Georgia Lawsuit Shows Clear Violations of Law, Gross Misconduct, and Election Fraud

November 26, 2020 Updated: November 29, 2020


Attorney Sidney Powell dropped a major court filing in Georgia, with sworn statements and affidavits attesting to an astonishing level of election fraud, along with constitutional violations and multiple violations of state law.

While the most controversial allegations have been tied to Dominion Voting Systems, there are many other pieces of evidence that demonstrate clear illegalities and cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2020 election.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of multiple registered voters who seek to “set aside and decertify the election results for the Office of President of the United States.”

Powell’s filing in Georgia states that “as a civil action, the plaintiff’s burden of proof is a ‘preponderance of the evidence,’ as the Georgia Supreme Court has made clear,” that it isn’t incumbent upon the plaintiff to show how the voters would have voted if their absentee ballots had been regular. The plaintiff only needs to show that there are enough irregular ballots to place in doubt the result (Mead v. Sheffield, 278 Ga. 268, 272, 601 S.E.2d 99, 102 (2004) (citing Howell v. Fears, 275 Ga. 627, 571 S.E.2d 392 (2002).

Here are some of the most striking revelations:

Attorneys for the plaintiffs reference a litigation settlement made in the spring of 2020 with the Democratic Party of Georgia Inc., the Democrat Senatorial Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, in which standards were set for processing absentee ballots that were in direct violation of Georgia law.

Despite the fact that O.C.G.A., Sec. 21-2-386(a)(2) prohibits the opening of absentee ballots until Election Day, the State Election Board adopted its own rules to open and process absentee ballots “beginning at 8:00 AM on the third Monday prior to Election Day,” in direct violation of the law.

Testimony provided under oath stated that “signatures were not being verified and that there were no corresponding envelopes seen in site,” actions that are unlawful and in direct violation of O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-38 l(b )(1).

The lawsuit also states that Georgia Board of Elections records show that at least 96,600 absentee ballots were requested and counted, but were never recorded as being returned to county election boards.

“Thus, at a minimum, 96,600 votes must be disregarded,” the filing states.

Other witnesses saw ballots cast for President Donald Trump given to Joe Biden, Republican observers forced to move to areas where they couldn’t see vote counting, authentication processes to verify ballots being routinely abandoned, and even people reviewing open, marked ballots and deciding “where to place” them.

Just a week ago, Georgia’s secretary of state’s office showed that Biden led Trump by 12,284 votes, meaning a Trump victory in the state is still within play should these alleged illegal votes become disqualified.

Issues surrounding voting machines also presented affronts to legally prescribed election procedures. An affiant testified that the chain of custody procedures was breached.

“We typically receive the machines, the ballot marking devices—on the Friday before the election, with a chain of custody letter to be signed on Sunday, indicating that we had received the machines and the counts on the machines when received, and that the machines have been sealed,” the affiant was quoted as stating. “In this case, we were asked to sign the chain of custody letter on Sunday, even though the machines were not delivered until 2:00 AM in the morning on Election Day.”

The lawsuit also includes a sworn declaration from a former electronic intelligence analyst under the 305th Military Intelligence Battalion, located at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, who provided testimony that the Dominion voting software was accessed by “agents acting on behalf of China and Iran in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent US general election in 2020.”

A sworn declaration is considered testimony provided under penalty of perjury.

Additional testimony from fact and expert witnesses demonstrate that as far back as 2006, the Smartmatic voting system was a “known problem” and that senior government officials have “long known of this foreign interference on our most important right to vote, and it had either responded with incompetence, negligence, willful blindness, or abject corruption.”

A cousin of Antonio Mugica, who testified through a sworn affidavit, stated that he has personal knowledge that Mugica “incorporated Smartmatic in the U.S. in 2000 with other family members in Venezuela listed as owners.” He also testified that Mugica manipulated the software to ensure the election of Hugo Chavez in a 2004 election and that Mugica received “tens of millions of dollars from 2003-2015 from the Venezuelan government to ensure Smartmatic technology would be implemented around the world, including in the U.S.”

Foreign ownership of the company was documented as far back as 2006, when U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) noted the company’s foreign ownership and requested a review because the system “posed serious national security concerns about the integrity of our elections.”

Witness testimony highlights a list of vulnerabilities of the electronic voting systems used in the 2020 election, which include:

  • “In all three of these machines [including Dominion Voting Systems], the ballot marking printer is in the same paper path as the mechanism to deposit marked ballots into an attached ballot box. This opens up a very serious security vulnerability: the voting machine can make the paper ballot (to add votes or spoil already-cast votes) after the last time the voter sees the paper, and then deposit that marked ballot into the ballot box without the possibility of detection.”
  • Voting machines were able to be connected to the internet by way of laptops that were obviously internet accessible. If one laptop was connected to the internet, the entire precinct was compromised.
  • Users on the ground had full administrative privileges to machines and software, giving them the ability to decide which votes would and would not be counted.

One of the most serious allegations comes from the unidentified former U.S. military intelligence expert, who testified that “by using servers and employees connected with rogue actors and hostile foreign influences combined with numerous easily discoverable leaked credentials, Dominion neglectfully allowed foreign adversaries to access data and intentionally provided access to their infrastructure in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent one in 2020.”

The lawsuit also cites evidence showing that more than 20,311 absentee or early voters voted while being registered as having moved out of the state.

In one county alone, there are “a combined minimum of 14,276 missing and unlawful ballots, and maximum of 15,250 missing and unlawful ballots, which exceeds the statewide Presidential race total margin by a range of as few as 1,606 ballots and as many as 2,580 in the County of Cobb alone impacting the Cobb County Republican Party,” the lawsuit alleges.

Plaintiffs also state denial of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

At issue here is the state’s disparate treatment of ballots, as cited in Bush v. Gore (2000).

Georgia code (O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-522) allows for the contesting of an election on any one or a combination of five grounds:

(1) Misconduct, fraud, or irregularity by any primary or election official or officials sufficient to change or place in doubt the result;

(2) When the defendant is ineligible for the nomination or office in dispute;

(3) When illegal votes have been received or legal votes rejected at the polls sufficient to change or place in doubt the result;

(4) For any error in counting the votes or declaring the result of the primary or election, if such error would change the result; or

(5) For any other cause which shows that another was the person legally nominated, elected, or eligible to compete in a run-off primary or election.

And it appears as though attorneys for the plaintiffs may be standing on solid ground when stating that all of those “grounds have been satisfied and compel this Court to set aside the 2020 General Election results, which fraudulently concluded that Mr. Biden defeated President Trump.”

Adrian Norman is a writer, political commentator, and author of the book “The Art of the Steal: Exposing Fraud & Vulnerabilities in America’s Elections.”

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.