27m, 12 tweets, 2 min read
"Watch Live: Judge Hears Lawsuit in Michigan That Seeks to Overturn Election Result."
I'll be covering live-tweeting, @lawcrimenews.
The plaintiffs' lawyer said they're not seeking to void the results today, but that's his demand in their complaint.
Watch Live: Judge Hears Lawsuit in Michigan That Seeks to Overturn Election Result
Attorney David Kallman:
"They don't specifically refute the observations, and the specific claims of our affidavits."
The affidavits he's talking about now are not about voter fraud, but the distance to observe the counting.
Kallman complaint of "so-called COVID regulations, whatever those are," presumably referring to social distancing regulations.
The attorney then turns to a specific fraud claim.
The judge presses him on it.
Judge: Who are you contending will do this independent audit?
Kallman says that this is something that the court could direct, but the state constitution is silent about how that is done.
Attorney David Fink for Detroit is up:
"By now, we've seen this before..."
"It's starting to feel a little bit like Groundhog Day, but unlike Groundhog Day, this isn't funny at all."
Fink: These suits have given us an opportunity to give a deep dive in Michigan processes.
"This was a terrific process and it was handled properly."
"They say the number of challengers in the room was limited," never that GOP observers were left out.
Fink slams the plaintiff's lawyer Kallman for minimizing "so-called COVID regulations," as if social distancing is not necessary.
As for the allegations of "back-dating," Fink debunks that: "It was dating."
Fink debunks reports of fraud with fake birth dates of "Jan. 1, 1900."
Nobody wanting to commit voter fraud would do claim to be a 120-year-old, he says, noting it's a placeholder in the system.
Fink: "The concerns have been expressed. We looked at them. We looked closely at them." Detroit found them lacking.
He notes this is the fourth such case in Michigan.
Fink: "In 40 years of practice, I've never had this happen."
The new lawsuit attached another lawsuit as an exhibit.
"They are searching everywhere they can for validation of the conspiracy theories that they have."
Fink: "What we have to look at is the absurdity of the whole claim."
"Donald Trump received 5,000 more votes in Detroit in 2020 than he did in 2016. There was no complaint in the 2016 election."
Fink: "The courts are not supposed to get involved in the middle of an election, in the middle of the vote."
"Their remedy is a recount. To get to a recount, you have to have a certified election."
"Ironically," he adds, they're asking to block certification.
Fink slams the illogic at the heart of the plaintiffs' legal demand:
If they win, the judge blocks certification—which ultimately prevents them from getting the audit and recount that they supposedly want.
Fink turns to the "elephant in the room":
"There are always some delays, and there is always some harm in some delay."
But harm in a presidential election is the most harm.
"If the vote is delayed... the ultimate deadline could be missed: Dec. 14."
"The electors can only meet if they are appointed."
That could mean that no candidate reaches 270 electors, and it's thrown into the House of Representatives or as some pundits claim, statehouses.
"Either scenario is desperately dangerous."
Fink says that if the judge grants any ruling, however small, in the plaintiffs' favor, it will send a message to the world validating unsubstantiated conspiracy theories of voter fraud.
Such a message "undermines the very bedrock of our democracy," he says.
Wayne County's attorney Janet Anderson-Davis is now up.
J. Paul Kirby
All of the attorneys are taking 40 minutes to recite 10 minutes of content.
The state's Democratic party's attorney John M. Devaney is now up.
3:23 PM · Nov 11, 2020·Twitter Web Ap
Devaney starts with issues of standing.
His client's message in the legal brief: "The people of Michigan have spoken.”
https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/w ... on-result/
Kallman, for the plaintiffs, is back up.
Judge Kenny is pressing him on their unsubstantiated voter fraud charges.
Kallman again handwaves the COVID-19 pandemic: "Mr. Devaney says that we're in a pandemic and all that."
Kallman claims they were forcing observers to stand 20 feet away.
The judge asks him for evidence of that.
Kallman quickly retreats from the 20-feet claim.
Judge Kenn asks Kallman to respond to the allegation in Detroit's brief that poll challengers broke Michigan law by intimidating ballot-counters with chants of "Stop the vote."
Kallman says his clients weren't the ones doing that.
"So what?" he asks.
Kallman adds that he doesn't support that kind of chanting, but it has nothing to do with the case.
Asked whether anyone filed formal challenged, Kallman suggests vaguely that some may have or tried to, but he doesn't state specifics.
Judge Kenny does not rule from the bench, saying that he will issue a written opinion at a later time.
It will be available Friday.
• • •