Republicans Lose Court Challenge to Mail-In Voting in PA

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
In 2019, both houses of the Pennsylvania state legislature were Republican controlled and voted for the mail-in voting changes

After trump losing and no fraud found....they want to repeal :rolleyes:


https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/republicans-lose-court-challenge-mail-220300400.html
Republicans Lose Court Challenge to Mail-In Voting in PA
Keith Reed
Tue, August 2, 2022 at 6:03 PM·1 min read

6ovsu8.jpg



The top judges in a critical swing state upheld a 2019 law allowing any registered voter to cast a ballot by mail, setting up a likely battle before a conservative U.S. Supreme Court with Republicans bent on limiting methods of voting.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the law, Act 77 of 2019, didn’t violate the state’s constitution. The law expanded mail-in voting in Pennsylvania to any voter compared with the previous procedure which required voters to have an exception allowing them to vote by mail.

Mail-in voting was popular with residents and lawmakers of both parties in PA at the time; the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette noted that the law passed the state’s GOP-controlled legislature “with nearly unanimous support.” But that was before Pennsylvania—specifically Black voters in deep blue Philadelphia, it’s more moderate suburbs and solidly blue Allegheny County in the western half of the state—helped tip the state for President Joe Biden, a Democrat, over Republican former President Donald Trump in the 2020 election.

Trump launched his “Big Lie” propaganda and legal effort to illegitimize the election results shortly thereafter. In addition to efforts that are being investigated such as his role in the insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021, and Trump’s attempt to overturn election results in Georgia, the ex-prez has also pointed to mail-in and other absentee voting methods across the country as rife with fraud and reasons why he lost. No such fraud has been discovered in Pennsylvania or elsewhere, but that hasn’t stopped Republican officials from seeking to undo vote-by-mail, which is very popular with Black voters and other considered likely Democratic partisans.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
Not only do we have 3 different government agencies that can't find their texts on Jan 6 but we also have this jackass who has been caught
lying about his texts from the past 2 years...

Interesting for the Jan 6 cmte & the DOJ since Jones was a insurrectionist


https://www.yahoo.com/news/alex-jones-damning-texts-accidentally-172520497.html
Alex Jones’ Damning Texts ACCIDENTALLY Sent to Sandy Hook Lawyer
Justin Rohrlich
Wed, August 3, 2022 at 1:25 PM·5 min read

6ovvix.jpg


A day after far-right conspiracy-monger Alex Jones was scolded by a judge for chewing gum in the courtroom, opposing lawyers dropped a bombshell revelation they said proved the embattled InfoWars host has been lying on the stand.

Jones testified on Wednesday for the second time in attempting to fend off one of many defamation lawsuits brought by families affected by the Sandy Hook massacre. They are seeking at least $150 million from Jones and his bankrupt media company, Free Speech Systems. Numerous parents of children killed in the 2012 school shooting blame Jones for spreading falsehoods and disinformation about the tragedy that brought on ceaseless abuse, harassment, and death threats.

On Tuesday, Jones insisted, under oath, that he had fully complied with the court’s discovery process, and that there were no text messages on his phone in which he discussed Sandy Hook, as the other side had requested.




On Wednesday, attorney Mark Bankston informed a seemingly stunned Jones that he had evidence this was untrue.

“Did you know [that] 12 days ago your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone, with every text message you’ve sent for the past two years?” he asked. “And when informed, [they] did not take any steps to identify it as privileged, or protected in any way?”

“This is your Perry Mason moment,” an obviously shocked Jones responded.




Bankston continued, “In discovery, you were asked if you had Sandy Hook text messages on your phone, and you said, ‘No.’ Correct?” Bankston asked. “You said that under oath.”

Jones replied, “If I was mistaken, I was mistaken. You’ve got the text messages right there.”

“You know what perjury is, right?” Bankston shot back. “I just want to make sure before we go any further... You testified under oath that you personally searched your phone for the phrase ‘Sandy Hook,’ and [said] there were no messages...You lied.”

“No, I did not lie,” Jones answered.

Previously, Jones testified that he didn’t use email so he would not be providing any during discovery. However, Bankston stunned Jones again on Wednesday by displaying his own emails as evidence—which also came from Jones’ phone.

“You’d agree these are emails you sent to your lawyers, your staff, and others, concerning your business operations, Sandy Hook, [and] other topics… ?”

Jones responded, “This is ridiculous.”

Jones testified on Wednesday that InfoWars regularly brought in as much as $200,000 a day, and that it grossed as much as $800,000 a day at times. The exchange came after Bankston mentioned Jones’ claims that his income had virtually disappeared in recent years.

Jones also said that he “was planning to shut down [InfoWars]” when he got married several years ago, but that he “got stuck in his fight with the system, and everything else that’s going on.”

When Bankston asked Jones if he remembered saying on his show that the mass shooting at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, was a “false flag engineered to start a civil war,” he answered, “I said I believed it could be.”

“The Las Vegas shooting, there at the concert,” Bankston continued. “False flag? Government operation, right?”

“Now, a lot of people have questions about Vegas,” said Jones.

