Lawyers are stupid

Not all of them, of course. But as a general rule, it’s a good idea to keep in mind that even highly successful lawyers are considerably less intelligent than successful entrepreneurs and even modestly accomplished computer programmers. What compounds their mediocrity is the fact that they are trained to not think, but rather, to do the legal equivalent of “skim until offended”. As one lawyer explained it to me, in law school they are trained to look for “the magic sentence” in the case law upon which the argument depends, then regurgitate it for gold stars and favorable decisions. At no point is any contextual thinking or holistic understanding taught, required, or encouraged.

This is why Patrick Byrne’s account of encountering Rudy Giuliani and his team rings absolutely true, as well as why we were correct to have no faith whatsoever in Team Giuliani’s legal approach to attacking the 2020 election fraud.

 I explained to him carefully the outline of what we understood at that point, an outline such as the reader might have after watching this presentation by the MIT Math PhD Dr. Shiva, or the exposition by Seth Keshel, as well as the cascade of stories of porous security in election software all referenced above. I feared overwhelming him, so I tried to simplify. Given that he sat grunting stoically as I spoke, it was difficult to judge what was sinking in. Yet after only 10 minutes I saw Rudy checking his multiple phones for texts, right in front of me as we sat talking. Conversing with one of his assistants, sending someone on a side errand, or receiving a report back. It felt rather strange to be talking to a man who was paying so little attention to me, but the Commish, sitting on the side, motioned for me to continue. After no more than 30 minutes I was ushered out of the office, but told to hang around.

Eventually I was brought back into a smaller room with Mayor Giuliani, and again asked to explain what I think happened. Realizing I may have overwhelmed him with my earlier explanation, gotten him lost in the forest for the trees, I broke it down simply and slowly, like one would for, well, one’s 76 year old Grandfather. Again within 5-10 minutes he was fidgeting, grunting on occasion, sending people on unrelated side errands, checking his multiple phones for texts and typing some people back…. Meanwhile, I tried to stay on track. Yet there was a moment 15 minutes in when I got a whiff of something in that small office…. Medicine? Booze? Just as I was taking a sniff to decide, someone rushed in with something unrelated issue, and I was escorted from the office.

Again I wandered around among the staff, most of whom were professing to know nothing about what was going on, and many others of whom were packing up desks in bankers’ boxes.  I was perplexed, and found myself drifting around the convoluted office space. 30 minutes later I was strolling outside some other conference room down the hall, when I heard Rudy’s familiar voice saying, “…don’t understand a fucking thing this guy’s telling me…” drifting out of a doorway. Startled, I looked around the corner, and there was Rudy talking to whatever group of staffers happened to be sitting worshipfully in that conference room to which he had moved.

Several staffers pulled me aside in a hallway. What Mayor Giuliani  is going to need, one told me, is a one page summary. Very simplified.

Another added, but with graphs and data.  

Another piped up, And bulletpoints. The Mayor likes bulletpoints!

But no more than one page! Repeated the first.

Insulted at Mediocrity and the 20-something staffers who were telling me how to write, and giving such asinine advice in the process, I promised I would get them something by the end of the weekend. 48 hours. I asked them for one favor: any requests that came from them should be orchestrated through one of their people, who would call one person whom I would designate among my cyber-team, and that way we would have some structure, and keep track of deliverables as we sought to accommodate their needs, so that it would not all turn into a shit-show.

Then I left and drove back to DC. By late that evening, I had learned that there were three different open requests from three people on Rudy’s team to various of my colleagues within the Bad News Bears. One was only going to handle passing requests of this type, one only wanted to handle passing on requests of that type… And the shit-show began.

I do not want to claim that everybody in that large but melting office space was incompetent. As I said, there were three competent, skillful lawyers (a fourth if one counted a Constitutional law scholar who was in and out).  But the atmosphere was one of despair, there was zero leadership shown, staffers were wondering around in the dark, and the meetings seemed like sophomore bull sessions rather than anything organized and disciplined.

From occasional contacts with several of those solid staffers over the weeks that followed, I learned what had had happened that day just before I arrived. Rudy had declaimed that, “You can never prove election fraud in a courtroom!” and had declared it was not going to be the strategy. The strategy was going to be to challenge things on procedural grounds: “This county in this state had one set of rules, this other county in that same state used a different set of rules, that violates due process and Equal Protection of the 14 Amendment.” So I was correct: just before I arrived there had been a huge blow-up between Rudy and Sidney in front of everyone, with Rudy ending by shouting at Sidney Powell and sending her away, in front of an office of dozens of people. Declaring that none of this was going to be about election fraud, and putting his lawyers to work on their procedural filings.

