If people were rubbing off date codes, that's fraudulent. It's misleading. It's deceptive. If my client said it was happening, it's not defamation.

Why did they settle, if they thought they were entitled to more?

There is no evidence in this case that the ballots were ever compromised. And if the ballots weren't compromised, the election wasn't compromised.

This complaint never should have been filed.

I think there is a problem of confusion with diploma mills.

(The state Supreme Court) has plenty of time to hear it. They've been hearing things in a matter of hours.

If you'll read the statute, it says there is one certification mandated by 5 p.m. seven days after the election, and that's the only one. The only reason there's a second one for overseas absentee ballots is because the federal Congress has stepped in, as they have the right to do, and has said that the states must allow that. But only to that extent.

There is no right by the federal or state constitution to manual recounts. There is no law that says that you must count dimpled ballots, constitutional or otherwise.

What it tells the voters is the parties play no part in the selection methodology. Nothing could be further from the truth.