“Would you agree with me that there is not a mass tragedy, mass bombing, mass shooting, that has occurred in America in the past 15 years, that you have not attached the words ‘false flag’ to?” asked Bankston.

“No,” Jones replied.

Bankston then played footage of Jones calling Sandy Hook a concocted scheme by the government.

“Sandy Hook [was] ‘synthetic,’ completely fake, with actors, in my view,” Jones said in the clip. “Manufactured. I couldn’t believe it at first. I knew they had actors, they are clearly, but I thought they killed some real kids. And it just shows how bold they are, that they clearly used actors, I mean, they even ended up using photos of kids killed in mass shootings… in a fake mass shooting in Turkey. Or, uh, Pakistan.”

On Tuesday, the jury heard heartbreaking testimony from Neil Heslin, whose 6-year-old son, Jesse, was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting.

“I can’t even describe the last nine and a half years, the living hell that I and others have had to endure because of the recklessness and negligence of Alex Jones,” Heslin said in court.

Jones did not show up for Heslin’s testimony, which the grieving father called “cowardly.”

“Today is very important to me and it’s been a long time coming... to face Alex Jones for what he said and did to me. To restore the honor and legacy of my son,” he told the Associated Press.

Jones has in the past denigrated Heslin as being “like somebody on the spectrum,” and said he and Jesse’s mom, Scarlett Lewis, were “caricatures of what you would imagine in some alternate universe of dwarf goblins.”

The lawsuit against him is a First Amendment issue, according to Jones, who has baselessly accused the trial of being rigged.

“All I did was speculate and ask questions,” he seethed to reporters outside the courthouse on Tuesday. “I have a right to do that.”

In closing arguments, which began Wednesday afternoon, plaintiff’s co-counsel Kyle Farrar called the last 10 years “the most horrific decade of disinformation in American history.”

And while Jones has a constitutional right to say whatever he likes, he still must be held accountable for the consequences of any harmful statements.

“Speech is free,” Farrar told the jury, “but you have to pay for your lies.”
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.businessinsider.com/jan...ubpoena-alex-jones-emails-texts-report-2022-8
The Jan. 6 committee plans to subpoena Alex Jones' emails and texts after his own lawyers accidentally revealed them
Sonam Sheth and Natalie Musumeci 16 hours ago


6ovw6r.jpg


  • The Jan. 6 committee plans to subpoena Alex Jones' texts and emails, Rolling Stone reported.
  • The news comes after it surfaced that Jones' own lawyers accidentally turned them over to opposing counsel in an ongoing defamation trial against him.
  • Jones was visibly stunned when a lawyer for Sandy Hook families told him he had years worth of data from his phone.

The House select committee investigating the Capitol riot plans to subpoena years worth of the right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones' emails and texts, Rolling Stone reported Wednesday.

The development comes after it surfaced that Jones' own attorneys had accidentally turned the messages over to opposing counsel in an ongoing defamation trial against Jones.

Mark Bankston, a lawyer representing families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, revealed the error while cross-examining Jones in court Wednesday.

The previous day, Jones had testified under oath that his team had complied with the discovery process and that there were no text messages on his phone in which he mentioned Sandy Hook.

"Did you know [that] 12 days ago your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone, with every text message you've sent for the past two years?" Bankston said to Jones on Wednesday. "And when informed, [they] did not take any steps to identify it as privileged, or protected in any way?"

Among the evidence Bankston brought up in court was a text message to Jones referencing Sandy Hook which warned the InfoWars host not to claim coronavirus victims were actors.

"That is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have text messages about Sandy Hook," Bankston told Jones as he was on the witness stand testifying in his own defense.

Jones, who looked visibly stunned, replied: "This is your Perry Mason moment."

Rolling Stone, citing a source familiar with the matter and another person briefed on it, reported that the January 6 select committee started discussing how to get the messages within minutes of Bankston's revelation. The panel is now planning to request the data from the plaintiffs' attorneys as part of its ongoing investigation into the Capitol riot, the outlet reported.

Bankston, for his part, was also heard on a hot mic during recess wondering what would happen if the contents of the phone were turned over to federal investigators conducting a criminal investigation of events surrounding the January 6 attack.

"There's going to be months of fallout from this," he was heard saying at one point, later saying. "You know what no one's thought about yet? What happens when that phone goes to law enforcement?"


A spokesperson at the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Jones has already been found liable for defamation by the Texas court and a court in Connecticut for falsely and repeatedly claiming that the Sandy Hook massacre was a "hoax" and that grieving parents and children were actors.

The jury in the trial will determine how much money Jones must pay to Heslin and Lewis, who are seeking $150 million in compensatory damages.
 

Gator Fever

Bull Gator
Feb 13, 2008
22,711
6,267
113
I think a case the US SC is taking up could reverse this but would need to see how this was actually implemented. If the PA legislature didnt pass a bill making it clear mail-in was valid in all elections from that point forward this could get overturned.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-had-chance-kill-al-123256147.html
Trump had the chance to kill al-Qaeda's leader but didn't because he didn't recognize the name, report says

6ovwjy.jpg


  • The al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed by a US drone strike, Biden announced Monday.
  • Then-President Trump had the option to kill al-Zawahiri, but chose not to, NBC reported in 2020.
  • Trump wanted to kill Osama bin Laden's son instead because it was the only name he knew, NBC said.
Former President Donald Trump had the chance to kill the leader of al-Qaeda but didn't because he didn't recognize the terrorist leader's name, NBC News reported in 2020.

Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed in a US drone strike in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Saturday, President Joe Biden announced on Monday.

His death, which has been hailed by many world leaders, is the biggest blow to al-Qaeda since its founder, Osama bin Laden, was killed by US Navy SEALs in 2011.

But plans for al-Zawahiri's execution could have been carried out far earlier, according to an NBC News report published in February 2020.

Intelligence officials briefed Trump many times about senior terrorist figures the CIA wanted to track down and kill, specifically mentioning al-Zawahiri, NBC News reported.

But two people familiar with the briefings told NBC News that Trump chose not to pursue al-Zawahiri because he didn't recognize his name, and instead suggested targeting bin Laden's son, Hamza bin Laden.

"He would say, 'I've never heard of any of these people. What about Hamza bin Laden?'" one unnamed former official told NBC News.

A Pentagon official also told the news outlet: "That was the only name he knew."

The Department of Defense and a spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to Insider's requests for comment.

Even though Bin Laden's son was widely seen as an emerging figure in the terrorist group, he was not believed to be planning any attacks at the time, NBC News reported.

'The president's preference for a "celebrity" targeted killing'​

Trump confirmed in 2019 that the younger bin Laden had been killed in a US counterterrorism operation earlier on in his presidency.

"Despite intelligence assessments showing the greater dangers posed by Zawahiri ... and the unlikelihood Hamza was in the immediate line of succession, the president thought differently," the former CIA official Douglas London wrote in Just Security in 2020.

He added that Trump's "obsession" with bin Laden's son "is one example of the president's preference for a 'celebrity' targeted killing versus prioritizing options that could prove better for US security."

In his address announcing al-Zawahiri's death, Biden said that after "relentlessly seeking Zawahiri for years under Presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump, our intelligence community located Zawahiri earlier this year."

"This mission was carefully planned, rigorously minimized the risk of harm to other civilians, and one week ago, after being advised that the conditions were optimal, I gave the final approval to go get him, and the mission was a success."

Al-Zawahiri helped Osama bin Laden plot the September 11, 2001, attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.
 

Gator Fever

Bull Gator
Feb 13, 2008
22,711
6,267
113
lol right.. Its nice Biden by leaving all that military equipment behind in that joke withdrawal helped them out like that I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gatordad3

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
The case is Moore v Harper

And what occurred in 2019 would not have been affected no matter what is decided in Moore v Harper since it was the republican controlled legislature that voted for mail-in ballots to be legal

Moore v Harper is a test of whether or not the state legislature is the final decider on a state's election even above the state's court system
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gator Fever

Gator Fever

Bull Gator
Feb 13, 2008
22,711
6,267
113
The case is Moore v Harper

And what occurred in 2019 would not have been affected no matter what is decided in Moore v Harper since it was the republican controlled legislature that voted for mail-in ballots to be legal

Moore v Harper is a test of whether or not the state legislature is the final decider on a state's election even above the state's court system

Just worried about the 2024 voting now. My guess is they would rule the legislature is.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
Actually he's been living in Afghanistan since trump's failed Doha agreement was signed in February of 2020


But plans for al-Zawahiri's execution could have been carried out far earlier, according to an NBC News report published in February 2020.

Intelligence officials briefed Trump many times about senior terrorist figures the CIA wanted to track down and kill, specifically mentioning al-Zawahiri, NBC News reported.

But two people familiar with the briefings told NBC News that Trump chose not to pursue al-Zawahiri because he didn't recognize his name, and instead suggested targeting bin Laden's son, Hamza bin Laden.

"He would say, 'I've never heard of any of these people. What about Hamza bin Laden?'" one unnamed former official told NBC News.

A Pentagon official also told the news outlet: "That was the only name he knew."
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
Anyone seen those brave Secret Service agents that swore they would testify about trump's temper tantrum?


https://www.yahoo.com/news/presidential-motorcade-officer-details-trumps-122535780.html
Presidential Motorcade Officer Details Trump's Behavior On Jan. 6
Marita Vlachou
Tue, August 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM·2 min read

6ovylh.jpg


A former officer who was part of Donald Trump’s motorcade on Jan. 6, 2021, said Monday that Trump was “upset” at not being allowed to join his supporters attacking the Capitol.

Mark Robinson, a now retired D.C. police officer who was in the front car of Trump’s convoy on Jan. 6, told CNN that Trump was desperate to visit the Capitol grounds following his speech at the “Stop the Steal” rally at the Ellipse.

“We’ve heard it several times while it was on the motorcade,” said Robinson, who is also a witness in the House Jan. 6 committee’s probe. “I think during the speech, shortly thereafter, he had finished the speech, that the president was getting into the motorcade and he was upset. And he adamantly wanted to go to the Capitol.”

He continued: “And even when we departed from the Ellipse, it was repeated again. ... It was a heated argument in the limo. And he wanted to definitely go to the Capitol.”

