Thema:
‘Kraken’ lawsuit is way dumber than you realize flat
Autor: membran
Datum:01.12.20 07:38
Antwort auf:US-Politik Part XII - The Evil Is Defeated von Pezking

War die Tage auf /r/politics verlinkt, ist ein Weblog von einem Anwalt ("Mike Dunford is a lawyer and intellectual property researcher at Queen Mary University of London, where he focuses on issues related to copyright and online communities") - ich schneide mal die besten Stellen raus, weil der Blog mit weiß auf schwarz imho etwas ätzend zu lesen ist.

The ‘Kraken’ Lawsuit Was Released And It’s Way Dumber Than You Realize
[https://thebulwark.com/the-kraken-lawsuit-was-released-and-its-way-dumber-than-you-realize/]

(...)

Powell had been threatening to release the Kraken for the last week, which she spent “practicing law on her own” after being unpersoned by the Trump legal team following a press conference in which she spouted conspiracy theories so insane that even Giuliani’s hair dye was trying to get out of the room. It wasn’t clear what the Kraken was until it was released and we learned that it had taken the form of matching his-and-hers lawsuits in Georgia and Michigan. Lawsuits that have redefined rock bottom.

(...)

Powell had been threatening to release the Kraken for the last week, which she spent “practicing law on her own” after being unpersoned by the Trump legal team following a press conference in which she spouted conspiracy theories so insane that even Giuliani’s hair dye was trying to get out of the room. It wasn’t clear what the Kraken was until it was released and we learned that it had taken the form of matching his-and-hers lawsuits in Georgia and Michigan. Lawsuits that have redefined rock bottom.

You don’t need to read far to see how truly awful these lawsuits are. Start with the simplest and most eye-catchingly obvious: Complaints in federal lawsuits have set formatting—at the top of the first page are the words “IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE ____ DISTRICT OF ____.” It’s a ritual formula, it’s hard to mess up, and every lawyer I know who practices in federal courts uses a fill-in-the-blanks template. Every lawyer except Sidney Powell, I guess—because between the two filings she managed to spell the word “district” four different ways, batting .250 on accuracy.

And things only got worse from there. Much worse.

(...)


[https://thebulwark.com/app/uploads/2020/11/Dunford1.jpg]

(...)

That kind of spacing problem recurs throughout. The document is practically unreadable.

(...)

(O)ne of Powell’s more absurd “witnesses” is Ronald Watkins who, alongside his father, runs the imageboard where “Q” drops his messages. Hmmmm. The reason Watkins is part of this case is unclear. Powell is claiming him as an expert in Dominion’s voting software, but you would hope that she could find someone better—like I don’t know, someone who has worked with it maybe?

The basis of Watkins’s alleged expertise is the fact that he claims to have read the manual. This may come as a surprise but reading a software manual does not qualify you to testify as an expert witness in a federal courtroom.

If you can believe this, Watkins isn’t even the strangest witness. The award would go to Mystery Man Lord Tensai. Powell redacted this witness’s name from all the filings, including those sent to the defendants. The Mystery Witness proclaims that he/she/it wants  to “let the world know the truth about the corruption, manipulation, and lies being committed by a conspiracy of people and companies” that “began more than a decade ago in Venezuela and has spread to countries all over the world.” Our Mystery Witness, whom the declaration assures us is “an adult of sound mine” (sic... lmao). (...) We don’t know this person’s name, but they tell us that if we doubt the veracity of their claims, we only have to—well, see for yourself -


[https://thebulwark.com/app/uploads/2020/11/Dunford2.jpg]

(...)

For those who are not versed in the particulars of high-stakes lawsuits of this nature, let me affirm that, no, you cannot hide the identity of your star witness from the people you’re suing. And no, you cannot hide the identity of the people who will vouch for the veracity of your star witness.

(...)
"


< antworten >