(Photo
by
Drew
Angerer/Getty
Images)
After
US
District
Judge
Linda
V.
Parker
issued
a
blistering
sanctions
order
on
the
lawyers
in
the
Michigan
Kraken
LOLsuit,
Sidney
Powell
and
Howard
Kleinhendler
are
taking
matters
in
their
own
hands.
They’ve
apparently
parted
ways
with
attorney
Donald
Campbell
—
who
is
not
a
potted
plant!
—
and
will
be
representing
themselves
in
the
appeal
of
Judge
Parker’s
order.
Which
means
there’s
no
attorney,
or
even
a
rational
adult,
intermediating
between
Team
Krak
and
the
Sixth
Circuit
in
the
dispute
over
attorney’s
fees
and
a
bar
referral
for
their
effort
to
overturn
Biden’s
win
in
Michigan.
So
far
it’s
going
great.
The
86-page
appeal,
a
mere
4,681
words
over
the
13,000-word
limit,
is
peak
Kraken,
which
is
to
say
that
it
is
totally
batshit.
Come
for
the
mischaracterization
of
the
rules
of
evidence,
stay
for
the
ad
hominem
attacks
on
a
sitting
federal
judge.
Powell
and
Kleinhendler
will
go
to
their
graves
insisting
that
had
no
obligation
to
review
the
laughable
affidavits
they
lifted
from
other
cases
and
submitted
to
the
court,
neither
for
credibility,
nor
to
determine
whether
the
conduct
alleged
was
even
illegal.
“Sanctioning
lawyers
for
bringing
such
cases
because
they
have
not
crossed
every
‘t’
and
dotted
every
‘i’,
at
the
time
they
file
the
complaint
will
deter
future
lawyers
from
bringing
such
cases,
casting
a
chilling
pall
over
such
advocacy,”
they
huff,
adding
that
“attorneys
are
not
required
to
have
any
evidence—sworn
or
otherwise—beyond
a
client’s
say-so
before
bringing
suit.”
That
is
perhaps
not
an
entirely
apt
description
for
copy-pasting
an
affidavit
from
another
lawsuit
in
which
some
dog
walker
claims
to
have
seen
an
unusually
cheerful
couple
hand
a
bag
to
the
UPS
guy,
which
he
suspects
of
being
a
delivery
of
fraudulent
ballots.
The
trial
court
was
similarly
incensed
that
the
lawyers
failed
to
disclose
that
their
so-called
expert
witness
Joshua
Merritt,
AKA
Spyder,
turns
out
not
to
have
been
the
“former
electronic
intelligence
analyst
with
305th
Military
Intelligence”
described
in
their
briefs.
(Indeed,
they
seem
to
have
gone
to
some
lengths
to
conceal
the
identity
of
multiple
witnesses
who
were
not
who
they
claimed
to
be.)
Team
Krak
insists
that
there
was
no
evidence
of
Merritt’s
lack
of
the
advertised
expertise,
despite
the
fact
that
the
Washington
Post
tracked
it
down
almost
immediately.
They
even
goes
so
far
as
to
insist
that
they
had
no
obligation
to
correct
the
record
with
the
court
because
“there
was
no
pleading
due
during
that
period
[and
thus]
counsel
would
have
had
to
file
a
special
notice
advising
the
District
Court
of
information
that
was
already
national
news.”
“Why
counsel
were
under
a
professional
obligation
to
do
so,
when
the
possibility
of
getting
effective
relief
was
rendered
essentially
null
the
following
day
after
Congress
affirmed
the
Electoral
College
count
and
counsel
was
contemplating
dismissing
the
case
altogether,
the
District
Court
does
not
explain,”
they
add,
a
mere
eight
pages
before
arguing
that
they
could
not
possibly
have
vexatiously
prolonged
this
litigation
because
there
was
still
a
possibility
of
relief
after
Congress
met
and
certified
Michigan’s
Democratic
electors.
“Nor
is
it
entirely
clear
that
even
January
6
was
the
drop-dead
date,”
they
insist.
“Had
Michigan
been
ordered
to
withdraw
its
certification
after
that
date,
Congress
could
have
reconsidered
its
vote.”
They
also
argue
that
they
didn’t
need
to
have
a
verifiable
claim,
because
ginning
up
publicity
for
their
cause
was
justification
enough
to
spam
the
federal
docket:
“Public
interest
litigation
generally
involves
both
a
case
and
a
cause.
Entities
bringing
such
cases
routinely
use
litigation
as
a
way
of
publicizing
their
message.
There
is
nothing
improper
or
unethical
about
this.”
Interestingly,
Powell
makes
the
exact
opposite
argument
in
her
countersuit
against
Dominion,
accusing
the
company
of
filing
a
defamation
suit
against
her
as
a
form
of
“lawfare”
to
clear
its
own
name.
But
most
egregious
are
the
repeated
broadsides
against
Judge
Parker.
Nothing
says
rational
actor
making
a
good
faith
argument
like
accusing
the
trial
judge
of
“fulminations,”
“lavish
outrage,”
a
“one-sided
effort
to
paint
Appellants
as
scoundrels
bent
on
deceiving
the
court,”
giving
“its
personal
opinions
the
weight
of
punitive
government
sanction,”
and
writing
a
“blunderbuss
opinion,
sanctioning
lawyers
for
building
a
case
on
scant
evidence
augmented
by
intuition.”
(Are
they
actually
admitting
this
case
was
bullshit
from
the
jump?)
“Contemplating
the
order’s
prolixity,
one
might
think
it
must
at
least
check
all
the
requisite
procedural
boxes,”
they
remark
snidely,
adding
later
that
“one
wonders
how
the
District
Court’s
written
work
product
would
fare
under
its
own
unblinking
glare.”
And
this
closing
paragraph,
explaining
that
the
award
of
attorney’s
fees
and
referral
the
bar
—
“maximum
possible
sanctions,
with
the
clear
purpose
of
depriving
them
of
their
livelihoods”
—
seems
particularly
ill-advised:
The
District
Court
has
improved
upon
Voltaire’s
observation
that
“[t]yrants
have
always
some
slight
shade
of
virtue;
they
support
the
laws
before
destroying
them”:
It
managed
to
shred
the
Constitution
at
the
very
same
time
it
wrapped
itself
in
the
flag.
In
the
canonical
account
of
treachery
towards
a
sovereign,
it
is
one
of
the
supporters
of
the
pretender
to
the
throne
who
proposes,
“The
first
thing
we
do,
let’s
kill
all
the
lawyers.”
Shakespeare,
Henry
VI,
Part
II,
Act
IV,
Scene
2.
That
is
because
“Shakespeare
knew
that
lawyers
were
the
primary
guardians
of
individual
liberty
in
democratic
England.”
J.B.
Hopkins,
The
First
Thing
We
Do,
Let’s
Get
Shakespeare
Right!,
72
Fla.
B.J.
9,
9
(Apr.
1998).
Americans
know
this
too.
“[T]he
District
Court
does
everything
possible
to
make
Appellants
seem
overwrought,
dangerous
lunatics,”
they
moan.
Which
is
giving
Judge
Parker
more
credit
than
she
deserves.
This
crew
is
perfectly
capable
of
demonstrating
that
they
are
overwrought,
dangerous
lunatics
without
any
help
from
the
court.
King
v.
Whitmer
[Appeal]
Elizabeth
Dye
(@5DollarFeminist)
lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
writes
about
law
and
politics.
Chris
Kathryn