Anonymous ID: bdc879 Nov. 5, 2023, 6:26 a.m. No.19864931   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>19862784 Police investigate how Michgan voting machine would up for sale onlinePN

CNN distorts and lies in both articles, the police make excuses, the SOS of MI declines to comment.And then these investigations disappear from the news.until the GWP released their investigation of Dem operatives in the state in 2020+ elections.

 

Michigan State Police seizes voting machine as it expands investigation into potential breaches tied to 2020 election

 

Annie Grayer, Zachary Cohen, May 5, 2022

The Michigan State Police has expanded its investigation into whether third parties gained unauthorized access to voting machine data after the 2020 election, and is now examining potential breaches in at least one new county, CNN has learned.

 

In a raid last Friday, state police seized one voting machine tabulator in Irving Township, Barry County Clerk Pamela Palmer told CNN on Thursday.

 

Palmer told CNN that she was not aware of any issues until police notified her of the voting machine seizure.

 

Michigan State Police first opened its investigation into potential voting machine breaches in February after the Secretary of State’s Office notified it that anunnamed third party was allowed to access vote tabulator components and technology in Roscommon County.

 

Michigan State Police Lt. Derrick Carroll told CNN on Wednesday that the department’s investigation hasexpanded to more counties where they were notified of breachesof election systems, but would not confirm the seizure in Irving Township specifically. It’s unclear if the investigation includes localities beyond Roscommon County and Irving Township but a source familiar with the investigation told CNN that state policeare aware of a third potential breach.

 

“If we find more examples of unauthorized access, we talk to those officials to find out what transpired,” Carroll added.

 

These potential breaches did not affect results in the 2020 election, Carroll said, noting the breaches occurred after the election was complete. (WTF? How would they know this? Did they do a forensic analysis? Or was this statement just to allay fears?)

 

A spokesperson for the Michigan attorney general’s office declined to comment.

 

The probe in Michigan reflects agrowing number of incidentsaround the country where unauthorized people attempted to gain access to voting systems that were key targets in the Donald Trump campaign’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election outcome.

 

They succeeded in at least one instance in late November 2020, when a team of pro-Trump operatives traveled to Antrim County, Michigan, and conducted an audit of voting systems there, according to court documents released as part of a failed lawsuit filed by attorneys working on behalf of the former President at the time. (The attorneys were requested to inspect the machines, they did not breach the machines illegally.)

 

That access led to a now-debunked reportissued by a team of analysts from a Texas-based company, Allied Security Operations Group, alleging irregularities in Dominion Voting Systems that was consistently cited as evidence in multiple failed legal challenges in Michigan and other swing states.

 

Dominion has filed several lawsuits over false election claims made about its equipment, including against Fox News.

 

The House Select Committee investigating January 6 has made clear that third-party efforts to gain access to voting data in Michigan and across the country remain a key area of focus in its probe.(where is the republican efforts to expose the 2020 election interference? Lazy ass rulers neglecting the cause & the demise of rule of law over elections. Neglecting this creates the destruction of trust in government by Americans, if we cannot trust Congress to fix elections than nothing else matters. )

 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/05/politics/michigan-expands-investigation-voting-machine-breaches/index.html

Anonymous ID: bdc879 Nov. 5, 2023, 7:01 a.m. No.19865086   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5096

>>19862544 Here is the full docket on the Trump DC case.PN

 

Aug 1, 2023: INDICTMENT as to DONALD J. TRUMP (1) count(s) 1, 2, 3, 4. (zltp) (Entered: 08/01/2023)

 

Interesting #45 and #47 in the docket entries Nov 4, and today Nov 5, 2023

Document attached:

“The prosecution requests leave to file an oversized, consolidated brief in response to President Trump’s Motion to Dismiss on Statutory Grounds (Doc. 114) and Motion to Dismiss on Constitutional Grounds (Doc. 113) (together, the “Motions”).

 

The prosecution advises its proposed brief would exceed the 45-page limit for responses provided by LCrR 47(e). Doc. 136. The Court should deny the prosecution’s application.

 

Because the Motions raise distinct bases for dismissal, the defense believes it is more efficient and organized for the briefing to remain separated. This will avoid confusion over the application of any arguments to the parties’ respective briefing and will also keep the record clear on appeal by either party.

 

To the extent the Court grants relief, it should prohibit the prosecution from discussing eitherMotion for more than 45 pages, inclusive of any combined introductory or background sections. For example, the Court should not permit the prosecution to address Constitutional issues for 60 pages.

 

Finally, President Trump construes the prosecution’s application as concerning only its proposed response brief.

 

Accordingly, President Trump intends to file separate replies in support of his Motions, consistent with LCrR 47(d), (e) and this Court’s prior order, Doc. 82. Any alteration to that standard right should require a separately noticed motion and full briefing.”

 

138 Nov 4, 2023

RESPONSE by DONALD J. TRUMP re 136 MOTION for Leave to File Oversized Brief (Lauro, John) (Entered: 11/04/2023)

Main Doc

Response to motion

 

Nov 5, 2023

Order on Motion for Leave to File Document

 

Nov 5, 2023

MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: The government's 136 Motion for Leave to File Oversized Brief is hereby GRANTED. The government may submit a combined opposition brief to Defendant's 113 Motion to Dismiss Based on Constitutional Grounds and 114 Motion to Dismiss Based on Statutory Grounds. The brief may not exceed 90 pages in total. The discussion of each Motion therein shall not exceed 45 pages. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 11/5/2023. (zjd)

 

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/united-states-v-trump/