I don’t think Giuliani was taking a dive. I don’t think he ever had the ability to do any better. My impression is that his legal campaign was little more than a feint to keep the media distracted. Only time will tell. 

Running from defamation

The legal team of The New York Times sounds a little… panicked.

The New York Times filed a “Motion to Dismiss” request in an attempt to toss out the lawsuit and evade their wrongdoing.

Maggie Astor, The New York Times reporter who wrote the defamatory article, affirmed in her piece that the Veritas videos have “solely” unnamed sources. 

“The video then claims that Democratic operatives connected to Ms. [Ilhan] Omar’s campaign paid voters to hand over blank mail-in ballots and filled them out. This would be illegal, but the allegations come solely from unnamed people who speak with Project Veritas operatives in the video and whose faces are not shown,” she said.

In an affidavit, Astor said that the videos have “many” unnamed sources.

“Many of the individuals featured in the Video were unnamed, and there was no way for me to verify the claims that the unnamed sources purport to make in the Video,” she said.

Astor said she relied on Project Veritas’ “reputation” when making her unfounded claims.

“I know of Project Veritas and, before writing my articles about the Video, I knew that it had a reputation for publishing deceptively-edited videos and had been publicly criticized many times for doing so,” she said.

While arguing to dismiss the case, The New York Times’ legal team cited Wikipedia.

“Project Veritas bills itself as a ‘prominent independent journalistic organization,’ but it is described on its Wikipedia page (and just about everywhere else) as ‘an American far-right activist group founded by James O’Keefe’ that ‘uses undercover techniques to reveal supposed liberal bias and corruption and is known for producing deceptively edited videos about media organizations, left-leaning groups, and debunked conspiracy theories,’” they said.

Wikipedia themselves admit that their website is not a reliable source of information.

New York Times’ legal team also labelled Astor’s article an opinion piece to avoid Project Veritas’ charges of defamation.

Now, I’m no legal expert, but even a humble consumer advocate knows that if your defense against a charge of defamation involves relying upon Wikipedia, you’re probably in trouble. 

That’s all she wrote

For the lawsuit, anyhow. The California Superior Court informs us that Patreon dropped its lawsuit against the Bears on January 13th.



Based Uganda

More sovereign states should follow Uganda’s example and completely ban the seditious big social media companies from operating inside their borders:

The government of Uganda has disabled Twitter within its borders for election interference, days after oligarch Jack Dorsey took initiative to suspend accounts supportive of President Yoweri Museveni.

President Museveni is known as a devout Christian, and has been the target of animosity from western governments and global corporations his his staunch opposition to homosexualism. Uganda’s election is scheduled for Thursday, and the state has suspended Facebook and Twitter’s services for systemic bias against his National Resistance Movement.

“That social channel you are talking about, if it is going to operate in Uganda, it should be used equitably by everybody who wants to use it,” Museveni said of Twitter and Facebook. “If you want to take sides against the National Resistance Movement, then that group will not operate in Uganda.”

The Big Tech platform commenced to whine up a storm after facing consequences for censorship, conveniently dismissing the reality that they were engaged in a wide-ranging campaign to censor figures associated with President Museveni, just days before a national election.

What a pity President Trump hasn’t yet shown himself to be as courageous a leader as President Museveni. Twitter really has no grounds for complaint. Uganda is a sovereign nation and a foreign corporation like Twitter has no right to operate there if the Ugandan government doesn’t wish to permit it to do so.

That’s… oddly specific

Lin Woods calls for two Supreme Court resignations.

Chief Justice John Roberts & Justice Stephen Breyer should resign from their positions on the United States Supreme Court by Noon ET tomorrow, January 2, 2021.

Well, they have another 20 minutes or so, though I’m not holding my breath.

It’s really not that complicated

 Patreon confirms that its lawsuit against the 72 Bears isn’t complex.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Patreon, Inc. does not oppose Defendants’ Motion to Designate Case as Not Complex, filed December 9, 2020.  The parties stipulated on October 7, 2020 that this case should not be designated as complex. 