Robinson’s comments appear to be consistent with White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony that Trump got into a physical altercation with his Secret Service detail on Jan. 6, and tried to grab the steering wheel of the presidential limousine in the hope of driving to the Capitol.

“The president reached up toward the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel,” Hutchinson told the panel. “[Secret Service agent Bobby] Engel grabbed his arm and said, ‘Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we’re going back to the West Wing. We’re not going to the Capitol.’”

Hutchinson said the story was recounted to her by the former White House operations chief Anthony Ornato.

While unnamed Secret Service officials had previously said Ornato, Engel and the unnamed driver of the presidential limo would testify under oath that Hutchinson’s account was inaccurate, they have so far not done so. All three have also hired private lawyers.

“Some of the officers said that they would be coming and talking under oath,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a Jan. 6 committee member, told reporters, according to Salon. “They have not come in, and they recently retained private counsel, which is unusual but they have a right to do that.”

Robinson said he now feels relieved the Secret Service did not grant the president’s wish to drive to the Capitol, adding that Trump’s presence would have further motivated the insurrectionists.

“I think it would have probably encouraged more rioting. And [the rioters would have] felt supported,” Robinson told CNN. “If the presidential motorcade came in support of them ... I think the insurrectionists probably would have felt as though they had the support of the president.”
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.local3news.com/regional...cle_ab11b8bc-608b-5e16-a124-6e348fca59d7.html
Jan. 6 committee expands interest into possible use of the 25th Amendment against Trump with Mnuchin and other Cabinet interviews
By Annie Grayer, Ryan Nobles and Zachary Cohen, CNN Jul 28, 2022 Updated Jul 28, 2022

6ovz8n.jpg



The House select committee investigating January 6 is zeroing in on former officials from Trump's Cabinet for testimony and is particularly interested in learning more about conversations among officials about possibly invoking the 25th Amendment after the US Capitol attack.

The panel has interviewed former President Donald Trump's former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, sources tell CNN.

Sources tell the CNN the committee is negotiating terms for a potential interview with former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe. Given the classified nature of Ratcliffe's former role, there are unique issues the two sides have to work out.

The committee will also interview former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as soon as this week and is speaking with former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney on Thursday.

Several former Cabinet officials are known to have met with the committee already, including Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia, Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller and Acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen.

The committee also met with former Attorney General Bill Barr, but he had left the administration prior to the events of January 6th.

The committee has also previously interviewed Ken Cuccinelli and reached out to Chad Wolf, two top officials from the Trump-era Department of Homeland Security, CNN reported last year.

The interest in the 25th Amendment and activities following the Capitol attack comes after former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified last month about a "large concern" that the Cabinet and then-Vice President Mike Pence could attempt to remove the President from office.

"There was a large concern of the 25th Amendment potentially being invoked, and there were concerns about what would happen in the Senate if it was," Hutchinson testified.

But Mark Short, former chief of staff to former Vice President Mike Pence, said on CNN Thursday that he doesn't "recall there being any serious conversation" about invoking the 25th Amendment, saying that using it would have been impractical.

"The reality is there was 10 days left in the administration," Short said. "This was a political ploy. And, further, you know, when they designed the 25th Amendment, it has higher standards, higher hurdles than even impeachment does. Whereas impeachment requires a simple majority in the House and a supermajority in the Senate, this requires approval by a Cabinet, plus a supermajority in the House, plus a supermajority in the Senate."

Short added: "That wasn't happening in 10 days in the administration ... This was really just a political ploy by Nancy Pelosi and Democrats in Congress to try to put pressure to exert this and it was never going anywhere in our White House."

A select committee spokesperson declined to comment.


CNN has reached out to Mnuchin for comment.

ABC News was first to report the Mnuchin interview.

DOJ criminal investigation heating up​

The separate Justice Department criminal investigation into the plots to subvert the 2020 election is also heating up.

CNN previously reported that Hutchinson is cooperating with DOJ's criminal investigation, a source with knowledge of the discussions confirmed to CNN. The extent of that cooperation isn't clear. Hutchinson was a star witness for the committee.

DOJ also obtained a second warrant to search the cell phone of right-wing lawyer John Eastman as part of its criminal inquiry, prosecutors said in a court filing Wednesday.

Investigators seized Eastman's phone earlier this month in New Mexico after receiving a warrant to take the device. Agents needed a second warrant to search the contents of the phone, which they received on July 12.

The warrant is a critical step in the Justice Department's intensifying investigation into January 6, where investigators have seemingly zeroed in on the conduct of Trump and his close allies' efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Eastman has been a key figure in the committee's investigation in the plot to subvert the election results. A federal judge has previously said that Eastman and Trump "more likely than not" planned a crime as they sought to disrupt the January 6 congressional certification of the presidential election.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.yahoo.com/news/records-tied-600-000-money-232718011.html
Records tied to $600,000 money transfer subpoenaed in Miami ‘ghost’ candidate case

6ow0du.jpg


Prosecutors subpoenaed records related to a $600,000 money transfer between dark money organizations tied to an ongoing Miami-Dade criminal case surrounding “ghost candidates” in the 2020 election, according to court records unveiled Friday.

