This is one of the worst complaints I’ve ever read. It actually has some good parts but is so disorganized and mixes the few compelling parts with typical electoral nonsense that happens every election that it actually undermines itself. This is clearly a cut and paste job from a lot of people’s writing and it doesn’t hang together. In many cases the language is inconsistent and statements don’t follow from what precedes it. They jump from the general election to the recount haphazardly and sometimes you don’t know which they are talking about.
The strong points in this complaint:
The Sec of State did not follow the law in key respects.
Large numbers of ballots counted without observers, including opening of ballots before permitted by law.
officials lied about the leak in state farm arena and poll workers stayed behind working after observers were cleared.
I can’t tell if the statistical analyses are helpful because the lawyers writing about them did such an utter crap job explaining them that the stat portion was total gobbledygook. I hope the affidavits from the experts themselves make sense because the portion of the complaint discussing the stats are garbage.
The description of the clean machine produced ballots was extraordinarily poor. They quoted one affiant on this without saying what county it was in. I recall there were multiple witness accounts of this, including Democrats, and they just cite a single one. Just awful.
This complaint could have been made 1000x more compelling by focusing on the above facts, including bolstering the machine printed ballots and the stats, and moving all the black helicopter stuff about Dominion (which had zero bearing on the main points) and the random witness accounts of how grandma’s ballot got put in the Biden pile in an appendix.
I fear they actually took a strong case and made it weaker by poor writing and organization.
SIDNEY, page 1: As a civil action, the plaintiff’s burden of proof is a “preponderance of the evidence” .... Plaintiff only had to show that there were enough irregular ballots to place in doubt the result.
Re any «errors» They might have uploaded an a draft that is not proofread to draw attention to it through the Streisand Effect. I can see a Drunken Kung Fu strategy in doing that which is not unlike Trumps. Why show your best work to your enemy in the face of so much negative energy - even from so called supporters??
This is one of the worst complaints I’ve ever read. It actually has some good parts but is so disorganized and mixes the few compelling parts with typical electoral nonsense that happens every election that it actually undermines itself. This is clearly a cut and paste job from a lot of people’s writing and it doesn’t hang together. In many cases the language is inconsistent and statements don’t follow from what precedes it. They jump from the general election to the recount haphazardly and sometimes you don’t know which they are talking about.
The strong points in this complaint:
I can’t tell if the statistical analyses are helpful because the lawyers writing about them did such an utter crap job explaining them that the stat portion was total gobbledygook. I hope the affidavits from the experts themselves make sense because the portion of the complaint discussing the stats are garbage.
The description of the clean machine produced ballots was extraordinarily poor. They quoted one affiant on this without saying what county it was in. I recall there were multiple witness accounts of this, including Democrats, and they just cite a single one. Just awful.
This complaint could have been made 1000x more compelling by focusing on the above facts, including bolstering the machine printed ballots and the stats, and moving all the black helicopter stuff about Dominion (which had zero bearing on the main points) and the random witness accounts of how grandma’s ballot got put in the Biden pile in an appendix.
I fear they actually took a strong case and made it weaker by poor writing and organization.
SIDNEY, page 1: As a civil action, the plaintiff’s burden of proof is a “preponderance of the evidence” .... Plaintiff only had to show that there were enough irregular ballots to place in doubt the result.
Re any «errors» They might have uploaded an a draft that is not proofread to draw attention to it through the Streisand Effect. I can see a Drunken Kung Fu strategy in doing that which is not unlike Trumps. Why show your best work to your enemy in the face of so much negative energy - even from so called supporters??