Election Litigation Status

[Res Ipsa]

Honor, yeah, interesting like that.

In other news, more on Sidney Powell's flat-out lies to the Supreme Court. https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi ... 920800001/

Lying to any judge is bad. Lying to the Supreme Court is Supremely bad.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Perhaps the jenius will take the time to explain why Eric Ostergren said he saw no wrongdoing while he served as a poll challenger. Perhaps the jenius will explain why Eric Ostergren actually joined the Trump campaign lawsuit, you know, after reading it? I want a direct quote from the complaint, jenius.

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

Here is Dominion’s demand letter to Sidney Powell. She may end up with a different day in Court than she wanted.

https://Twitter.com/alanfeuer/status/13 ... 59937?s=21

It is important to understand that Powell could have had an actual trial on her claims by simply filing election contests in state courts. Instead, she has pursued a legal strategy intended to avoid having her evidence actually tested in court. Her strategy has consistently been to throw a bunch of claims and assertions in front of federal judges and claim that there is sufficient (untested) evidence to warrant extreme action without any any fact finding. All the while she is soliciting money to support the production of low quality, sloppy legal work.

[Chap]

Honor, yeah, interesting like that.

In other news, more on Sidney Powell's flat-out lies to the Supreme Court. https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi ... 920800001/

Lying to any judge is bad. Lying to the Supreme Court is Supremely bad.

Goodness me, yes! The only question now is "Does she know she is lying, or is she too stupid to know the difference between truth and falsehood"?

Under English law, an attorney is an officer of the court and has strict (and enforced) duties to that court. I presume it is the same in the US?

A long-shot legal effort relying on conspiracy theories and inaccurate analyses to argue President Donald Trump actually won Michigan included additional blatantly false information in a new filing with the U.S. Supreme Court this week.

The legal team, including attorney Sidney Powell, told the court the Republican-controlled Michigan Legislature backs its effort to allow a so-called GOP slate of Electoral College delegates cast the state's 16 electoral votes for Trump.

This is wrong. On Monday, Republican leaders of the Michigan House and Senate publicly acknowledged President-elect Joe Biden won the election. The same day, the state's actual 16 Electoral College delegates voted for Biden, who received 154,000 more votes than Trump in Michigan.

Electoral College elector Robin Smith, left, and others clap after casting their votes for President of the United States at the state Capitol, December 14, 2020 in Lansing, Michigan. - Joe Biden's US election victory was set for formal confirmation by the Electoral College, further closing the door on angry efforts by President Donald Trump to overturn the 2020 vote.

It's unlikely the Supreme Court will take up this or any of the legal claims from Powell and her team. Powell previously appeared at news conferences with Rudy Giuliani and other Trump attorneys, but the campaign has since sought to distance itself from her.

Gregory Rohl, a Michigan attorney working with Powell, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.

The group of Republicans who incorrectly argue they can cast electoral votes for Trump were not allowed into the state Capitol on Monday. Powell and her team represent several people who would have served as GOP delegates to the Electoral College had Trump won Michigan.

Powell and her team want the high court to review an appeal of a lawsuit recently rejected in a Detroit federal court. Their lawsuit relies on a litany of debunked theories, including allegations of an international conspiracy to steal the election from Trump.

U.S. District Judge Linda Parker, based in Detroit, previously rejected their request to force Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to award the state's electoral votes to Trump.

On Friday, Powell and her team asked the Supreme Court to take up their case before a federal appellate court had the chance to rule, arguing their needs are so urgent that the high court should ignore legal norms and decide the case immediately.

The team sent an additional filing to the Supreme Court Tuesday, highlighting efforts by Republicans to cast electoral votes for Trump in states he did not win and a deeply flawed analysis of voting machines in Antrim County.

At one point, the filing states: "On December 14, 2020, the Republican majority State legislatures of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin exercised their plenary authority under the U.S. Constitution’s Electors Clause by permitting the full slate of Republican nominees to cast their electoral votes for President Donald J. Trump on a contingent basis."