The transfer is adding a new layer of intrigue to a years-long question into who paid for thousands of political mail advertisements to promote sham no-party candidates in three contested Florida races that were key to helping solidify the Republican majority in the state Senate.

While the source is not yet clear, the money transfer shows prosecutors have looked into a $600,000 transfer made on or around Sept. 30 from Foundation for a Safe Environment, a nonprofit organization controlled by prominent Republican operative Stafford Jones, to Let’s Preserve the American Dream, a nonprofit organization run by Ryan Tyson, a top GOP pollster in Florida.

During the course of the investigation, court records show that Tyson told investigators that he, too, had sent $600,000 on Sept. 29, 2020, to Grow United, a dark money organization that sent $550,000 to two political committees that paid for the mailers that promoted as political progressives the no-party candidates in two Miami-Dade state Senate races and another in Central Florida.

Jones told the Herald on Saturday, after this story was originally published online, that the amount transferred by Foundation for a Safe Environment was $630,000, not $600,000 as the court document states. Jones said the money was a general contribution and not for any specific purpose.

Tyson told investigators his organization transferred the money to Grow United to help “left to center” candidates, and that he “had a hunch” the money would later be transferred to the two political committees — The Truth and Our Florida — which were controlled by Tallahassee consultant Alex Alvarado.

Tyson, however, said he could not be sure what the money would be used for. He told investigators that “once he makes a contribution to an entity, he loses control of how they spend the money.”

A labyrinth of political committees, nonprofits​

Records released Friday — a summary of investigative activity related to the elections for Senate Districts 37 and 39 from Sept. 1 to Dec. 31, 2021 — did not offer much detail about the relationship Foundation for a Safe Environment has to the investigation. But Jones, who chairs the organization, controls a number of political committees associated with the prominent GOP research firm Data Targeting, according to court records. Data Targeting has long served as a chief firm advising Senate Republican campaigns, including during the 2020 election cycle.

Data Targeting also paid former Republican state Sen. Frank Artiles, who is facing several charges related to the no-party candidate who ran in District 37, for campaign-related work. Data Targeting paid Artiles $90,000 over six months to work on “state legislative campaign assignments ... to include certain Senate Districts in Miami-Dade County,” according to records released by the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office. The contract did not detail the exact duties.

Unlike political committees, which are legally required to disclose their donors, dark money groups are not required by law to do so, which makes them useful for funders who don’t want their identities revealed when backing certain campaigns or causes.

In addition, records show that on April 20, prosecutors were seeking information from Brian Lacey, who worked with the Florida Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee until he was let go in December 2020 following “a bad cycle and losses in Florida Senate races.”

The DLCC also received money from Grow United. Lacey told investigators he recalled the contribution was made but that he did not have information beyond that and did not have access to those records because he was not employed by the committee.

Friday’s records are part of the discovery in the case against Artiles in Miami.

The candidate in Senate District 37, who shares a surname with the Democrat incumbent and received more than 6,000 votes in an election decided by just 32, was arrested on four felony campaign finance charges last year. Auto-parts dealer Alexis Pedro Rodriguez later took a plea deal in exchange for helping prosecutors build a case against his acquaintance, Artiles. Investigators say Artiles paid Rodriguez $40,000 to run as a no-party candidate to sway the outcome of the election by siphoning votes away from the incumbent.

Both men were charged with conspiracy to make or accept campaign contributions in excess of legal limits, accepting and making those excess campaign contributions, false swearing in connection to an election and aiding in (and eventually, submitting) false voter information. Under state law, each of those charges carries sentences of up to five years in prison if convicted.

The case is scheduled for its next hearing on Sept. 1.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.yahoo.com/news/colorado-man-pleads-guilty-casting-151726910.html
Colorado Man Pleads Guilty To Casting Missing Wife's Ballot For Trump
Nina Golgowski
July 24, 2022·2 min read


A Colorado man who was previously charged with the murder of his still-missing wife has reportedly pleaded guilty to casting a presidential ballot for Donald Trump under her name during the 2020 election.

Barry Morphew admitted that he cast the illegal mail-in ballot for his wife, Suzanne Morphew, following her mysterious disappearance “because I wanted Trump to win,” The Denver Post reported, citing an arrest warrant.

“I just thought give him another vote. I figured all these other guys are cheating,” he reportedly told an FBI agent about his decision, which he said he didn’t think was illegal.

He pleaded guilty on Thursday to one count of forgery, a felony, and was sentenced to one year of supervised probation.

6ow0m0.jpg


Barry Morphew was sentenced Thursday after admitting to casting a presidential ballot for his wife, Suzanne Morphew, who has been missing since May of 2020. (Photo: Chaffee County Sheriff's Office)

Morphew cast the ballot for his wife about five months after she was reported missing after going for a bike ride near her home in Salida, Colorado, in May of 2020.

Prosecutors charged him with first-degree murder last year in her disappearance, accusing him of killing her after discovering that she was involved in an extramarital affair. All charges were dropped against him in April, however, after prosecutors were sanctioned by a judge for violating discovery rules. The district attorney can refile the same charges against him in the future as the case was dismissed without prejudice, The Denver Post reported at the time.

