From: A Talk Radio Listener [Email him]
The Georgia complaint filed by Trump's counsel is online:
As a civil action, the plaintiff’s burden of proof is a “preponderance of the evidence” to show, as the Georgia Supreme Court has made clear that, “[i] was not incumbent upon [Plaintiff] to show how the  voters would have voted if their [absentee] ballots had been regular. [Plaintiff] only had to show that there were enough irregular ballots to place in doubt the result.” Mead v. Sheffield, 278 Ga. 268, 272, 601 S.E.2d 99, 102 (2004)
A core requirement of the Smartmatic software design was the software’s ability to hide its manipulation of votes from any audit. As the whistleblower explains: [Venezuelan President Hugo] Chavez was most insistent that Smartmatic design the system in a way that the system could change the vote of each voter without being detected. He wanted the software itself to function in such a manner that if the voter were to place their thumb print or fingerprint on a scanner, then the thumbprint would be tied to a record of the voter’s name and identity as having voted, but that voter would not be tracked to the changed vote. He made it clear that the system would have to be setup to not leave any evidence of the changed vote for a specific voter and that there would be no evidence to show and nothing to contradict that the name or the fingerprint or thumb print was going with a changed vote. Smartmatic agreed to create such a system and produced the software and hardware that accomplished that result for President Chavez. (See Id., see also Exh.3, Aff. Cardozo, attached hereto)). [PDF]
This is an easier case than Bush v. Gore, in which there was no allegation of election fraud. That case arose because the Democrats believed that vote tabulation machines in Democrat-controlled Palm Beach County had missed Gore votes that would have been counted by Democrat vote counters. It was a Democrat complaint about a Democrat-designed ballot in a Democrat county counted by machines purchased by Democrats. No impropriety was alleged in counties controlled by Republicans.
The Trump complaints were written both for the courts and for the public and include much more detail than typically is presented in a complaint. Indeed, they more closely resemble motions for summary judgment than complaints. Trump has a very strong case. The only question is whether one of his Supreme Court Justices will cave to pressure, which will include personal threats against their families and the threat of riots throughout the country.
Unfortunately, the expert reports aren't online. Some reporter should make copies at the courthouses, then scan and post them.