The important thing is that credible evidence of election fraud has been submitted under penalty of perjury for public scrutiny. The recognition of the evidence will have its effect even if the court case is quashed.

I recently completed a lawsuit against the State of California's tax agency where I alleged they were running two embezzlement/racketeering schemes and third racketeering scheme. The State of CA never denied my allegations. They pretended as if I had made completely different arguments and claimed I had never submitted any evidence or legal codes. The judge went with the State's arguments and rejected all of my evidence on technicalities. Proof: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/

But it was worth the effort. The State never denied the allegations, they evaded them. That gives a lot of traction to me and others to fight the State in other venues, or even to file another court case.

All of the evidence of the criminal schemes has been submitted under penalty of perjury. While the judge may have chosen to ignore the evidence, it is still evidence that can be used by me other people/organizations in other capacities.

I have been putting a lot of pressure on legislators to intervene to stop it. Before the court case, the legislators mocked me for thinking the agency was running a criminal scheme. Now that I send them court documents, they take me seriously. Q said lawsuits work. I can attest that they do work, even if not in the way that you intended.

The important thing is that credible evidence of election fraud has been submitted under penalty of perjury for public scrutiny. The recognition of the evidence will have its effect even if the court case is quashed.

I recently completed a lawsuit against the State of California's tax agency where I alleged they were running two embezzlement/racketeering schemes and third racketeering scheme. The State of CA never denied my allegations. They pretended as if I had made completely different arguments and had never submitted any evidence or legal codes. The judge went with the State's arguments and rejected all of my evidence on technicalities. Proof: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/

But it was worth the effort. The State never denied the allegations, they evaded them. That gives a lot of traction to me and others to fight the State in other venues, or even to file another court case.

All of the evidence of the criminal schemes has been submitted under penalty of perjury. While the judge may have chosen to ignore the evidence, it is still evidence that can be used by me other people/organizations in other capacities.

I have been putting a lot of pressure on legislators to intervene to stop it. Before the court case, the legislators mocked me for thinking the agency was running a criminal scheme. Now that I send them court documents, they take me seriously. Q said lawsuits work. I can attest that they do work, even if not in the way that you intended.