The body of Suzanne Morphew, who shares two children with her husband, has not been found.

An attorney for Barry Morphew told The New York Times that he cast the ballot for his wife innocently, believing that when he became the legal guardian for her after she went missing that he was entitled to represent her in voting as well.

“He believed that because he could sign legal documents for her, that the ballot, similarly, was under his authority,” said his attorney, Iris Eytan. “So he was following her wishes. He did not sign her name. He signed his name on the witness line. So he didn’t, in any way, intend to deceive the clerk of the court.”

Eytan added that Morphew continues to maintain his innocence in his wife’s disappearance and that he wishes authorities would focus on finding her rather than prosecuting him for voter fraud.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-massachusetts-man-threatened-arizona-011720278.html
FBI: Massachusetts man threatened Arizona election official


The FBI on Friday arrested a Massachusetts man for threatening to blow up Arizona’s top election official following the 2020 election that saw former President Donald Trump lose in the state.

James W. Clark, 38, of Falmouth made an initial court appearance in Boston to answer to a three-count indictment that charges him with threatening to explode a bomb in Democratic Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ “personal space” if she did not resign.

Court records do not show a lawyer for Clark, or show if he remains in custody.

The threat was sent on Feb. 21, 2021, through an online form maintained by the Secretary of State’s election department, according to the indictment.


It was one of countless threats made against Hobbs for her role in certifying the 2020 election, which Trump contends without evidence was flawed by fraud. He lost to President Joe Biden in Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.

Hobbs spokeswoman Murphy Hebert said it was the only bomb threat Hobbs received among the thousands of threats the office received via telephone, email and online. She said the threats and harassment came in spurts, with hundreds on some days and then none for a while before another flurry of activity.

“Hanging is something we hear a lot, that you should be hanged,” Herbert said. “That seems to be a favorite.”

Clark faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted of making the bomb threat and five years on each of the other charges, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division said threats of violence put election officials and workers at risk “and undermine the bedrock of our democracy: free and fair elections.”

Election officials across the nation, especially in battleground states that Trump lost like Arizona, have been subjected to threats in the wake of Trump’s defeat and the failed attempt to prevent Congress from certifying the election results on Jan. 6, 2021.

Attorney General Merrick Garland formed an Election Threats Task Force in June 2021 to focus on threats of violence against elected election officials, workers and and volunteers to ensure they are able to oversee elections free of harassment. The case against Clark is part of that effort.

Hobbs said in a statement that election officials across the country are being regularly threatened for doing their jobs and thanked the FBI for pursuing the investigation.

“It’s unconscionable and undermines our democracy,” Hobbs said. “This harassment won’t be tolerated and can’t be normalized.”
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
https://www.yahoo.com/news/rnc-election-integrity-official-appearing-110000080.html
The RNC ‘election integrity’ official appearing in DOJ’s Jan. 6 subpoenas
Betsy Woodruff Swan
Sat, July 30, 2022 at 7:00 AM·4 min read

In addition to a group of former President Donald Trump’s top lawyers, the Justice Department’s Jan. 6 probe is also seeking communications to and from a Republican National Committee staffer in a sensitive role.

At least three witnesses in DOJ’s investigation of so-called alternate electors in the 2020 election — two in Arizona and another in Georgia — have received subpoenas demanding communications to and from Joshua Findlay, who is now the RNC’s national director for election integrity.

POLITICO reviewed the subpoena sent to the Georgia witness after the Washington Post published copies of two Arizona subpoenas. Findlay’s appearance in the documents means the Justice Department has taken interest in his communications as part of its probe related to pro-Trump GOP officials and activists who presented themselves as legitimate electors from states where Joe Biden won.

Findlay worked for Trump’s 2020 campaign in multiple capacities. In January 2019, the campaign announced he was joining the team that would handle the 2020 Republican National Convention. After the convention, he worked as an attorney on the Trump campaign’s legal team.


The three subpoenas order the witnesses to share all documents and communications from October 2020 on, “[t]o, from, with, or including” a list of people, including Findlay.

While Findlay is not a central figure in the Jan. 6 select committee’s investigation, the head of the Trump campaign’s legal team, Matt Morgan, mentioned him in testimony to the panel. At a hearing on June 21, the panel played a video clip where one of its investigators, Casey Lucier, said some Trump campaign lawyers “became convinced that convening electors in states that Trump lost was no longer appropriate.”

On Nov. 18, 2020, Lucier noted, Trump-allied lawyer Kenneth Chesebro had written a memo calling for that strategy — which generated push-back.

“At that point, I had Josh Findlay email Mr. Chesebro politely to say, ‘This is your task,’” Morgan told the select committee in testimony revealed at the hearing. “‘You are responsible for the Electoral College issues moving forward.’ And this was my way of taking that responsibility to zero.”

Findlay’s visibility into plans regarding alternate electors didn’t end on Election Day. POLITICO reviewed an email sent to him on December 12, 2020, showing David Shafer — head of the Georgia Republican Party, and himself an alternate elector — directing one of his subordinates to contact Findlay about the alternate elector plans.

A lawyer for Shafer declined to comment on the email.

