Just out of curiosity, but what's the latest on that?

My knowledge on the situation was:

Sidney Powell had Merritt helping on her lawsuits back in November/December. Apparently he fucked up a lot of the writing and burnt that bridge.

Popped back up on David Clements after The Professor's Record caught on in early January. I listened to a couple of those and Merritt seemed a little bit knowledgeable, not per se glowie, covered a lot of the links that we saw in December between voting companies and such. Didn't really exhibit anything that made me think he's found a novel exploit before.

Everything fine until the Symposium, at which time I'm assuming Clements vouched for Merritt to be on one of Lindell's teams.

Merritt talks to reporter saying the election data was bunk. I can't really argue with that logic, as Lindell has been talking about releasing this for 8 months now, and even Lindell stated after the fact that they only brought 1 terabyte (and who knows in what actual form). They failed to pair the Dominion machine's logs up with that election data during their symposium.

They wheeled out CodeMonkeyZ who didn't bother loading registry hives, and whose best contribution from the segments I saw was "do we have anyone that knows batch programming?" Made me distrust his whole knowledge of things at that point. Granted my trust was already waning after they spent like 2-3 hours of failing to use tech properly for a virtual meetup. "Oh, he doesn't have audio again". Granted it was worth a good laugh, but I watched with the intention of hoping to see them proving shit, not proving ineptitude.

Clements disavowed Merritt shortly after the article. Some "is he white hat, is he black hat" occurred, but I pretty much stayed out of that, so don't know how the story ended. My thoughts were "he's just an idiot in a sea of idiocy saying 'I think these people are idiots'".

I will defend Merritt's stance only in that Lindell's evidence still has not been presented, proven, or released. It's still on the "needs government agency backing in order to be upheld in court" in my eyes. 36 terabytes is a lot of information, but when you know src and dest addrs, should be able to parse that from a tcp dump easily, and he failed to prove that the Colorado machine was in his packet logs and that to my knowledge would've been the only proof available (unless he's actually paired it with ASOG's unredacted Antrim report, or maybe something else exists out there).

So I imagine the lawsuit is going to be his breach of an NDA by making statements to a reporter, but that was the last thing I ever saw regarding it. I don't know what the NDA looks like, but I don't think they're going to be getting much money from that dude. Is there something else pointing towards Merritt legitimately being a bad actor/glowie and not just an idiot?

Just out of curiosity, but what's the latest on that?

My knowledge on the situation was:

Sidney Powell had Merritt helping on her lawsuits back in November/December. Apparently he fucked up a lot of the writing and burnt that bridge.

Popped back up on David Clements after The Professor's Record caught on in early January. I listened to a couple of those and Merritt seemed a little bit knowledgeable, not per se glowie, covered a lot of the links that we saw in December between voting companies and such. Didn't really exhibit anything that made me think he's found a novel exploit before.

Everything fine until the Symposium, at which time I'm assuming Clements vouched for Merritt to be on one of Lindell's teams.

Merritt talks to reporter saying the election data was bunk. I can't really argue with that logic, as Lindell has been talking about releasing this for 8 months now, and even Lindell stated after the fact that they only brought 1 terabyte (and who knows in what actual form). They failed to pair the Dominion machine's logs up with that election data during their symposium.

They wheeled out CodeMonkeyZ who didn't bother loading registry hives, and whose best contribution from the segments I saw was "do we have anyone that knows batch programming?" Made me distrust his whole knowledge of things at that point. Granted my trust was already waning after they spent like 2-3 hours of failing to use tech properly for a virtual meetup. "Oh, he doesn't have audio again". Granted it was worth a good laugh, but I went with the intention of hoping to see them proving shit, not proving ineptitude.

Clements disavowed Merritt shortly after the article. Some "is he white hat, is he black hat" occurred, but I pretty much stayed out of that, so don't know how the story ended. My thoughts were "he's just an idiot in a sea of idiocy saying 'I think these people are idiots'".

I will defend Merritt's stance only in that Lindell's evidence still has not been presented, proven, or released. It's still on the "needs government agency backing in order to be upheld in court" in my eyes. 36 terabytes is a lot of information, but when you know src and dest addrs, should be able to parse that from a tcp dump easily, and he failed to prove that the Colorado machine was in his packet logs and that to my knowledge would've been the only proof available (unless he's actually paired it with ASOG's unredacted Antrim report, or maybe something else exists out there).

So I imagine the lawsuit is going to be his breach of an NDA by making statements to a reporter, but that was the last thing I ever saw regarding it. I don't know what the NDA looks like, but I don't think they're going to be getting much money from that dude. Is there something else pointing towards Merritt legitimately being a bad actor/glowie and not just an idiot?