Read on Twitter
And while Sidney asked for various forms of emergency relief at the end of the filing, and said that a cert petition would be "forthcoming," the filing itself is LABELED as a - wait for it - "Petition for Writ of Certiorari."
Now this should probably go without saying but if you don't know what you are asking the court to do, the court probably doesn't know either and isn't going to go out of its way to figure it out.
Also, what is it with these people that makes the linearity of time such an amazingly difficult concept? Seriously?
I mean I could see occasionally getting that stuff wrong, but it's every damn time at this point, what the hell?
The fact that they have to discuss the Arizona and Wisconsin petitions - which have still not appeared on the docket - separately is what you might call "foreshadowing."
Also, asking SCOTUS to work over the holidays is a bold bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.
Also, the Michigan relief isn't "parallel" to the Georgia relief - there's no final judgment in the Michigan case. I know because I checked that just the other day.
More importantly, though, it's not parallel because there is little legal similarity between the cases. Sidney is demanding that different people do different things for different reasons - the only thing that's parallel is that she wants electoral votes to be given to Trump.
Seriously, this is one of those things that might not seem obvious to nonlawyers, but Sidney's complaints are a bit different. They rely on different facts in each state and on different alleged violations of state elections laws.
Cases don't become similar enough to consolidate just because you bring a similar cast of clowns to each one.
Oh, and now we see what happened to the other two "parallel" cases - Sidney seems to have screwed them up even more than the first couple of cases so they got returned to sender.
Relax, Sidney. Your explanation is in the mail.
Relax, Sidney. Your explanation is in the mail.
"Nunc pro tunc" is a legal term of art that basically means backdated.
In other words, Sidney wants the petitions to be viewed as filed on the date she meant to file them, not on whatever date she sorts out her screwups.
Unlikely to happen for many reasons.
In other words, Sidney wants the petitions to be viewed as filed on the date she meant to file them, not on whatever date she sorts out her screwups.
Unlikely to happen for many reasons.
"One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?"
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?"
Nope. There are not "competing slates of electors." There are electors who cast real electoral votes, and there are self-appointed assclowns who played "grown-up person dress-up" on the same day.
These are different things.
These are different things.
And, no, Sidney. Allowing people to use a meeting room in the same building is not "the endorsement of the legislatures." (And *disallowing* people from using a meeting room inside is DEFINITELY not endorsement.)
You're lying to the court, Sidney. Stop doing that.
You're lying to the court, Sidney. Stop doing that.
Sidney, the testimony wasn't unrebutted in all those cases.
And in the cases where it was unrebutted it was unrebutted only because your butt got booted out of the courthouse before the case reached a point where rebuttal would have been required.
And in the cases where it was unrebutted it was unrebutted only because your butt got booted out of the courthouse before the case reached a point where rebuttal would have been required.
I swear, Orly Taitz should bill Sidney Powell - because Sidney obviously took crazy lessons from Orly. Just no doubt.
And calling the thing Ramsland did a "court-ordered forensic audit" is deliberately misleading. The court ordered them to give Ramsland access to the machines; the court did not, to my knowledge, order that an audit be conducted.
But Sidney is good at lying to the Court.
But Sidney is good at lying to the Court.
Oh, good. We're finally at the "argument section" of the brief, which clearly follows "that other section, whatever it was."
Lol, you want responses on 23 December instead of 14 January? I don't think that's going to happen.
Also, it's still not clear whether you're asking for cert or something else.
Also, it's still not clear whether you're asking for cert or something else.
And you want Michigan and Georgia ordered to respond to this motion by noon tomorrow, what are you even smoking.
That said, I could probably knock out a more than adequate response in that time:
"Dear Justices, plz tell Nutty Treasonweasel to go away. Kthxbai."
That said, I could probably knock out a more than adequate response in that time:
"Dear Justices, plz tell Nutty Treasonweasel to go away. Kthxbai."
And that's about that.
In this motion, which is just as batshit crazy as everything else these nuts have filed, they managed to refer to but not file copies of the missing briefs/motions/petitions/whateverthefucktheyares, which they failed to include as exhibits (or anything else).
Pro Tip:
If you're asking the court to do stuff with stuff that you've failed to get on the real docket, maybe including copies would be smart?
If you're asking the court to do stuff with stuff that you've failed to get on the real docket, maybe including copies would be smart?
Also, they managed to cite, by my exact count, a total of zero actual cases, although to be fair the exalted and respected *checks notes* Epoch Times was given as the authority underlying a key factual contention so there's at least that.
Good lord, but Sidney Powell needs to get the fuck out of the legal profession, fucking disgrace that she is.
/fin
/fin