Participants in the alternate electors scheme have given different explanations for their involvement. Some have said they participated at the advice of lawyers so pro-Trump electors would be available in case the courts flipped the elections’ outcomes in their states, while others have falsely claimed to be their states’ rightful electors.

Findlay started his job at the RNC after Biden’s inauguration and as its chair, Ronna McDaniel, announced a new “Committee on Election Integrity” with the stated purpose of “ensuring voters have confidence in future election processes.” Former attorney general Bill Barr has said the FBI found no evidence of voter fraud that could have swayed the outcome of the election, and a host of other former administration officials have told the select panel they thought Trump’s claims of voter fraud were nonsense.

Nonetheless, Trump has continued to stoke baseless arguments that his loss to Biden was illegitimate — and Republican voters have moved to elevate champions of those allegations, including Pennsylvania Republican gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano.

In his role at the RNC, Findlay has discussed the party’s work scrutinizing election administration.

In a video call hosted by Texas RNC Committeewoman Toni Anne Dashiell and posted on YouTube on July 26, 2021, Findlay said the party was gearing up to “train and build the largest, most well-prepared election integrity organization in the history of the Republican Party.”

He also described “the first ever Republican Party National Election Integrity College,” which included twenty candidates and was held in Washington D.C. the week before the call.

“We need to put eyes on every part of this election process,” he continued. “We’re going to have thousands and thousands of volunteers out there. So a big part of the curriculum at this college was recruiting and training and placing volunteers.”

The RNC, he continued, was moving “to recruit and train and place volunteers to watch every aspect of every election to make sure that Democrats aren’t committing fraud, that election administrators are not abusing their position, and just to make sure that there’s no mistake in what’s happening across the board.”

DOJ has not accused Findlay or any other people of crimes related to the alternate elector scheme. A spokesperson for the department declined to comment on the subpoenas.

Findlay and an RNC spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
Remember when the trumpanzees were all ablaze with "Lock her up" chants over Hillary Clinton's private email server?


https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/03/politics/peter-navarro-documents/index.html
Justice Department sues former Trump adviser Peter Navarro for emails from his private account
By Hannah Rabinowitz, Holmes Lybrand and Katelyn Polantz, CNN

Updated 5:44 PM ET, Wed August 3, 2022

6ow26d.jpg


The Justice Department sued former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro on Wednesday, seeking to force Navarro to turn over emails from a private account that he used while working at the Trump White House.

According to the lawsuit, the National Archives learned of Navarro's private account from the House committee investigating the government's response to the coronavirus pandemic, which obtained messages from the previously unknown email address.

Between 200 and 250 of the emails on Navarro's private account should have been given to the National Archives, prosecutors say.
Navarro, however, did not copy these messages to his official government email account, according to prosecutors, and when the archivist attempted to contact Navarro in order to secure these records, Navarro did not respond.

The lawsuit is a bold and unusual enforcement move by the Justice Department's Federal Programs Branch -- which pursues civil, not criminal, matters -- to strike at alleged sloppy federal records maintenance during the Trump administration.

Public records advocates have long taken issue with lost, never-created or deleted records, but the Justice Department has rarely sued former administration officials over the Presidential Records Act.

"Mr. Navarro has refused to return any Presidential records that he retained absent a grant of immunity for the act of returning such documents," the lawsuit says, adding that Navarro "is wrongfully retaining Presidential records that are the property of the United States, and which constitute part of the permanent historical record of the prior administration."

The lawsuit says that Justice Department officials attempted to negotiate with Navarro and his legal team to get a copy of the emails, but Navarro refused unless he was given "a grant of immunity" in exchange. It is not clear what Navarro wanted immunity from.

The former trade adviser is facing separate contempt of Congress charges after failing to comply with a subpoena by the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021. In July, Navarro rejected a plea offer, claiming that former President Donald Trump told him he was covered by executive privilege.

Navarro's attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
 

RayGravesGhost

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2021
4,598
1,572
113
The same bill that the GOP first approved.. then blocked.. and then approved again finally will become law

No changes to the bill...just a public shaming was needed to get it done


https://www.inquirer.com/politics/p...-pact-act-pat-toomey-objections-20220802.html
The Senate passes burn pit bill to help veterans, overcoming Pat Toomey’s objections
The vote ended what had become a national firestorm that drew outrage from veterans and, prominently, comedian Jon Stewart after Toomey stalled the PACT Act over spending concerns

6ow35f.jpg


Overcoming an objection from Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) and rejecting his proposed amendment, the Senate on Tuesday night passed the PACT Act, a bill to drastically expand health care for veterans sickened by burn pits or other exposures to toxic elements.

The 86-11 vote ended what had become a national firestorm that drew outrage from veterans and, prominently, comedian Jon Stewart after Toomey led a push to stall the bill over spending concerns.

Toomey joined 10 other Republicans in opposing final passage of the bill.
The $280 billion measure, which had already passed the U.S. House, now goes to President Joe Biden, who is expected to quickly sign it.

“We’ve been fighting for this for decades, for decades, and I will tell you that the last few days have not been particularly easy for me, but they’ve been even more difficult for the veterans around this nation,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D., Mont.). “This bill puts us on the path to finally paying the costs of war.”

