “too white.” The next day, it’s business as usual at the government just as if nothing ever happened (especially because we pick up our own trash).

          If you want government to listen to you, you first have to get their attention. That takes something like looting, a store arson, maybe burn a few police cars. Then police chiefs will come out on their knees and wash your feet.

          I know all of the above sounds like a politicalmetaphor, but every one of those things actually happened in 2020. What does it take for those on our side to learn that very clear, very crucial lesson?

          You don’t water the Tree of Liberty with distilled water. (That’s a metaphor.)

          CorkyAgain in reply to Pasadena Phil. | November 26, 2020 at 4:19 pm

          @henrybowman,

          Things being what they are, I expect that any violent protest from the Right would provoke a much harsher response than the indulgent treatment BLM/Antifa received.

          henrybowman in reply to Pasadena Phil. | November 27, 2020 at 1:19 am

          I have absolutely no doubt it would. That’s why, when you go into such a thing, you don’t assume you’ll just be taking on amateur Pantifa, but enemies all the way up to their vote-stuffing elected commie enablers, including their bought-and-paid-for myrmidons with badges, and their bought-and-paid-for Soros DAs and AGs. It won’t be a limited action, it will be all or nothing.

      Like the last Lobby Day demonstration, bring guns and ammo and vests. But this time be prepared to use them.

She is using Republican State electors and other resident citizens as plaintiffs. So her suits all have standing.

A House Divided… From international cooperation to steal the election to the individual Democrat double voting in two states. How can there be free and fair elections when about half the population backs the Party of theft, intimidation and sedition?

The only way to combat voter fraud and malfeasance on the part of those counting the votes is to have severe consequences for such actions. Until a court shows the courage to overturn an election, we will continue to get increasing amounts of voter fraud.

The left had no idea the sleeping giant this would awaken.

Yes, the state court MUST overturn the election. Otherwise, the message is, laws don’t matter, and elections are worthless.

    the headline says it’s been filed in federal court, not state court.
    historically, the federal government has been hands off with elections. the constitution leaves most of the job to each state.

      You misunderstand me. This election MUST be overturned, else our Republic is truly dead. I swore an oath to uphold the constitution. Any government headed by Biden would be an illegitimate government, and must be countered by force, if not the courts. Remember the 4 boxes of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo.

      The Federal court can oversee the issues under State law under it’s ancillary functions.

      The Constitution gives state legislatures the power to decide how a states electors are chosen. If a governor, committee, or judge changes the election procedures, that should be a constitutional violation that federal courts would address. Of course, PA was permitted to bypass the legislature and change its procedures — thanks to Roberts voting with the liberal justices because … Covid. That was at the injunction stage, I think, but a lot of issues could’ve been avoided had the Constitution been followed.

I believe a thorough audit that strictly goes by State law (ignoring any illegal agreements with Raffensperger by the Democrats which violate Article 2) is the remedy here. All votes that were counted without proper poll watcher supervision will have to be thrown out .Every counted ballot should be verified as to legal origin .If it cant be then it should be thrown out. I don’t think the judges will summarily throw out all mail in ballots . If the envelopes have been destroyed all mail in ballots should be thrown out.
The statistical evidence of fraud is less compelling. If votes were switched or weighted by software then the manual recount should be way off-unless the machines themselves are the culprit and they should be checked as to whether they have weighted tabulation built in.
Close oversight of the tabulation will be ordered and anyone intimidating a watcher will be immediately arrested.

“Will a Court really overturn an entire state election result?”

I said on another site if the courts let the election stand while acknowledging the fraud that will not be accepted by Trump voters.

The country will become a very dangerous powder keg where one tiny spark somewhere can tip it into mass violence.

Especially as a new Biden administration starts trying things such as a nationwide mask mandate, Biden’s corruption becomes more widely known, or even something like Biden’s plan to make 11 million illegal aliens into citizens.

Millions of people are going to be angry. Very angry.

Hopefully the state legislatures step in and do their duty. If there is fraud in a state and the state can’t sort it out than for the sake of the country that state legislature should refuse to send any electors to the electoral college.

