Summary posts to catch up a bit...
A press conference held this morning provided a first glimpse of where the Trump teams legal efforts are going, and provided quite a bit of insight into the the structure of the frauds practiced... I’ll come back to that after looking first at Michigan, first, and then Georgia...
Michigan:
GOP Canvassers in Michigan Speak Out After Being Harasssed and Threatened
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zbu2jFQloI
Michigan SOS: MI Republicans To Rescind Their Certification Of Votes | Katy Tur | MSNBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCz7J61dbdc
Michign’s Secretary of State claims “no legal avenue” to overturn a corrupt result in Wayne County? That’s obviously wrong, both as a matter of process, first?
Also an issue or two in law... the existence of coercion is prima facie reason to overturn any such findings. Not at issue whether they can legally rescind a proper result, but that a coerced result is in itself not legal, nor a proper result.
It is the duty of the Sec. of State, among others, to ensure the result is properly obtained, and is not a product of coercion. So, begin with the obligation the Sec. of State has to ensure that the process that occurs is compliant with the law and delivers a proper result ? That’s clearly not happening in Michigan now, at all, in process or result.
Chapter LXX
PUBLIC OFFICES AND OFFICERS
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(5hpeyse5eoqah3spi2culc5a))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-328-1931-LXX
750.483a Prohibited acts; penalties; “retaliate,”“official proceeding,” and “threaten or intimidate” defined.
(5) A person shall not do any of the following:
(b) Offer evidence at an official proceeding that he or she recklessly disregards as false.
Michigan law defines “coercion” as others might... and makes it a felony to engage in wrongful behavior to influence public process under Section 750, as 750-122:
Prohibited acts; witnesses; threat or intimidation; affirmative defense; violation as felony; penalties; applicability of section; definitions.
Interesting that Michigan imposes an affirmative requirement to disclose, making it a crime to conceal, awareness of treason against the state.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(5hpeyse5eoqah3spi2culc5a))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-750-545
Testimony of those present suggests an apparent violation of the Michigan law regarding records, which they testify were provided only orally. The legislators should demand they be provided with direct copies of the information so provided, with the failure to provide it being a crime.
tx
Michgan’s state board of canvassers is supposed to meet on Monday.
“this vote should not be certified and the State Board of Canvassers should canvass for an additional period”
They’ll have to take action to prevent a fraudulent result being validated... proper process requiring a full hearing and resolution of the disputed county certifications at the next level, and fulfilling the obligations made to conduct a full audit of the areas of concern, all of which must occur before allowing process to proceed.
Obstructing that... ? See my post prior.