Attorney Matt DePerno, who has been battling election fraud for six months in Antrim County, Michigan, appeared after a hearing on Tuesday to reassure Michiganders that he is not finished fighting. Judge Elsenheimer dismissed his client’s case yesterday with a ruling based on what DePerno says is a “narrow decision” that had nothing to do with any of the evidence he and his client, Bill Bailey, have presented. This, he says, leaves the door open for further action on the case. The appearance with Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit can be viewed below:

Per reporting by UncoverDC on Tuesday, Elsenheimer agreed there were problems with the 2020 election. He narrowed his ruling to whether Bailey has a right to an additional audit that examines the ballots and machines in Antrim and other counties in the state of Michigan. Elsenheimer explained that the audit performed by Jocelyn Benson may not be the kind of audit they wanted. Still, it did qualify as an audit—even if some officials had admitted in one of the hearings that it was more of a recount. The judge made no determination one way or another about the evidence presented by DePerno. The judge, DePerno said, “his decision had nothing to do with any of the evidence presented.”

During Tuesday’s hearing, Elsenheimer narrowly cited a 2018 Proposal called Proposal 3, an amended law to guarantee that “every citizen of the United States who is an elector qualified to vote in Michigan the right to have the results of statewide elections audited in such a manner as prescribed by law to ensure the accuracy and integrity of elections.” DePerno says that the judge did not fully recognize the meaning and content of that amendment.

DePerno explained the amended law is “self-executing and that the legislature can pass any law expanding those rights and that any judge must interpret that constitutional amendment and liberally construe it in favor of the voter in order to protect the intent of the amendment in order to ensure there are fair and free elections—Purity of Elections is the way it’s actually read.”

Proposal 3 was an election overhaul that allowed mail-in voting and “other progressive ideas,” according to DePerno. However, importantly, the proposal was a give-and-take proposal because legislators negotiated a “safety valve,” permitting voters to audit the elections as referenced above by Judge Elsenheimer because of the concessions permitted with the addition of mail-in ballots.

Subsequent to that, legislators passed a statute that gives the Secretary of State power to determine what the audit would look like. Therein lies the issue, according to DePerno.

“Presumably, she could say, in order to trigger an audit, you have to fill out fifty forms, in triplicate, on pink paper, in a certain font, pay $50,000 and then she will go to 5 designated precincts and look at one ballot each. And she could call that an audit, under the statute.”

“[Judge Elsenheimer] did not liberally construe the amendment in favor of the voter in order to ensure Purity of Elections. Because if he did that, he would have to look at all the evidence and that would have destroyed the argument he was trying to make.”

It is on this basis, DePerno intends to appeal the decision. DePerno has mountains of evidence, and he says there is much more out there. Antrim County has never been the end game for him and his client. Antrim county is a “stepping stone” and “isn’t all he is working on.” However, it has been, he said, a “gold mine” of evidence and overall strategy and will continue to be one. “Other people working on other things” will be able to use the evidence he has turned up. DePerno says he already has solid evidence that election machines are extremely vulnerable to hacking.

“Our goal ultimately has always been that the votes are properly recorded at the Tabulator and properly counted at the EMS (Election Management System)… The roadmap has gone through Antrim County. It has truly been the gift that keeps on giving…We are not stopped from continuing to find and push out the evidence we discover. There are layers and layers and layers of how these machines operate,” he continued. “They are designed to send you down rabbit holes so that every time you get to a point where you find a problem, there is no one to ask about the problem. No one hows these systems work.”

DePerno conveyed he continues to be perplexed by the lack of media interest in his lawsuit. “Only one news outlet, The Record-Eagle, has actually acknowledged our case but only in the form of how many hit pieces they could write.”

Holding one of many boxes filled with letters from citizens, DePerno stated that legislators like Senator Ed McBroom should take the time to sit down with him and look at his evidence and read the heartfelt letters from concerned citizens. “You cannot read these letters and not be compelled to fix this system.”

Citizen Letters/Matt DePerno

McBroom was one of the legislators who appropriated money to purchase the machines used in the election. Only two people have contacted DePerno in the “entire House of Representatives.” He said legislators had been repeatedly threatened with “removal from committees and funding for future elections terminated” if they dare to support DePerno’s efforts.

DePerno stated that this case has truly been a grassroots effort in terms of financial and moral support and, eventually, it will be “a story that should be told.”