This case was originally filed back in January. It looks like it was moving ahead.

Keep in mind, this is NOT a case brought by the state legislature -- which still has done NOTHING to correct the election fraud.

It was brought by private parties. The judge appears to have been doing the right thing, by allowing the plaintiffs to sue the individuals who are accused of wrongdoing, but dimissing against the county is questionable.

Article from July:

https://vozwire.com/the-election-suit-against-fulton-county-was-dismissed-by-a-georgia-judge-but-the-claim-against-individual-officials-was-allowed/

I suspect there are a lot of lawsuits that are lost because the plaintiff (or their attorney) screwed it up, either by accident or on purpose.

The case law cited by this judge says that a "generalized" claim of vote dilution due to fraud does not provide standing to sue for "equal protection."

You can bet some or all of those previous cases were setups by corrupt judges and probably corrupt arrotneys who wanted to get these cases created as "settled law" for future claims like this one.

Let's see if these guys are the real deal. Do they appeal the decision? Do they go to Georgia Supreme Court and SCOTUS, if necessary?

This article explains it better --

https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgia-ballot-inspection-case-dismissed-after-no-fraud-found/OUVOQ5I5ARHMBJ62CX3YBHRMYM/

Looks like the judge was trying to do the right thing. He allowed the plaintiffs to move forward against the individuals they claimed were doing wrong.

He tried to get the ballots inspected, but there were roadblocks because nobody wanted to damage the evidence, and nobody seemed to have a good solution on how to do it without looking at the evidence.

Georgia "investigators" (government officials, I presume) said they did not find any evidence of counterfeit ballots.

... a decision that came a day after Georgia investigators told the court they were unable to find any counterfeit ballots.

If that is what the judge had to go on, then he didn't have much choice but to dismiss the case.

There needs to be a way to access the ballots in cases like this, by independent investigators, not corrupt government employees.

Maybe I am dumb, but how does this tie to MTG?

I see her mentioned nowhere in the motion papers.

Page 3-4: One of the witnesses worked for Georgia Tech and DARPA. This was a plaintiff witness.