King v. Whitmer CIVIL 20-13134 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 25, 2021) in their pleadings and Motion for Injunctive Relief, counsel emphatically argued that “[t]he witness is setting forth exactly what he observed and [the] information that he bases it on.... He saw these plastic bags .... It is a true affidavit.” (ECF No. 157 at Pg ID 5488-89.) The Court accepts that the affidavit is true in that Ciantar memorialized what he saw at the time. But the Court cannot find it reasonable to assert, as Plaintiffs' attorneys do, that this “shows fraud.” (Id. at Pg ID 5489.) Absolutely nothing about this affidavit supports the allegation that ballots were delivered to the TCF Center after the Election Day deadline. And even if the Court entertained the assertion of Plaintiffs' counsel that this affidavit “is one piece of a pattern” reflecting fraud or Defendants' violations of Michigan election laws (id.), this would be a picture with many holes. This is because a document containing the lengthy musings of one dog-walker after encountering a “smiling, laughing” couple delivering bags of unidentified items in no way serves as evidence that state laws were violated or that fraud occurred. During the hearing, Plaintiffs' counsel further asserted that “we don't typically rewrite what an affiant says.” (Id. at Pg ID 5490.) That is good. But, pursuant to their duties as officers of the court, attorneys typically do not offer factual allegations that have no hope of passing as evidentiary support at any stage of the litigation. To support the allegation that Defendants “fraudulently add[ed] tens of thousands of new ballots . . . to the [Qualified Voter File] . . . on November 4, 2020, all or nearly all of which were votes for Joe Biden, ”54 Plaintiffs quote the affidavit of Melissa Carone (“Carone Affidavit”), 55 which describes “facts” that demonstrate no misconduct or malfeasance, and amount to no more than strained and disjointed innuendo of something sinister: 54 (ECF No. 6 at Pg. ID 942 ¶ 190(a) (citing IIB).) 55 Plaintiffs also reference the affidavit of Andrew Sitto (“Sitto Affidavit”) and Robert Cushman (“Cushman Affidavit”) to support this allegation. (ECF No. 6 at Pg ID 905-06 ¶¶ 100-03.) But as Judge Kenny concluded in Costantino, Sitto's affidavit is “rife with speculation and guess-work about sinister motives” and he “knew little about the process of the absentee voter counting board activity.” (ECF No. 31-15 at Pg ID 2443.) Indeed, the evidentiary value of the Sitto Affidavit is questionable at best. And while the Court does not discuss the Cushman Affidavit in this Opinion and Order, the Court notes that Plaintiffs describe the Carone Affidavit as “the most probative evidence” of the factual allegation at bar. (ECF No. 6 at Pg ID 899 ¶ 84.) There was [sic] two vans that pulled into the garage of the counting room, one on day shift and one on night shift. These vans were apparently bringing food into the building .... I never saw any food coming out of these vans, coincidently it was announced on the news that Michigan had discovered over 100, 000 more ballots-not even two hours after the last van left.56 The Amended Complaint calls this an “illegal vote dump.” (ECF No. 6 at Pg ID 900 ¶ 84.) 56 (See IIB - “Election Workers Fraudulently Forged, Added, Removed or Otherwise Altered Information on Ballots, Qualified Voter List and Other Voting Records, ” Subsection 1 - “Election Workers Fraudulently Added ‘Tens of Thousands' of New Ballots and New Voters in the Early Morning and Evening of November 4, ” ECF No. 6 at Pg ID 899-900 I 84 (quoting Carone Affidavit, ECF No. 6-5 at Pg ID 1306 I 8).) 56 (See IIB - “Election Workers Fraudulently Forged, Added, Removed or Otherwise Altered Information on Ballots, Qualified 31