If both candidates fall under 270 electoral votes than allow the House to vote on who will become President.

    Milhouse in reply to TheOldZombie. | November 26, 2020 at 5:46 pm

    If there is fraud in a state and the state can’t sort it out than for the sake of the country that state legislature should refuse to send any electors to the electoral college.

    If both candidates fall under 270 electoral votes than allow the House to vote on who will become President.
    This is not correct. A candidate does not need 270 votes, he just needs a majority of the electors. So if PA, GA, and MI don’t send any electors there will be only 486 electors and Biden will only need 244 to win, which he will easily have. For Trump to have a chance those states need to send in electors’ votes for Trump. And it’s difficult to see how that can happen.

    Also, it seems that some people have the impression that the state legislatures are the ones who send the electors’ votes in to Washington, and will therefore be faced with a decision whether to certify the current result or change it. That’s wrong. The state legislatures have no role in the process. Their role was to set the rules for how electors are chosen, and they did that decades ago. Now the rules play out every four years and the legislatures are not involved.

    The question is whether the legislatures can and/or should deliberately involve themselves by changing the rules after the event. First, it’s not clear that they can. First, that would run afoul of 5 USC §3, which says that the electors chosen according to the rules set before Nov 3 must be counted. Second, it’s likely that under their state constitutions an act of the legislature that is not signed by the governor is a nullity. That is what the federal constitution provides, after all. If that is so then the governors, who are all Dems, will refuse to sign the change, the existing rules will remain in place, and that will be that.

    Milhouse in reply to TheOldZombie. | November 26, 2020 at 5:46 pm

    If there is fraud in a state and the state can’t sort it out than for the sake of the country that state legislature should refuse to send any electors to the electoral college.

    If both candidates fall under 270 electoral votes than allow the House to vote on who will become President.

    This is not correct. A candidate does not need 270 votes, he just needs a majority of the electors. So if PA, GA, and MI don’t send any electors there will be only 486 electors and Biden will only need 244 to win, which he will easily have. For Trump to have a chance those states need to send in electors’ votes for Trump. And it’s difficult to see how that can happen.

    Also, it seems that some people have the impression that the state legislatures are the ones who send the electors’ votes in to Washington, and will therefore be faced with a decision whether to certify the current result or change it. That’s wrong. The state legislatures have no role in the process. Their role was to set the rules for how electors are chosen, and they did that decades ago. Now the rules play out every four years and the legislatures are not involved.

    The question is whether the legislatures can and/or should deliberately involve themselves by changing the rules after the event. First, it’s not clear that they can. First, that would run afoul of 5 USC §3, which says that the electors chosen according to the rules set before Nov 3 must be counted. Second, it’s likely that under their state constitutions an act of the legislature that is not signed by the governor is a nullity. That is what the federal constitution provides, after all. If that is so then the governors, who are all Dems, will refuse to sign the change, the existing rules will remain in place, and that will be that.

      CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | November 26, 2020 at 8:16 pm

      Milhouse,

      Minor quibble. I would argue that the legislature would be exercising a power vested wholly in themselves in the selection or determination of a slate of electors. Similar to Congress holding the power to ‘make and declare war’. The executive wouldn’t be entitled to veto the legislature choosing to exercise it’s vested power.

      Election of 1876 seems particularly relevant.

      artichoke in reply to Milhouse. | November 27, 2020 at 10:35 am

      Are you sure? I’ve seen comments saying that that phrase means you need 270, not a majority of just the electors who show up.

      If they important thing is how many electors show up, what if a state sends two slates, one from the Dem governor and one from the Rep legislature? Can that increase the total number of electors above 538 and the total needed above 270?

        CommoChief in reply to artichoke. | November 27, 2020 at 12:03 pm

        artichoke,

        As simply as possible:
        1. Electors are determined for each state
        A. In the event of widespread problems the state legislature could refuse to certify and send any electors. In this case the number required for a majority of electors would decrease.
        B. Or the legislature could appoint an alternate slate of electors. In this case the choice of which slate to allow to be seated resides with the ‘President of the Senate’. Is that the VP or is it whomever McConnell appoints to preside? Not entirely settled.
        C. State simply sends electors as per normal.