So as I surmised at the time, the belated designation of the Patreon case as complex litigation was just a mistake by the Clerk of the Court rather than shenanigans on anyone’s part. That mistake has been corrected and the only real consequence of this is the delay of what is best understood as a motion to dismiss being heard by Judge Schulman from December 16 to January 20.

The result of that hearing are not seriously in doubt, since as the Legal Legion has explained it to me, Patreon’s lawyers have never grasped that California law generally does not permit two simultaneous iterations of the same proceeding in different jurisdictions. Their lawyers appear to have misunderstood the case law that permits questions of arbitrability to be heard by a court BEFORE an arbitration begins in much the same way that an arbitration award can be challenged AFTER an arbitration ends.

But, as Judge Schulman’s order on the preliminary injunction has already explained, the courts are not generally permitted to, nor can they reasonably be expected to, interfere with ongoing arbitration proceedings once they have begun. So, the most likely outcome is that Judge Schulman will throw the Patreon case out for being untimely, and tell them to challenge the awards in the future if they don’t like the way the arbitrations turn out.

Which they probably won’t. The fact that Patreon has recently changed its terms of use to preclude arbitration rather than mandate it, and has removed its illegal forced waivers of jury trials and class actions, would appear to provide a fairly reliable guide to how Patreon thinks the arbitrations are going.

Lawyers don’t do strategy

And they certainly don’t make strategic decisions. But this report by Patrick Byrne concerning a recent meeting at the White House would sound a lot more concerning if it wasn’t obviously limited to the President’s legal team:

“I was there for the full 4.5 hour meeting. Claims military coup/martial law were discussed is 100{e61d147451bc60549e96d95b5c07be35845e0345eab7ed5d54cc3d49f812ab5c} fabrication. Trump is lied to by his own advisers, who tell staff “get the president to concede“ while they stall Trump. Meadows + Lawyers Eric, Derek, GC Pat Cippollone (leaker).”

“Meadows and legal staff led by GC Cippolone reflexively shoot down every sober discussion or idea presented. Their frame of mind is automatic: “we better not try that, it may not work, it would hurt your reputation in the press…“ No kidding, they say stuff like that. Tell DJT.”

Byrne named the advisors he believes are hurting Trump, “Pat Cippollone and two other lawyers. Eric and Derek. Meadows wants him to concede and transition also.”

Responding to a poster who offered an opinion on why the establishment is intent on getting rid of Trump, “I’m convinced the US Establishment including the Republican Establishment have decided to end the Trump era. They want Biden/Harris and the Globalist Reset. The reason they have resorted to such extreme measures is because the Reset is time critical. They need the US on board now,” Byrne replied, “Correct.”

Byrne responded to several questions about the meeting and Trump’s attitude, It is 100{e61d147451bc60549e96d95b5c07be35845e0345eab7ed5d54cc3d49f812ab5c} winnable. No martial law required. Sydney and Flynn presented a course that I estimate has 50{e61d147451bc60549e96d95b5c07be35845e0345eab7ed5d54cc3d49f812ab5c} – 75{e61d147451bc60549e96d95b5c07be35845e0345eab7ed5d54cc3d49f812ab5c} chance of victory. His staff just try to convince him to do nothing but accept it. As a CEO, my heart broke to see what he is going through. He is betrayed from within.”…”He truly believe he won and he truly did win. I did not vote for him, but I don’t want to see our country hijacked in a psyop.”…”Too nice. Thinks he will look bad in press. Nonsense like that.”…He wants to fight on. They are bending over backwards to come up with reasons to tell him he can’t do anything. He needs to fire them all or he loses.”

One thing I’ve learned over the last few years is that lawyers are, for the most part, among the most cowardly people on the planet. They’re only the big tough intimidating courtroom giants they are portrayed as being on television when they are on the offensive and believe they are untouchable because the conflict doesn’t directly concern them. They tend to fold the minute that even the slightest criticism is directed at them personally; I’ve heard genuine panic in the voice of a top lawyer from a very high status firm when she was simply told to “stop lying”. The Legal Legion is most definitely not even close to the norm in the legal world.

Basically, they live in complete terror of the judges all the time, and unless a strategy offers a 100-percent chance of success, they don’t like it. “It may not work so we better not try it” rings absolutely true. They really don’t like genuine conflict and they are not accustomed to it; they remind me of point fighters facing the prospect of going into the full-contact ring for the first time.

That being said, there is zero chance that this group, with that lawerly mindset, has anything whatsoever to do with the NSA and military intelligence teams that set the election trap and is reported to “have it all”. So, while I think Byrne’s report is likely real, I don’t think it is as relevant as it sounds, because I think this is the legal plan team, as opposed to the legislative plan team, as opposed to the defend-the-Constitution team. And I doubt President Trump has much confidence in them, because he has a lot more experience with lawyers and knows far more about them than I do.

Monday surprises

This is being reported by multiple sources.

President Trump to pardon Julian Assange.

It looks as if a lot of secrets are about to be revealed, starting today. 

UPDATE: PA Republicans select an alternate set of electors:

At the request of the Trump campaign, the Republican presidential electors met today in Harrisburg to cast a conditional vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence for President and Vice President respectively.

“We took this procedural vote to preserve any legal claims that may be presented going forward” said Bernie Comfort, Pennsylvania Chair of the Trump campaign. “This was in no way an effort to usurp or contest the will of the Pennsylvania voters.”

Today’s move by Republican party electors is fashioned after the 1960 Presidential election, in which President Nixon was declared the winner in Hawaii. While Democrat legal challenges were pending, Democratic presidential electors met to cast a conditional vote for John F. Kennedy to preserve their intent in the event of future favorable legal outcomes.

The conditional resolution states that electors certify their vote for the President and Vice President “on the understanding that if, as a result of a final non-appealable Court Order or other proceeding prescribed by law, [they] are ultimately recognized as being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Pennsylvania…”

UPDATE: Georgia has also selected a rival set of electors:

Because the President’s lawsuit contesting the Georgia election is still pending, the Republican nominees for Presidential Elector met today at noon at the State Capitol today and cast their votes for President and Vice President. 

Keep in mind that if a state submits two sets of electors, the President of the Senate decides which group of electors to hear, as per the precedent set when Rutherford B. Hayes was elected. The President of the Senate is the Vice-President, Mike Pence. He also has the option of leaving the state out of the count.

The end of democracy

I make no claims about the accuracy of this report, which is supposedly a leak from a clerk for one of the Supreme Court justices.

I am a clerk for one of the Justices on SCOTUS. Today was like nothing we have ever seen. The justices are arguing loudly behind closed doors.

The Justices met in a closed and sealed room, as is standard.

Usually it is very calm, however today we could hear screaming all the way down the hall.

They met in person, because they didn’t trust telephonic meeting as secure.

Chief Justice Roberts was screaming

“Are you going to be responsible for the rioting if we hear this case? Don’t tell me about Bush v. Gore, we weren’t dealing with riots then! You are forgetting what your role here is Neil, and I don’t want to hear from the two junior justices anymore. I will tell you how you will vote.”

Justice Clarence Thomas says “This is the end of Democracy, John.”

When they left the room, Roberts, the Libs and Kavanagh had big smiles. Alito and Thomas were visibly upset. ACB and Gorsuch didn’t seem fazed at all.”

I am beginning to wonder if ACB and Gorsuch know that the President is not relying upon them to shoulder the burden of defending the Constitution. It may be that Kavanagh is the only traitor appointed by Trump. While I don’t trust either of them, it is interesting to hear that a) they were opposed to Roberts’s position and b) unlike Alito and Thomas, they were unsurprised by the Chief Justice’s absolute unwillingness to hear the case.

But Roberts isn’t afraid of rioting. He’s afraid of his secrets and his corruption being exposed by his masters.

Justice Thomas is correct. One way or another, this is the end of democracy in the USA. We must hope and pray it is because the God-Emperor is going to cross the Rubicon.

174,384 unregistered votes in MI

Joe Biden will not set foot in that White House. 170k votes in Michigan have just been discovered to not have a trace to a registered voter in Michigan. For those asking, this information is in the Texas lawsuit. 174k ballots in Wayne County Michigan can not be tracked to a registered voter in the state.

Melissa Tate

Those votes are all absentee ballots to whom no registered voter can be connected. It’s right there in the previous post in the Texas response to Michigan. That is clear and incontrovertible evidence of fraud. Trump clearly won Michigan on that basis alone.

Michigan also admits that it “is at a loss to explain the[] allegations” showing that Wayne County lists 174,384 absentee ballots that do not tie to a registered voter.  Mich. Br. 15; Compl. ¶ 97.