A historic and profound abuse of the judicial process


A federal judge in Michigan on Wednesday night ordered sanctions to be levied against nine pro-Trump lawyers, including Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood, ruling that a lawsuit laden with conspiracy theories that they filed last year challenging the validity of the presidential election was “a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process.”

In her decision, Judge Linda V. Parker of the Federal District Court in Detroit ordered the lawyers to be referred to the local legal authorities in their home states for possible suspension or disbarment.

Declaring that the lawsuit should never have been filed, Judge Parker wrote in her 110-page order that it was “one thing to take on the charge of vindicating rights associated with an allegedly fraudulent election,” but another to deceive “a federal court and the American people into believing that rights were infringed.”

I look forward to reading the order.

The Michigan lawsuit, filed in late November, was one of four legal actions, collectively known as the “Kraken” suits, that Ms. Powell filed in courts around the country, claiming that tabulation machines made by Dominion Voting Systems were tampered with by a bizarre set of characters, such as the financier George Soros or Venezuelan intelligence agents. In the suits, she complained without merit that those conspirators began a complicated, covert plot to digitally flip votes from President Donald J. Trump to his opponent, Joseph R. Biden Jr.

In a pseudo-legal move technically known as “making shit up.”

Judge Parker’s order, which said Ms. Powell and her colleagues had “scorned their oath, flouted the rules and attempted to undermine the integrity of the judiciary,” was the latest legal setback for the embattled group of lawyers who emerged from the postelection period as the most die-hard of Mr. Trump’s supporters.

“Embattled.” Try not making shit up and then you might not be so embattled.

H/t Screechy Monkey

4 Responses to “A historic and profound abuse of the judicial process”