        2. If several states send alternative slates of electors that is one path.

        3. If several states send no slate of electors that is another path.

        Bottom line is the real magical number isn’t 270. The magic number is a majority of seated electors.

        Trying to speculate all the different twists and turns before the courts rule on the election challenges is not with your time. Too many possibilities none of which are certain because any actions taken will be subject to additional court review and an unimaginable level of political and public pressure.

        I suggest looking at the election of 1876. Just wiki it and do further research from there to form your personal opinion.

          Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | November 29, 2020 at 1:32 am

          The president of the senate is Mike Pence. There’s nothing unsettled about that. McConnell doesn’t get a say in the matter.

        Milhouse in reply to artichoke. | November 29, 2020 at 1:35 am

        Artichoke, the comments you’ve seen are wrong. Just read the constitution and it will be obvious to you.

        If two slates arrive then at most one of them will be counted. If neither is counted then the majority is reduced. Who decides which one should be counted is unsettled. A plain reading of the constitution suggests that Mike Pence makes that decision, and congress doesn’t get a say. But in 1877 the congress took a different view; it thought it should decide. That dispute has never been settled.

as a civil complaint what does she expect the court to do?
OJ was found ‘guilty’ of wrongful death in a civil case.
yet, it didn’t result in his being sent to prison. i believe he was made to pay a fine.
surely ms. powell would know this. if she’s in procession of evidence of a crime, she’s be required to bring it to the GBI/FBI or the DOJ or georgia’s state AG.
this seems like a last ditch effort, not a front line defence.

Professor,

Your question ‘will a court overturn an entire State’s election result’ has, IMO, a flawed predicate.

Your statement presumes that:
1. All votes were tabulated from lawfully submitted ballots
2. All the election procedures required by law were followed

If those two points were true then we wouldn’t be here. The bottom line is neither of those points are true.

As an example, if the law states that elections observers must be allowed to meaningfully observe the process and in precinct x, the observers were prevented from meaningful observation then all ballots from that precinct should be disallowed.

Likewise if the law calls for certain process to be followed and they were not followed in a particular precinct then those ballots should be discarded.

If that means that every county in GA except one, willingly violated election law, then every ballot from every county except that one county should be disallowed.

Respectfully, it seems to me that you are making the argument that the fraud is too widespread to address. That seems to provide an incentive to large-scale illegality. Logically that enables the least ethical to prevail.

    henrybowman in reply to CommoChief. | November 26, 2020 at 3:59 pm

    “Respectfully, it seems to me that you are making the argument that the fraud is too widespread to address. That seems to provide an incentive to large-scale illegality. Logically that enables the least ethical to prevail.”

    Witness financial houses that were deemed “too big to fail.” All that crap has to stop.

Results? Electoral College or Press?

The Democrats had years to prepare the cheat and figure ways to cover their tracks, along with compliant media, courts, bureaucracy and the Never Trumpers to help. Trump has weeks to investigate and make a case. It really feels discouraging to think that so many hate Trump so much that they would destroy so much in response.

    And then the voters blew up their carefully thought out plans by overwhelming their voting machines with so many Trump votes, they had to slap together a messy plan to manufacture Biden votes. They panicked. THAT represents most of the evidence fueling the Kraken.

    Having overwhelmed the voting process system, we now have to overwhelm the vote counting our system and follow it right up to the steps of SCOTUS. This is our Martin Luther journey to the Vatican. One of the most consequentially epic events in history. Feel it. Believe it. ACT on it.

Time, you’re going to say ‘we don’t have enough time?’ That’s what you advise bohica? No, well we have the execution scheduled so what the hell, we can’t stop now.

You know very well that is this stolen election stands, 2016 will have been the last free and fair election ever.

