You thought I wouldnt read it? Lookie here.
According to the allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint, plaintiff Eric Ostegren is a
credentialed election challenger under MCL 168.730. Paragraph 2 of the complaint alleges that
plaintiff Ostegren was “excluded from the counting board during the absent voter ballot review
process.” The complaint does not specify when, where, or by whom plaintiff was excluded. Nor
does the complaint provide any details about why the alleged exclusion occurred.
So I can submit a case that says "G13 robbed my house" and not specify anything else? Not the date, not the time, not the address, how I knew it was you, etc. Yeah fortunately you dont get to make frivolous claims and expect the supreme court to look at it. They also said they didnt get "meaningful access" which is not a legal term, it does not mean anything at all. They dont specify what that means. You also dont get to break the rules by not wearing a mask and expect to hang around, then cry about getting thrown out for breaking rules you agreed to.
You didnt read it, did you? Its all right there, plain english. You're using that as your evidence for why this is an injustice... When it explains exactly why the cases were laughed out of court.
Next.
|