In another portion, the filing states: "Republican slates of electors have received the endorsement of the Republican-majority legislatures in each of these States, as reflected in the decision for them to cast (or attempting to cast) their slate of electoral votes."

None of this is true.

There is no endorsement from the Michigan Legislature. On Monday, both House Speaker Lee Chatfield, R-Levering, and Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey, R-Clarklake, said Monday the election is over and Biden won the state.

[honorentheos]

Dr. Syyadurai, not a lawyer, faced off with the Secretary of State William Galvin and won the right to present an amended complaint
(see Case 1:20-cv-12080-MLW).
This case will provide Dr. Ayyurdai the opportunity to present the evidence of the fraud that involved Dominion Voting Systems machines and erased votes that should have been counted for him. Not only that, it also will show that the same fraud was perpetrated against Donald Trump.
Dr. Shiva’s amended complaint provides him the opportunity to lay out the evidence–documentary, eye witness and statistics. l

Thanks for adding yet another example of your inability to distinguish between fact and innuendo. The Dr. above who is reportedly representing himself gets the chance to present his evidence to the court that voting machines robbed him and President Trump of election victories. Ok, cool.

But you posted it like it proved something.

I'm reminded of the scene from Oceans Eleven:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EkXcLQ8KitA

subbie: show me proof that courts are dismissing cases with affidavits claiming electoral misconduct.

Also subbie: A court allowing a case to proceed is a game winning hand.

subs argument in a meme-like format: "Guys, guys, guys...! All reds." (smiling smuggly).

ETA: I understand that Topher Grace ad libbed that scene.

[Res Ipsa]

Dr. Syyadurai, not a lawyer, faced off with the Secretary of State William Galvin and won the right to present an amended complaint
(see Case 1:20-cv-12080-MLW).
This case will provide Dr. Ayyurdai the opportunity to present the evidence of the fraud that involved Dominion Voting Systems machines and erased votes that should have been counted for him. Not only that, it also will show that the same fraud was perpetrated against Donald Trump.
Dr. Shiva’s amended complaint provides him the opportunity to lay out the evidence–documentary, eye witness and statistics. l

Welcome to episode number "too many to count" of "Subby Doesn't Know crap About Courts."

Here's the docket from this lawsuit: https://www.courtlistener.com/?type=r&q ... ore%20desc

Note that Subby misspelled plaintiff's name. That's one thing he and Sidney Powell have in common.

The Complaint was filed 11/20. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18 ... -v-galvin/

You will not find the name "Dominion" anywhere in the complaint. None of Sidney Powell's nut-ball crazy allegations are included in the complaint. Plaintiff lost the Republican Primary back in September and demands a recount of that election because, he alleges, the Secretary of State illegally destroyed certain electronic images of the ballots after the ballots were counted. Nothing -- I repeat -- NOTHING about malfunctioning voting machines. He wants to stop the process of the general election because he thinks he should have been the R candidate in the General Election.

But did he "win" a battle over whether he could amend his complaint?

Here's the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure that governs amending a complaint:

Rule 15. Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

(a) Amendments Before Trial.

(1) Amending as a Matter of Course. A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:

(A) 21 days after serving it, or

(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.

Defendant filed motions to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) on December 4. That started the 21 day clock under Rule 15(a)(1)(B). Under that rule, plaintiff has an absolute right to file an amended complaint, as long as he does it before December 25 (actually, I think he gets until the 28th, but I'm too lazy to look up the time rule.)

So, plaintiff had an absolute right to file an amended complaint. The Secretary cannot object. There is no need for a "face off" between the two. All he had to do was file and serve it.

So, what the hell is Subby talking about?