I know demographics will eventually swamp the US. I hate that but it will happen. But fraudulent elections? That’s too raw to swallow. Or maybe not, maybe not for blue state, blue city, ‘conservatives’ maybe going to the left slowly is ok for you. Not for me or mine.

    artichoke in reply to forksdad. | November 27, 2020 at 10:40 am

    We even have a chance with the demographics:

    (1) with Trump we’re likely to be more family-friendly internally and bringing in fewer immigrants to replace our own children, and also

    (2) this young generation may grow up conservative. They’ve seen leftism and when they reflect on what they’ve seen, it should scare them to death. Witness the generations from USSR and Maoist China. They will do anything to avoid a repeat. Those immigrants are some of our strongest citizens in fighting socialism and capitalism here.

Between the evidence presented at Rudy’s hearing and through Powell’s filing, I have a very full and satisfied feeling. The giddy kiddies were acting like seals at feeding time.

The varieties and magnitude of fraud, misconduct, and malfeasance are nothing short of breathtaking.

Forensic ink analysis and spectrophotometry on the ballots.

That’s the only *quick* and sure way to *prove* that Democrats stole this election. The only thing difficult about it is getting physical access to the ballots, which is a matter of litigation although a preservation order (enforced) is required from a judge.

Spectrophotometry is used analyze inks on documents; I’d bet anything that if we check the mail-in and absentee ballots, particularly those with votes only in the Presidential race, we’ll find thousands of ballots marked by the same inks/pens.

Ballot-stuffers needing to deliver 20,000 votes will not change pens after every ballot, and neither will the more efficient cheats using printers and photocopiers stop to change toners after every run.

And here’s the thing; high end spectrophotometers cost just a few thousand dollars, and they can scan multiple samples at the same time and output results in seconds. They can be used to tell if the same pen/ink marked a series of ballots.

Having thousands of absentee and mail-in ballots, purportedly from different people in different homes, all filling their ballots with chemically identical inks is impossible.

Pen and ink makers deliberately make sure their chemical and dye compositions are very different from each other, and they even put markers inside to distinguish between years of manufacture.

Even two precincts having ballots marked with the same ink on in-person ballots is near impossible; it means they somehow managed to get pens from the same maker, same model, same year and same batch. The chances of that happening are one in a billion.

This is as close to ironclad proof of fraud as we can get.

    CorkyAgain in reply to Martin_Knight. | November 26, 2020 at 4:29 pm

    The Dems have an easy explanation for the same ink being used on multiple in-person ballots: voters showing up at the polling place without their own pens and having to borrow one from one of the poll workers.

      Milhouse in reply to CorkyAgain. | November 26, 2020 at 6:00 pm

      Where you vote don’t they provide a pen in each privacy booth? Naturally people would use those, not their own.

      Here in NYC we normally do that, but this year because of teh covids we gave each person a pen that doubles as a stylus; they used the stylus to sign the electronic register (which then showed us a copy of the signature they used on their registration, and we had to compare them to verify that it was the same person), and then took the pen to a privacy booth to mark the ballot. So each person used a different pen, but they were all from the same manufacturer and batch. And that would be across the whole city.

      Absentee ballots is a different story. If you have a lot of people not living in the same household who voted with pens from the same manufacturer, it would indicate a problem.

        Martin_Knight in reply to Milhouse. | November 26, 2020 at 6:44 pm

        Absentee ballots is a different story. If you have a lot of people not living in the same household who voted with pens from the same manufacturer, it would indicate a problem.

        And as it turns out, absentee/mail-in ballots are where most of the fraud is at.

        And again, the situation in NYC (where the city equips every precinct) may not be the same as in those urban counties in GA, WI, MI and PA.

        artichoke in reply to Milhouse. | November 27, 2020 at 10:44 am

        In NYC do they give you ballpoint pens, or sharpie markers? Here in Westchester County in my town they use sharpie markers, but we’ve had leftist election outcomes in recent years that are hard to explain.

        Given the problem in Arizona where likely conservative voters were given sharpie markers, then their votes were discarded because the law requires ballpoint pen, I wonder if we’re falling for the same trick here. My town supervisor says he’s sure we are not — but I am not sure.

          Milhouse in reply to artichoke. | November 29, 2020 at 1:39 am

          In NYC do they give you ballpoint pens, or sharpie markers?

