It appears - a lot of this is my reading between the lines - that Mike Lindell put together the contest because he was really excited about some "election data" that he'd been given.
And, apparently, put the contest together before even his own people had reviewed everything.
Where did the data come from?
Here's where it gets fun, dear reader, because the cast of characters is such a Who's Who of the fringe right-wing grifters who serve as the unraveling yarn in the...well...the...y'know.
So the data comes from <drumroll> comes from <extended drumroll>
Dennis Montgomery.
Yes, really.
Who is Dennis Montgomery, you ask? Don't worry, I'll get there in a second.
Montgomery claimed to have special software tools that he used to capture secret information which revealed frauding and criming. If you're at all familiar with Dennis, this probably sounds familiar.
Why does it sound familiar? (For those of you new to Dennis, here's where you get caught up.)
Claiming to have special software that captures special information that reveals sekrit conspiratorial ties and crimes and frauds and everything is Dennis Montgomery's grift.
Well, I say "grift." Might be more accurate to say "his M.O." Or maybe his "trademark fraud."
Because this isn't the first time he's done that. Oh no. Not by a mile.
The last time, it was when he grifted Joe Arpaio and Joe's "Cold Case Posse" nimrod Mike Zullo.
Who figured out that they'd been scammed in 2014, but changed their minds when they realized they could drag another 15 minutes of stupidity out of the deal.
Those claims - which were based on data that Montgomery collected using secret software tools - purported to show that the government was surveilling all kinds of people. Including Zullo and Arpaio.
Oh, and Jerome Corsi of swiftboat infamy.
And also Larry Klayman, who is (or at least was) Dennis Montgomery's lawyer.
And the judge in the lawsuit against Arpaio, which led to Arpaio demanding (again) the judge's recusal, which may have contributed some to the ultimate decision to have Arpaio prosecuted for contempt.
And before that, there was the Nevada bribery scandal (which fizzled out when the data didn't pan out.)
And before that was the time he convinced the Pentagon that he had secret software tools that could pull secret messages to terrorists from Al Jazeera.
That one was back in the early Oughts, and led to Orange terrorism alerts, flight groundings, and probably almost got people killed.
Good times.
So that's the source of the data that Lindell bet $5 million was accurate.
How bad was the data? How thoroughly did Lindell get scammed?
I think, friends, that the only possible answer was "it was pretty damn bad given who figured out it was bad."
Because this data was so bad that Josh Merritt figured out it was bad.
Remember Josh Merritt? Of course you do, right?
Mr. Merritt is the "military intelligence" "expert" that Sidney Powell relied so heavily on for the Kraken lawsuits.
The one whose expertise ultimately turned out to be based on his extensive experience failing out of Military Intelligence school.
And who had failed out of combat medic school also, and ultimately had a 10-year Army career that was cut short by his apparent inability to meet the standards required to get promoted to Sergeant.
Yeah, that guy.
And then Lindell apparently responded to the fact that he'd been grifted by trying to create a set of conditions for the contest - which he didn't, despite Spyder's advice cancel - that in Mike's mind made the contest unwinnable.
Only one of the people who went to the symposium and entered the contest didn't like being grifted by the grifter who had been grifted by the other serial grifter.
And the arbitral panel looked at all of it, and Lindell, and were like "LOL No."
And there you have it.
A grift onion that came undone.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
To respond to the questions:
1: Yes. Literally.
2: I was not only person in my peer group to sustain this type of injury. I think (hope!) @AldrichPatrick can vouch for that.
3: My mistake was being distracted by "oh god it's shitting all over you."
4: Which was also literal.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Pat suffered a similar injury personally. But I think he can vouch for the widespread bloodshed amongst the volunteers helping with that one research project.
Let me give you some of what the WaPo editorial board, possibly because they elected to opine on a subject about which they are pigfuckingly ignorant, didn't mention.
Background: my wife has over 20 years in, as a physician. Our friends and neighbors are in similar demographics.
There's a good chance my wife will be in the high-earner bucket post-retirement. Here's the editorial view of the Washington Post:
Despite the fact that she is, as a result of service-connected issues, unable to continue activities she once enjoyed, she shouldn't be compensated.
Twitter apparently accidentally and without request 'verified' a fan game.
On the one hand, this is funny af because of the incompetence involved. On the other, if I'm Rovio I actually really need this to be fixed immediately.
Twitter's utter incompetence has dumped everyone else into a terrible situation.
Rovio isn't going to want to be seen to take action against a fan project. But at the same time, they're now at greatly increased reputational risk for anything that the ABF: Reboot project does.
And, making things worse, it's unlikely that this fan project is in full compliance with Rovio's guidelines for such projects. Twitter has made it extremely difficult for Rovio to pretend that they haven't noticed.
I don't have time/energy to do a livetweet through this right now. But here's the bottom line on this:
1: It appears that Dominion won summary judgment on *every* element of defamation *except* actual malice.
2: Fox lost all its key affirmative defenses.
3: Absent a settlement, this goes to trial.
4: The only liability question for the trial is "did Fox know that the lies that they were broadcasting were lies when they were said."
5: The damages question is basically just "what is Dominion really worth."
All that means, in turn, that the trial will be a series of Fox people - including owners, board members, and key talent - being put on the witness stand and asked (in effect) if they are knowing liars or merely gullible fools who are terrible at their jobs.
This isn't the first time, or the third, or the eighty-ninth, that something like this has happened. And it's also not like channel hacking is the only area where YouTube fails to protect even creators at the @LinusTech level.
YouTube is functionally an unregulated monopoly that has placed itself in a position where it can - and does - insulate itself from the consequences of not providing even the barest minimum of service toward the creators that are its lifeblood.
As a result, even large creators struggle to get assistance from YouTube when things go wrong - even when "things go wrong" is in part the result of YouTube's own failings.
So, fair warning - this list probably makes no sense and some of the books on it are objectively terrible.
But even the terrible ones hit me at the right time and place. So in they go.
Nonfiction:
1: For Self and Country - Rick Eilert.
2: Rule Number Two - Heidi Kraft
3: The Rule of Law - Bingham
4: Vegetable Mould - Darwin
5: The Great Devonian Controversy - Rudwick
6: Basin and Range - McPhee
7: For and Against Method - Motterlini, ed