Robert Zeidman, a computer forensics expert who twice voted for Mr. Trump, did just that, a federal judge in Minnesota ruled Wednesday, upholding an earlier ruling by a private arbitration panel. Judge John Tanheim said in Wednesday’s ruling that Mr. Zeidman is liable for $5 million, plus interest. The decision was the latest development in a years-long effort to win the award after Zeidman found the data was not relevant to the 2020 election.
Mr. Lindell’s attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday evening.
Zeidman told the Washington Post on Wednesday that he accepted Lindell’s challenge “because I thought it would be a historic event anyway.” He said it was unclear whether Lindell would actually receive the payment because he could appeal Wednesday’s decision. But Zeidman, who is active in Republican politics, said he wants those following the case to understand that Lindell’s data has nothing to do with the election.
“The most important thing is to get the truth out,” he said.
Mr. Lindell has been embroiled in legal and financial trouble in recent years, including a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems over false election claims.
The Post previously reported that the 2021 symposium was one of several ways Lindell amplified falsehoods about election fraud after Trump’s 2020 loss. To receive the challenge’s $5 million prize, Lindell will require symposium participants to certify that the data “clearly does not reflect information relevant to the November 2020 election.” I asked.
Zeidman said he reviewed the files during the three-day symposium and convinced friends to attend.
“I thought it would be fun and exciting to be a part of it,” Zeidman said. “I never expected to get so caught up in it and come to such a conclusion.”
Zeidman determined that the data did not prove election interference. He later testified during arbitration proceedings that the file he was given as part of the “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge appeared to be random numbers and letters. In his testimony, Zeidman said one contained a flowchart on how the election would work, and the other contained a list of IP addresses.
Mr. Zeidman summarized his findings in a 15-page report and sent a letter to Mr. Lindell’s company requesting compensation. The month after Lindell management denied his payment request, he filed for arbitration, and a private arbitration panel ruled that Zeidman, the only participant who filed a claim, said the data was not related to the 2020 election. The court ruled that this had been proven. The commission asked Lindell management to pay Zeidman within 30 days.
The payment never arrived, and in May 2023, Mr. Zeidman asked the federal court to confirm the arbitration award. Shortly after, Lindell filed for termination.
But Mr. Zeidman’s attorney, Brian Glasser, said the chances of confirmation are in Mr. Zeidman’s favor. Under the Federal Arbitration Act, an arbitration award will be upheld unless it is found to have been obtained by “corrupt, fraudulent, or improper means.”
“The court’s responsibility in reviewing an arbitration award is not to reevaluate the merits of the case, but rather to ensure that the panel acted appropriately,” Tanheim wrote in Wednesday’s ruling, noting that Lindell management’s Arguments may be convincing alternative interpretations,” but arbitral review standards “do not weigh competing interpretations.”
Zeidman said Wednesday’s ruling made him feel “a little bit more optimistic” about receiving the $5 million.
“I still think the chances of me seeing it are probably slim,” he said. “But again, I hope people take the lesson that it’s okay to challenge your beliefs.”
Chris Dehghanpoor, Emma Brown and Jon Swaine contributed to this report.