Toomey said he and other Republicans weren’t against the underlying aim of the bill but were trying to stop a potential end-around that he said could open the door to unrelated spending.


“My amendment does not cap any spending, does not reduce veteran spending,” Toomey said on the Senate floor just before the vote. “We prevent a budget gimmick that’s designed to grease the skids for up to $400 billion in totally unrelated spending.”

Democrats said the move could force veterans to come back to Congress for additional spending approvals if future spending exceeds estimates, and said any additional spending that results would still need approval from lawmakers.

“Congress, Congress, Congress has to justify the funds,” Tester said. “It will be reviewed as part of the standing appropriations process.”

Why senators were fighting over the PACT Act​

The bill had appeared to be on a smooth path toward becoming law when the Senate passed it in an 84-14 vote in June. But when the House made minor changes, it required a second Senate vote — and more than two dozen Republicans shifted their position, citing criticism from Toomey, a fiscal conservative who had voted against the measure the first time.

The fight hinged on the bill’s provisions to convert some “discretionary” veterans spending, which must be approved every year, to “mandatory,” which is essentially automatic. The change is aimed at ensuring that the veterans’ care covered by this bill isn’t hung up by annual budget fights. But Republicans say making some existing spending mandatory would leave behind a chunk of spending authority that could then be freed for other causes.

Toomey, who has the ear of many of his GOP colleagues when it comes to fiscal issues, worked to peel away Republicans who initially voted for the bill.

The dispute became a national controversy, driven in large part by Stewart’s scathing social media posts. After Toomey’s amendment failed, most Republicans resumed their support for the overall bill.

Fetterman and Oz both support the burn pit bill​

Both the Republican and Democratic candidates running to replace Toomey, who is retiring, said they support the bill.

“If the Senate doesn’t care about our veterans enough to provide basic health care for our most vulnerable veterans, then why are they even in this business to begin with?” asked a statement from Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic Senate nominee. “Send me to D.C., and I promise to never use the people who served our country as bargaining chips for political gain.”

GOP nominee Mehmet Oz said he also supports the bill.

“Dr. Mehmet Oz supports the PACT Act and he believes the Senate should act quickly to support our veterans,” said Oz spokesperson Brittany Yanick. “These veterans served our country and those who are sick deserve the best health care possible.”
 

ghost_of_ukalum1988

Swamp Thing
Jan 7, 2022
959
2,117
93
54
https://www.businessinsider.com/jan...ubpoena-alex-jones-emails-texts-report-2022-8
The Jan. 6 committee plans to subpoena Alex Jones' emails and texts after his own lawyers accidentally revealed them
Sonam Sheth and Natalie Musumeci 16 hours ago


6ovw6r.jpg


  • The Jan. 6 committee plans to subpoena Alex Jones' texts and emails, Rolling Stone reported.
  • The news comes after it surfaced that Jones' own lawyers accidentally turned them over to opposing counsel in an ongoing defamation trial against him.
  • Jones was visibly stunned when a lawyer for Sandy Hook families told him he had years worth of data from his phone.

The House select committee investigating the Capitol riot plans to subpoena years worth of the right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones' emails and texts, Rolling Stone reported Wednesday.

The development comes after it surfaced that Jones' own attorneys had accidentally turned the messages over to opposing counsel in an ongoing defamation trial against Jones.

Mark Bankston, a lawyer representing families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, revealed the error while cross-examining Jones in court Wednesday.

The previous day, Jones had testified under oath that his team had complied with the discovery process and that there were no text messages on his phone in which he mentioned Sandy Hook.

"Did you know [that] 12 days ago your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone, with every text message you've sent for the past two years?" Bankston said to Jones on Wednesday. "And when informed, [they] did not take any steps to identify it as privileged, or protected in any way?"

Among the evidence Bankston brought up in court was a text message to Jones referencing Sandy Hook which warned the InfoWars host not to claim coronavirus victims were actors.

"That is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have text messages about Sandy Hook," Bankston told Jones as he was on the witness stand testifying in his own defense.

Jones, who looked visibly stunned, replied: "This is your Perry Mason moment."

Rolling Stone, citing a source familiar with the matter and another person briefed on it, reported that the January 6 select committee started discussing how to get the messages within minutes of Bankston's revelation. The panel is now planning to request the data from the plaintiffs' attorneys as part of its ongoing investigation into the Capitol riot, the outlet reported.

Bankston, for his part, was also heard on a hot mic during recess wondering what would happen if the contents of the phone were turned over to federal investigators conducting a criminal investigation of events surrounding the January 6 attack.

"There's going to be months of fallout from this," he was heard saying at one point, later saying. "You know what no one's thought about yet? What happens when that phone goes to law enforcement?"


A spokesperson at the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Jones has already been found liable for defamation by the Texas court and a court in Connecticut for falsely and repeatedly claiming that the Sandy Hook massacre was a "hoax" and that grieving parents and children were actors.

The jury in the trial will determine how much money Jones must pay to Heslin and Lewis, who are seeking $150 million in compensatory damages.
I’m not an Alex Jones fan, but this is epic…..
 
  • Like
Reactions: dezyDeco

Latest posts