[DiogenesLamp]

That’s not true. Lindell presented data which he claimed consisted of raw packet capture data proving Chinese interference in the 2020 election. The man (his name is Robert Zeidman, and he is a Trump supporter) examined the data and found that it was mostly text and pdf files. Others were enormous files of what appeared to be random numbers and letters.

I have read the man's statements in which he claimed to have proven Lindell wrong. The Crux of the man's arguments is the dates which the files were created were *AFTER* the election and therefore could *NOT* be captured election data.

This argument is incorrect on the basis that file dates can be changed and do not necessarily represent the date they were created.

Unless the man can prove the dates were never changed on the files, which he can't, he hasn't actually proven his claim.

And i've looked at the files also. Lindell was a fool to make such a bet, and the guy claiming to have proven Lindell wrong is just taking unfair advantage of Lindell's naive understanding of computer technology.

As the man made his claim in bad faith, I have no qualms about rejecting his claim using that same bad faith.

He can't prove the dates, and therefore he can't prove his claim.

[Coronal]

Apparently the arbitrators disagree with you. "Based on the foregoing analysis, Mr. Zeidman performed under the contract. He proved the data Lindell LLC provided, and represented reflected information from the November 2020 election, unequivocally did not reflect November 2020 election data. Failure to pay Mr. Zeidman the $5 million prized was a breach of the contract, entitling him to recover."