Imperium AmericanumIndependent intelligence · Public evidence
All sections

Record #4725

The Democratic legal team's Georgia suit to recover the seized 2020 ballots will fail for lack of standing

Incorrect

Recorded occurrence

Each quote retains its own speaker, episode, publication date, timestamp when available, and full-source link.

  1. Occurrence 1 of 1 · source record #4725

    Bannon War Room · Episode 5151: The Importance Of 2020 Georgia Election

    Original quote
    In fact, this is one of the reasons I don't think they have standing. They don't have the clerk because the clerk argued before she wanted to destroy them two years ago.
    Quote begins at 19:03
Prediction time2026-02-18

Exact speaking time unavailable; using the official episode publication date.

Episode published2026-02-18
FirmnessLoose
TopicElections
Resolve by2026-06-30
Boldness55 · Notable

How the call settles

The court dismisses or denies the plaintiffs' Georgia ballot-recovery suit on standing grounds

Our reasoning

NO on the research record because On May 6, 2026 U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee denied Fulton County's motion for return of the seized 2020 ballots — but on the merits (no showing of callous disregard, lack of probable cause, or irreparable harm, and DOJ had supplied copies), not for lack of standing. The suit failed, but not on the standing grounds specified. | NEAR MISS (review 2026-08-08): Core call held — the Georgia ballot-recovery suit did fa.... Applied stored rule: The court dismisses or denies the plaintiffs' Georgia ballot-recovery suit on standing grounds.

Outcome evidence

On May 6, 2026 U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee denied Fulton County's motion for return of the seized 2020 ballots — but on the merits (no showing of callous disregard, lack of probable cause, or irreparable harm, and DOJ had supplied copies), not for lack of standing. The suit failed, but not on the standing grounds specified. | NEAR MISS (review 2026-08-08): Core call held — the Georgia ballot-recovery suit did fail as predicted; only the secondary detail of the legal ground (merits rather than standing) was wrong.

Outcome date: 2026-05-06

Verdict recorded: 2026-07-30

Basis: research