Authentic Legal Gibberish

Mike Lindell reveals evidence he says will convince Supreme Court of voter fraud https://t.co/McWLRg9Zsx

— Raw Story (@RawStory) March 15, 2024

Newsweek:

"I don't know if I can say this or not but I'm going to. I believe they're putting it on there in an emergency expedite," he said. "This is one of those things with the Supreme Court. To be able to get there, it has to be something that affects the whole country. This affects everything." 

He said he hopes his case will be heard "really fast" and that he expects his complaint will be made available for the public to read in the coming days. 

... 

His case stems from an April 2022 lawsuit filed by Kari Lake, an Arizona Republican Senate candidate who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2022, and Arizona Secretary of State candidate Mark Finchem, alleging that the systems used to count votes in the state were untrustworthy.

That case, however, was dismissed on standing. Lindell said Friday that because the case was initially dismissed on standing, he was able to introduce new evidence uncovered by lawyers about three months prior to the Supreme Court.

Yeah, I don’t know what that last sentence means, either. Editing is a lost art. But I have a question for the lawyers: if the Kari Lake case was dismissed, it can’t be the case Lindell is trying to present evidence in now.  He’ll have to start a new one, and that means he can’t begin to present evidence until he’s filed suit and gotten an answer filed by the defendant (after serving the defendant). And if that case was dismissed on standing (lack of), what standing does Lindell have to take up the same cause?

He’s also just speaking gibberish about Supreme Court jurisdiction.

Any way you slice it, this case is not getting to the Supreme Court this year. I don’t know who’s giving Lindell his legal advice, but he should get his money back.