Here's the order on the Motion to Dismiss: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov ... 8.21.0.pdf

The motion under Rule 12(b)(6) was granted. The Court agreed with defendant that the complaint did not state a legal cause of action for which the court was empowered to grant relief. Plaintiff lost. The Court could have entered a dismissal but, given the fact that Plaintiff still has an absolute right to amend his complaint and given that courts bend over backwards to accommodate pro se litigants, the court simply ordered plaintiff to file an amended complaint by a certain date. If he fails to do so, the judge will dismiss with prejudice.

The judge explicitly stated that he took this approach out of efficiency. If he had dismissed the case, plaintiff would have undoubtedly filed a new complaint that tried to fix the problems with his original complaint.

So, an accurate summary of what happened is: Plaintiff lost a motion to dismiss. The Court ordered him to do what he had the right to do anyway.

And, by the way, filing an amended complaint doesn't mean plaintiff will get to "lay out the evidence." Under the rules, defendant can respond to the amended complaint by either filing and answer or filing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b). There is no guarantee that the facts he alleges state a legal claim on which the court can act.

Now that you know what happened, let's go back and look at Subby's description one more time:

Dr. Syyadurai, not a lawyer, faced off with the Secretary of State William Galvin and won the right to present an amended complaint
(see Case 1:20-cv-12080-MLW).
This case will provide Dr. Ayyurdai the opportunity to present the evidence of the fraud that involved Dominion Voting Systems machines and erased votes that should have been counted for him. Not only that, it also will show that the same fraud was perpetrated against Donald Trump.
Dr. Shiva’s amended complaint provides him the opportunity to lay out the evidence–documentary, eye witness and statistics. l

Baghdad Bob couldn't have said it any better.

Thanks for tuning in to this episode of "Subby Doesn't Know crap about Courts." See you next time. Which, knowing Subby, could very well be this afternoon.

[Res Ipsa]

Chap, yes, lawyers are considered officers of the court, and there is a specific set of ethics rules on candor towards the tribunal. I don't think she is stupid. But she would not be the first lawyer to become a true believer on a crusade who fools herself into thinking her cause is more important than little things like telling judges the truth.

I don't know anything about the Supreme Court and sanctions. But it seems to me a published suspension of her admission to practice in front of the Supreme Court and a referral to her state bar association would be a just response.

[subgenius]

Not that a report, with citation, and detailed evidence would be of interest to some of you.
attack the messenger in 3...2...

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Thumbscroller gon’ thumbscroll. Pop in pop out. Post meme, don’t engage, own the libs. Ignore, repeat ad infinitum. Act like a victim when called out. Pivot, repeat, make accusations, ignore, move on. Post pics. Pivot. Repeat. Insult. Move on. Mushroom dick will be so proud.

- Doc

[honorentheos]

Not that a report, with citation, and detailed evidence would be of interest to some of you.
attack the messenger in 3...2...

From the findings of this report, it is possible to infer what may well have been a coordinated strategy to effectively stack the election deck against the Trump-Pence ticket.

Detailed evidence? Like,

In the wake of this astonishing reversal of Trump fortune, a national firestorm has erupted over the fairness and integrity of one of the most sacrosanct institutions in America – our presidential election system. Critics on the Right and within the Republican Party – including President Trump himself – have charged that the election was stolen. They have backed up these damning charges with more than 50 lawsuits, thousands of supporting affidavits and declarations, and seemingly incriminating videos, photos, and first-hand accounts of all manner of chicanery.

Lawsuits? Affidavits? Chicanery? Like this?

Fake ballot manufacturing involves the fraudulent production of ballots on behalf of a candidate; and one of the most disturbing examples of possible fake ballot manufacturing involves a truck driver who has alleged in a sworn affidavit that he picked up large crates of ballots in New York and delivered them to a polling location in Pennsylvania. There may be well over 100,000 ballots involved, enough fake ballots alone to have swung the election to Biden in the Keystone State.

Here's the truck driver reading a statement in OANN for kicks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0xaA4dYsbQ

Again, it appears innuendo serves as fact in the bubble. And you don't seem to understand the difference.