          They had special ballpoint pens made, with rubber tips so when the pen is retracted it can be used as a stylus.

          Pre-Wuhan they just had normal ballpoint pens in each privacy booth, tied to a bit of string so they didn’t walk off.

          Given the problem in Arizona where likely conservative voters were given sharpie markers, then their votes were discarded because the law requires ballpoint pen,

          That is complete bullshit. There is no such law, and votes made with sharpies were not discarded. In fact the election authorities there prefer that sharpies be used, and specifically designed the ballot so that it could be scanned even if the sharpie bled through the paper.

This is an interesting point (No. 31) on page 14 of the Complaint:

Defendant Governor Brian Kemp (Governor of Georgia) is named
herein in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Georgia. On or about June 9, 2019, Governor Kemp bought the new Dominion Voting Systems for Georgia, budgeting 150 million dollars for the machines. Critics are quoted, “Led by Abrams, Democrats fought the legislation and pointed to cybersecurity experts who warned it would leave Georgia’s elections susceptible to hacking and tampering.” And “Just this week, the Fair Fight voting rights group started by [Stacy] Abrams launched a television ad
critical of the bill. In a statement Thursday, the group called it “corruption at its worst” and a waste of money on “hackable voting machines.”

So…for once, did Stacy Abrams do something that made sense by warning that those machines are “hackable”?

    Dusty Pitts in reply to Melinda. | November 26, 2020 at 3:58 pm

    She may have thought so two years ago, but now it’s … inconvenient.

    Only because in Georgia’s case, the machines were not under the control of Democrats. Hence the bipartisan effort to derail Powell’s calls for nationwide review of voting procedures.

    This election’s fraud was nothing new. Bernie was the first national victim in 2016 and he knows it. But he probably cut a deal and agreed to keep quiet in exchange for more influence in 2020. Trump was the second victim in 2016 but Hilary’s team underestimated the enormity of Trump’s vote count and being unprepared for failure (that is why she was so shocked), she had to opt for “resist” instead claiming the Russians helped Trump steal the election.

    The Republicans are not likely innocent of voter fraud which is the only reason they would now be against any effort to conduct a forensic study of the 2020 elections. There is a lot of corruption out there and it is bipartisan. Also tells us something about the defeatist attitudes of some of our commentors.

What about “Judicial Notice”.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Judicial+Notice

A doctrine of evidence applied by a court that allows the court to recognize and accept the existence of a particular fact commonly known by persons of average intelligence without establishing its existence by admitting evidence in a civil or criminal action.

When a court takes judicial notice of a certain fact, it obviates the need for parties to prove the fact in court. Ordinarily, facts that relate to a case must be presented to the judge or jury through testimony or tangible evidence. However, if each fact in a case had to be proved through such presentation, the simplest case would take weeks to complete. To avoid burdening the judicial system, all legislatures have approved court rules that allow a court to recognize facts that constitute common knowledge without requiring proof from the parties.

On the federal trial court level, judicial notice is recognized in rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence for U.S. District Courts and Magistrates. Rule 201 provides, in part, that “[a] judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.”

And I’m still waiting on the pony I ask Santa for some 50yr.s ago. I only believe in results when they happen. I’m not holding my breath and going to do my best to thwart a second Biden term.

I don’t think it’s OK for the court to say there’s not enough time to look into this and thus discovery will not begin or will be too short. If the election result is reasonably disputed, there is a constitutional process: while it is disputed, Georgia and/or Michigan do not appoint electors, because they don’t know which ones to appoint.

And there’s a constitutional process in case nobody gets 270 electors.

The court, the lawyers, nobody has to like it, but it’s the legal process and it’s better than the alternative.

    Milhouse in reply to artichoke. | November 26, 2020 at 7:13 pm

    And there’s a constitutional process in case nobody gets 270 electors.

    No, there isn’t. There is no requirement for 270 votes. What is needed is a majority of the electors. If there aren’t 538 electors then a majority is less than 270. So not sending in electors from these states would not help Trump, because it would reduce the majority Biden needs.

      CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | November 26, 2020 at 8:04 pm

      Milhouse,

      Thanks for continuing to make that very important point regarding a majority of electors v 270 as a magic number. Folks please do some basic research instead of incorrectly arguing with others.

      Of course, the ‘addition by subtraction’ theory would work if enough States are subtracted entirely. Remove PA 20, WI 10, MI 16, GA 16, NV 11 and Biden is now below Trump. Flip some combination from Biden to Trump and that works as well, though far less likely.

      artichoke in reply to Milhouse. | November 27, 2020 at 10:51 am

      Are you sure? As I ask above, if the total number of electors decides what’s a majority, what if a state sends 2 competing slates of electors? Who is empowered to say which of them count, or maybe all of them count, and the total count can go above 538.

        CommoChief in reply to artichoke. | November 27, 2020 at 12:12 pm

        artichoke

        No. The number of electors will not increase. It could, potentially decrease below 538. State could send no electors, state could send competing slate of electors. The ‘President of the Senate’ is vested with determining which slate to seat; maybe, perhaps…. there are competing theories on this point.

        I suggest you do a wiki for the election of 1876. Get a grasp of the various aspects. Do more research from there to satisfy your own opinion.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | November 26, 2020 at 9:31 pm

Hmmmm…

Carlson Vs. Powell Feud Reveals A Larger Failure No One Seems to Be Talking About

https://youtu.be/afKIXUt4gpM

    It’s not mainly that the “investigative journalism community” in this country isn’t doing their job. The real problem is worse. We can still find investigative discussions on the web, if we look hard. But those who control broad access, like Tucker Carlson via his airtime, and Twitter via its platform, are suppressing those particular investigative findings because, apparently, they have an opposing agenda.

Re: f20000
The paper ballot problem is easy to solve if I have time and nobody watching. The vote machine tallies X real and X+Y total votes. I print Y votes. A hand count will see the paper and machine counts are equal and erroneously conclude no fraud. No need to waste time actually running paper through the scanner. That’s one way to add more votes than the scanning rate of the machines, as we see in some states.

    henrybowman in reply to randian. | November 27, 2020 at 1:25 am

    Very astute. If you see a challenge coming against your machine’s “phantom votes,” just gin up brand new paper ballots to support them.

    I thought maybe take TOTAL VOTES – IN PERSON VOTES = MAIL IN VOTES. Once that’s known, count the envelopes. If as claimed Democrat operatives brought in boxes of unfolded / pristine ballots without envelopes, there will be a big difference between MAIL IN VOTES counted and the number of ENVELOPES.

      randian in reply to MrE. | November 27, 2020 at 3:05 am

      The envelopes are destroyed after the ballot is removed. This is allegedly to protect the identity of the voter, though I don’t know why you’d put your name and address on a mail-in ballot, but it also serves to prevent the audit measure you propose.

        CommoChief in reply to randian. | November 27, 2020 at 9:53 am

        randian,

        In many States the envelope is required to be retained for a period of time following the election. Usually 2 – 2 1/2 years.

        GA may be not require retention of envelope. If they do and they were not …..

        Milhouse in reply to randian. | November 29, 2020 at 1:46 am

        The envelopes are destroyed after the ballot is removed. This is allegedly to protect the identity of the voter, though I don’t know why you’d put your name and address on a mail-in ballot

        That makes no sense. Destroying the envelope doesn’t protect voter privacy; that’s preserved when you take the ballot out of the envelope and put it with all the other ballots.

        You don’t put your information on the ballot, you put it on the envelope. That’s what it’s for. When it arrives the first thing they do is validate the information on the envelope, and only if they determine that this is a valid vote do they open it and remove the ballot, and put that into the system. Once that happens there is no way to trace the ballot back to the envelope. Destroying the envelop adds nothing, so it makes no sense for them to do so unless they’re trying to cover up fraud.

Now visible on PACER, this was filed as:

CASE #: 1:20-cv-04809-TCB Pearson et al v. Kemp et al

Assigned to: Judge Timothy C. Batten, Sr

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend