Good morning.
The sanctions hearing of Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and the rest of the so-called "Kraken" team will begin soon.
Follow along here for the play-by-play, and catch up on the background here @LawCrimeNews.
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
The sanctions hearing of Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and the rest of the so-called "Kraken" team will begin soon.
Follow along here for the play-by-play, and catch up on the background here @LawCrimeNews.
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
The parties are beginning to connect virtually to the proceedings.
Proceedings are beginning in a very bustling Zoom court.
Powell and Wood's co-counsel Stefanie Junttila, Scott Hagerstrom, Julia Haller, Brandon Johnson, Howard Kleinhendler, and Gregory Rohl are also in attendance, by court order.
Powell and Wood's co-counsel Stefanie Junttila, Scott Hagerstrom, Julia Haller, Brandon Johnson, Howard Kleinhendler, and Gregory Rohl are also in attendance, by court order.
Their lawyer Donald Campbell introduces himself and his co-counsel Patrick K. McGlinn.
Given the number of lawyers involved, these preliminaries may take awhile.
Detroit's lawyer David Fink is there with his partner and son, Nate Fink.
More on David Fink here: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
More on David Fink here: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
DNC's lawyer Scott R. Eldridge is also in attendance.
Now to the substance—
Judge Parker: "The purpose of today's hearing is to address three pending motions for sanctions."
Judge Parker: "The purpose of today's hearing is to address three pending motions for sanctions."
Judge Parker said that she ordered every lawyer for the plaintiffs in court because she had questions for all of them.
Thomas M. Buchanan downplays his client Emily Newman's role in the Kraken litigation, saying she spent five hours on the matter.
From Winston & Strawn, Buchanan reps Newman separately.
From Winston & Strawn, Buchanan reps Newman separately.
David Fink slams the Kraken team's attempt to dispute adequate notice of the Rule 11 (sanctions) motion, adding that he sent it long ago.
"This is hardly the time to say they didn't receive it."
More on that notice, story from Dec. 15: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
"This is hardly the time to say they didn't receive it."
More on that notice, story from Dec. 15: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Preliminaries over.
Parker: "My first question to plaintiff's counsel, who wrote the complaint?"
Campbell: Howard Kleinhendler.
"If you're looking for the lawyer who worked more closely with him," that's Sidney Powell, Campbell says.
Parker: "My first question to plaintiff's counsel, who wrote the complaint?"
Campbell: Howard Kleinhendler.
"If you're looking for the lawyer who worked more closely with him," that's Sidney Powell, Campbell says.
Judge Parker: Does anyone else want to add to that?
(No answer)
Lin Wood chimes in: "I played absolutely no role in the drafting of the complaint."
(No answer)
Lin Wood chimes in: "I played absolutely no role in the drafting of the complaint."
Thomas M. Buchanan interjects neither did his client Emily Newman, whom he reiterates spent five hours on the case.
The distancing begins.
The distancing begins.
Judge Parker wants to know what authority authorized the court to give any of the relief sought.
Campbell answers "the Constitution of the United States" and Bush v. Gore.
Campbell answers "the Constitution of the United States" and Bush v. Gore.
Unconvinced, Judge Parker presses Campbell for authority for *decertifying* an election.
Campbell claims Bush v. Gore again, conceding that was about stopping a vote count.
Parker: "I don't understand that."
Campbell claims Bush v. Gore again, conceding that was about stopping a vote count.
Parker: "I don't understand that."
Fink says that the Kraken team ignored "centuries" of precedent.
"There was no basis. This court's opinion and order... extremely well and properly addressed the weakness of all of the claims."
"There was no basis. This court's opinion and order... extremely well and properly addressed the weakness of all of the claims."
Fink: "This was from the beginning to the end an attempt to get a message out that was extrajudicial."
Heather S. Meingast for Gov. Whitmer agrees with Fink.
The proper recourse was to seek a recount, not file a lawsuit seeking to topple election results, she says.
The proper recourse was to seek a recount, not file a lawsuit seeking to topple election results, she says.
Campbell launches into an extended monologue that judicial review differentiates the U.S. from dictatorships like the Nazi regime and Hugo Chavez.
Analogies of this sort are inevitable in these cases, yet jarring every time.
Analogies of this sort are inevitable in these cases, yet jarring every time.
Fink: It appears that Sidney Powell has left the proceeding, and at least, we don't see her.
(She turned her camera off, an attorney says.)
It's back on the record that she's back.
(She turned her camera off, an attorney says.)
It's back on the record that she's back.
Kleinhelder: "Fraud vitiates everything."
(Every claim of election fraud failed.)
(Every claim of election fraud failed.)
Judge Parker asks if Kleinhelder if he has any case law for the court's inherent equitable authority to overturn an election on the basis of fraud claims.
Kleinhelder reaches for a more than century-old case.
Parker says she can't imagine the issue never came up since then.
Kleinhelder reaches for a more than century-old case.
Parker says she can't imagine the issue never came up since then.
Parker asks why the plaintiffs waited three weeks after the election to make their claims.
Campbell: "The reasons for the delay had to do with the gathering of the information."
He says the plaintiff's didn't know the result "until after the election."
Campbell: "The reasons for the delay had to do with the gathering of the information."
He says the plaintiff's didn't know the result "until after the election."
Parker: "But three weeks?"
Fink:
"All that they did was append affidavits in other cases," which were rejected in those case.
Quoting the judge's ruling, Fink says: "This case was stunning in its scope and breathtaking in its reach.
"The court summed it up."
"All that they did was append affidavits in other cases," which were rejected in those case.
Quoting the judge's ruling, Fink says: "This case was stunning in its scope and breathtaking in its reach.
"The court summed it up."
Fink calls the lawsuit an "embarrassment to the legal profession."
Judge Parker: My specific last question was why did plaintiffs wait three weeks until after the election.
Kleinhendler: "Yes, there was suspicion about the voting machines prior to the election... but it wasn't until the voting was counted ... until the scope of what many people perceived to be irregularities was understood."
It took time to get together the "Ramsland" and "Spyder" affidavits, Kleinhendler says.
More on both affidavits, via @Aaron_Keller_:
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
More on both affidavits, via @Aaron_Keller_:
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Judge Parker interrupts Kleinhendler: "I've heard enough."
Judge Parker asks Campbell about the plaintiffs' assertion to the SCOTUS on Dec. 14: "Subsequent relief would be pointless and the petition would be moot."
If that's so, Judge Parker asks, why didn't the plaintiffs dismiss the suit on that date?
If that's so, Judge Parker asks, why didn't the plaintiffs dismiss the suit on that date?
Sidebar:
Kleinhendler claimed earlier that it took time to gather witnesses like "Spyder," the so-called "military intelligence expert" unmasked by the WaPo, who discovered his credentials appeared to be wildly inflated. lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Kleinhendler claimed earlier that it took time to gather witnesses like "Spyder," the so-called "military intelligence expert" unmasked by the WaPo, who discovered his credentials appeared to be wildly inflated. lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Heather S. Meingast says she's "flabbergasted" from the assertion that the plaintiffs' case was newly invigorated after Dec. 14.
Judge Parker presses the Kraken lawyers' counsel Campbell on the assertion.
Judge Parker presses the Kraken lawyers' counsel Campbell on the assertion.
Parker: "I've never heard this explanation about this reinvigoration," saying "airquotes" around that word.
Campbell says he's never heard a judge saying the word "airquotes," chuckling, which seems like—a risky approach for addressing a federal judge.
Campbell says he's never heard a judge saying the word "airquotes," chuckling, which seems like—a risky approach for addressing a federal judge.
Judge Parker on the "reinvigoration" argument: "Are you arguing this for the first time?"
"Is that a new argument that you're advancing?"
Campbell, apropos of nothing, argues the judge doesn't have Rule 11 jurisdiction.
"Is that a new argument that you're advancing?"
Campbell, apropos of nothing, argues the judge doesn't have Rule 11 jurisdiction.
Judge Parker turns it over to David Fink.
Then Campbell tries to launch into another monologue, but Judge Parker stops him cold.
Parker: "No. No. I'm sorry, sir."
Fink is up.
Then Campbell tries to launch into another monologue, but Judge Parker stops him cold.
Parker: "No. No. I'm sorry, sir."
Fink is up.
Fink calls it "outrageous" that plaintiffs suggest that they have a financial interest in sanctions.
"These folks were putting in jeopardy the safety of our republic," and Detroit chose to "step up and say 'no,'" he adds, indignantly.
"These folks were putting in jeopardy the safety of our republic," and Detroit chose to "step up and say 'no,'" he adds, indignantly.
Judge Parker asks whether the lawyers have a legal obligation to review affidavits for plausibility.
Counsel replies yes.
Parker asks who read it.
Kleinhendler: "I read it, your honor."
Johnson and Rohl also say they read it.
Counsel replies yes.
Parker asks who read it.
Kleinhendler: "I read it, your honor."
Johnson and Rohl also say they read it.
Hagerstrom says he also read it prior to filing.
Lin Wood: "I just want to make a point. I did not review any of the documents with respect to the complaint.
I had no involvement. I didn't read the complaint. [...]
I just had no involvement in it whatsoever."
Lin Wood: "I just want to make a point. I did not review any of the documents with respect to the complaint.
I had no involvement. I didn't read the complaint. [...]
I just had no involvement in it whatsoever."
Wood: "My name was included."
"My skills weren't need."
[...]
"I actually did not know at the time that my name was going to be included."
[...]
"I didn't have any involvement in the filing. [...] It was only afterwards that I found out that my name was on there."
"My skills weren't need."
[...]
"I actually did not know at the time that my name was going to be included."
[...]
"I didn't have any involvement in the filing. [...] It was only afterwards that I found out that my name was on there."
Wood says he's there because the judge ordered him to be there.
Parker: You gave general permission to Ms. Powell to put your name on any pleading, "if what?"
Wood claims he told Powell that if she needed any a trial lawyer he'd help.
Parker: You gave general permission to Ms. Powell to put your name on any pleading, "if what?"
Wood claims he told Powell that if she needed any a trial lawyer he'd help.
ICYMI: A deep dive on Lin Wood on my podcast. art19.com/shows/objectio…
Fink scoffs at Wood's distancing himself from the case.
In Delaware Circuit Court, Wood "attempting to burnish his credentials in some way" said he was in fact involved in the case in Michigan, Fink notes.
In Delaware Circuit Court, Wood "attempting to burnish his credentials in some way" said he was in fact involved in the case in Michigan, Fink notes.
David Fink:
"He's ready to tell people when it helps him that he's involved in this case," referring to Lin Wood.
"He's ready to tell people when it helps him that he's involved in this case," referring to Lin Wood.
Judge Parker:
"This appears to the court to be an after-the-fact assessment."
"This appears to the court to be an after-the-fact assessment."
Fink noted that Wood responded to the Rule 11 notice on Twitter.
More on that here: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
More on that here: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Sidney Powell says she wouldn't have put Wood's name on there without authorization:
"Might there have been a misunderstanding? That's certainly possible."
"Might there have been a misunderstanding? That's certainly possible."
Judge Parker asks who spoke to Joshua Merritt (a.k.a. Spyder) to review the source of his facts before submitting.
WaPo unmasked him, reported he inflated his credentials.
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
WaPo unmasked him, reported he inflated his credentials.
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Kleinhendler is the only one to raise his hand and admit that he spoke to Merritt.
Kleinhendler claims that he cannot disclose his conversation on the public record, asserting Merritt worked as a "undercover confidential informant" throughout the U.S. govt.
Kleinhendler claims that he cannot disclose his conversation on the public record, asserting Merritt worked as a "undercover confidential informant" throughout the U.S. govt.
Kleinhendler claims it's more than the affidavit suggests.
Judge Parker: Did you make that correction to the court at any time?
Kleinhendler says he didn't have any time.
"I had no reason to doubt."
Judge Parker: Did you make that correction to the court at any time?
Kleinhendler says he didn't have any time.
"I had no reason to doubt."
These Twitter trends appear to be unrelated, but the "Kraken" sanctions hearing so far does not appear to be going well for Powell et al. 
Judge Parker asks who spoke to Mr. Ramsland.
Kleinhendler enthusiastically agrees he did and claims to have questioned him in detail.
This is what Ramsland submitted in Georgia, where he botched the difference between Michigan and Minnesota: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Kleinhendler enthusiastically agrees he did and claims to have questioned him in detail.
This is what Ramsland submitted in Georgia, where he botched the difference between Michigan and Minnesota: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Detroit's lawyer David Fink is now up, saying that his written briefings lay out the problems with these witnesses.
Fink calls Kleinhendler's assertion "disturbing," that he did not know the issues with the Merritt affidavit. (He notes that's the code-named "Spyder" one.)
Fink calls Kleinhendler's assertion "disturbing," that he did not know the issues with the Merritt affidavit. (He notes that's the code-named "Spyder" one.)
Fink submits the WaPo article:
"Washington Post let the world know that he was not a military intelligence expert," Fink says, adding that should have put them on notice.
"They were on notice."
"Washington Post let the world know that he was not a military intelligence expert," Fink says, adding that should have put them on notice.
"They were on notice."
Fink on the Kraken so-called experts:
The reports were "desperately" flawed.
Judge Parker interjects part of his presentation, saying she has add'l questions. She's moving matters along.
The reports were "desperately" flawed.
Judge Parker interjects part of his presentation, saying she has add'l questions. She's moving matters along.
Kleinhendler claims the WaPo's reporting is "false," but he won't say exactly how in open court.
Kleinhendler: "Mr. Merritt is ready to come to court and put to bed" any doubt about his qualifications.
Fink says that's not the point.
Kleinhendler conceded he learned some parts of Merritt's story were wrong, and he did not act when on notice, Fink added.
Fink says that's not the point.
Kleinhendler conceded he learned some parts of Merritt's story were wrong, and he did not act when on notice, Fink added.
