I thought she wanted discovery?
She's claiming that her Dominion claims are now "opinion" and not "fact".
Combined with her lead witness caught lying about his credentials, I often suspected she was purposely mislead to distract from the real mail-in ballot fraud.
Here's the actual court document in case people say its fake news: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699.22.2_3.pdf
Here's a link to the motion https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/Powell%20motion.pdf. Even the quote that WSJ used does not necessarily mean it was just her opinion, " “reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process" That statement doesn't mean her claims were not substantial, only that for people to take them as fact, they need to be proven in a court of law. Which is a reasonable claim on it's own. Also in the intro it stated "Finally, should the Court decide to address the Complaint’s substantive allegations, the Complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6)." which means they aren't arguing that she had nothing but opinion. I'm still reading through this, but everyone should see the primary source and make a decision based on that, not someone else's write up.