Lin Wood, a pro-Trump lawyer, under investigation for alleged illegal voting

A pro-Trump lawyer who defended conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election, including allegations of electoral fraud, is being investigated for illegal voting. CBS Atlanta affiliate WGCL-TV cites a high-level source from the Georgia Secretary of State’s office saying the office is investigating whether Wood voted “out of state” – in Georgia, although in fact he was a resident of South Carolina at the time of the November election.

It is not clear whether Wood was eligible to vote in Georgia and whether he was considered a resident when voting.

In a statement sent to CBS News, Wood said he “has been a resident of the State of Georgia since 1955. I moved to South Carolina yesterday. [February 1, 2021]. “

He added: “This is pure harassment on the part of the Georgia Secretary of State because I have revealed reliable evidence of electoral fraud on the part of Brad Raffensperger” – the Georgian Secretary of State.

Wood told NPR that “I was domiciled in Atlanta in October 2020 and was a resident of Georgia at that time. … I own properties in Georgia and South Carolina”.

The prominent pro-Trump figure sued Raffensperger in one of a series of unsuccessful lawsuits alleging electoral fraud in the 2020 election. Wood, along with Sidney Powell, filed lawsuits in battlefield states to try to overturn election results.

Wood spoke at far-right demonstrations about his claims, including a “Stop The Steal” event on December 2 in Georgia.

A “Stop The Steal” rally in Washington, DC preceded January 6 assault on the Capitol.

The 68-year-old man was permanently suspended by Twitter for pushing conspiracy theories and promoting the attack on the Capitol. He was temporarily suspended and then banned for saying he would use a second account to get around the suspension, according to Buzzfeed News.

The Georgia Bar Association recently opened an investigation into Wood’s jurisdiction. According to the Associated Press, the inquiry falls under “the rule of order that has to do with mental disability or substance abuse.”

.Source