Kleinhendler: I disagree with the characterization that it's inaccurate.
Judge Parker asks why Merritt submitted his affidavit under a pseudonym.
Kleinhendler recites the allegations from the motion to seal. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Judge Parker asks why Merritt submitted his affidavit under a pseudonym.
Kleinhendler recites the allegations from the motion to seal. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Parker: Who characterized him as a "military intelligence expert."
Kleinhendler: Merritt did.
Kleinhendler: Merritt did.
Parker: Should an attorney be sanctioned for failing to withdraw allegations that he or she learns to be untrue?
Campbell appears to dodge the question, saying it depends upon the fact pattern. The judge is asking about the proposition legally in principle.
Campbell appears to dodge the question, saying it depends upon the fact pattern. The judge is asking about the proposition legally in principle.
Judge Parker: Did Mr. Merritt draft the affidavit on his own with no assistance from counsel?
Kleinhendler answer yes, he did.
Kleinhendler answer yes, he did.
Kraken lawyer Julia Haller asks for an evidentiary hearing and for Merritt to testify.
Judge Parker moves on to other witness statements.
Judge Parker moves on to other witness statements.
Julia Haller tries to interrupt David Fink, but Judge Parker stops her and tells Fink to continue.
"The shorter answer to the court's question is, we believe that anyone who closely reviewed this study [...] it's clearly a desperately flawed document."
"The shorter answer to the court's question is, we believe that anyone who closely reviewed this study [...] it's clearly a desperately flawed document."
Judge Parker asks whether anyone questioned estimates of voting in certain jurisdictions leading to numbers like 781% and 460%.
Kleinhendler claims he did question it, and those numbers were subsequently corrected.
Kleinhendler claims he did question it, and those numbers were subsequently corrected.
David Fink:
What's "astounding" to him is that Mr. Kleinhendler "even as of today" isn't aware of where the claim is being made.
What's "astounding" to him is that Mr. Kleinhendler "even as of today" isn't aware of where the claim is being made.
Fink on the stats: "It was easy to find. It was publicly available."
When they make such a "dangerous" allegation, they have the duty to check it: Fink.
It took him a 30-second internet search.
"These lies were put out into the world," and they were "adopted and believed."
When they make such a "dangerous" allegation, they have the duty to check it: Fink.
It took him a 30-second internet search.
"These lies were put out into the world," and they were "adopted and believed."
Fink notes that Trump cited the bogus statistic in his infamous phone call with Raffensperger.
Background: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Background: lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Judge Parker moves onto the amended complaint, alleging vote dilution.
"The court is concerned that these affidavits were submitted in bad faith."
"The court is concerned that these affidavits were submitted in bad faith."
Judge asks the basis of the claim in an affidavit claiming tens of thousands of bad votes.
Kleinhendler says they were filed in a "companion case, having nothing to do with us."
Judge: You didn't feel like you needed to review it before it was filed?
Kleinhendler says they were filed in a "companion case, having nothing to do with us."
Judge: You didn't feel like you needed to review it before it was filed?
Kleinhendler says he did and questions what standard the judge is using in assessing the affidavit.
"I'm looking at the standards set forth in the *variety* of options that I have to impose sanctions," the judge shoots back. (Her emphasis)
"I'm looking at the standards set forth in the *variety* of options that I have to impose sanctions," the judge shoots back. (Her emphasis)
Fink: This case is going to make people around the world think that lawyers can do whatever they want.
And it's not true, Fink thunders.
And it's not true, Fink thunders.
"They seem to have chosen not to be sworn into our district" in order to evade rules of civility, Fink says.
"They have a duty to tell the truth," Fink says, including not submitting false affidavits.
"They have a duty to tell the truth," Fink says, including not submitting false affidavits.
Haller insists: "We did not submit falsehoods," again pushing for an evidentiary hearing.
Campbell has some last words, too.
20 minute recess.
Grab your coffee and take a stretch.
More live tweets ahead, some 2.5 hours later.
Campbell has some last words, too.
20 minute recess.
Grab your coffee and take a stretch.
More live tweets ahead, some 2.5 hours later.
Here's a breakdown all in one place:
"A Federal Judge Holds ‘Kraken’ Lawyers’ Feet to the Fire at Sanctions Hearing. Lin Wood Tried to Distance Himself from It All."
Starting a new thread for after the break, @LawCrimeNews
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
"A Federal Judge Holds ‘Kraken’ Lawyers’ Feet to the Fire at Sanctions Hearing. Lin Wood Tried to Distance Himself from It All."
Starting a new thread for after the break, @LawCrimeNews
lawandcrime.com/2020-election/…
Connecting the two threads here:
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1414606035009122304?s=20
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
