In September 2022, The Gateway Pundit reported on the relentless scrutiny from the Mockingbird Media regarding the Coffee County “breach” of election machines after the 2020 General Election and Senate run-off. It was a chilling lesson in narrative control: dubious-looking still frame photos of two individuals, separately, and very-publicly, walking into the Coffee Co. election office. The CCTV stills resemble often-seen images of criminals sneaking around the back of a building and entering through a backdoor. Or sliding merchandise into their coat pocket at a gas station before walking out. It was just missing the “Do you recognize this person? Call CRIMESTOPPERS” caption across the bottom of the photos.
Doug Logan and Jeff Lenberg, the two tech and cybersecurity experts photographed, may have double-tapped their key fob to provoke an attention-drawing “honk honk”, confirming the car was locked, but of course, there is no video. Only still frames complete with the “breachers” carrying snack,s, energy drinks and smiling at someone at the front door holding it open. More photos followed showing them and other individuals in the common area of the election office in broad daylight, seemingly during business hours. Gasp.
However, a big part of that story was ignored: they were invited by the individual with lawful authority to do so: the election supervisor.
In September 2022, I asked voting integrity activist Marilyn Marks, of the long-running, oft-cited Curling v Raffensperger case, what the basis of her “stolen” claim on Twitter was and if she could reference a specific statute that was violated. The original September 17, 2022 tweet pictured below.
“Multiple provisions of SEB Rule 183-1-12-.05 require that only [a] small list of specific officials have access to the server room. I’m sure that there are also provisions on voting machine tampering that I [have] not even bothered to look up.”
It seems that is something one should look up before making potentially defamatory accusations using words like “stolen”. While the referenced rule doesn’t mention specifics regarding “tampering” with machines, SEB Rule 183-1-12-.05 does outline who has “lock and key” access:
“The room in which the election management system is located shall be locked at all times when the system is not directly under the supervision of the election superintendent or his or her designee. Lock and key access to the room where the election management system is located shall be limited to the county election superintendent; the election supervisor, if any…”
There is neither known evidence nor accusations that either Lenberg or Logan accessed the system without the supervision of Misty Hampton, the county’s election supervisor. The SEB Rule does not explicitly forbid access. It only states that the system shall be locked when not directly under the supervision of the election superintendent. Lenberg has claimed that they did not ever physically touch the machine, but rather guided Hampton as to how to conduct the testing of the system.
After a series of disastrous elections with persistent issues reported to deaf ears and idle hands at the Georgia Secretary of States Office and facing not only a litigation-hold, but also concerns regarding how a Dominion technician was able to “fix” their machine during the January 5th Senate run-off without ever physically touching the machine, Coffee County officials brought in a professional e-discovery and computer forensics firm, Sullivan and Strickler, to take a forensic image the county’s voting system.
DA Fani Willis’s Brady Violation?
In addition to the litigation hold, which is a legal obligation to preserve evidence, attorneys claimed during their hearing that they believe there is evidence suggesting that making a forensic image of the machine was “authorized.”
An attorney representing Sidney Powell, who has also been indicted in the Donald Trump “RICO” case brought by District Attorney Fani Willis, argued before the court last week Willis’s office has not complied with a “very, very pointed” Brady request:
“Shortly after I got into this case, I sent a very detailed Brady request to the government. Those Brady obligations…are independent of their discovery obligations as it relates to this hard drive. They have a due-process obligation to turn over to me favorable information. And I didn’t send them some blanket request saying “give me everything under the sun”. It was a very, very pointed request on August 30th that addressed two critical issues for Ms. Powell. That is, number one: that she wasn’t behind this incident in Coffee County, which forms the basis of her inclusion in this indictment. And number two: that whatever happened in Coffee County, there is ample evidence out there that it was authorized.”
As was reported originally by The Gateway Pundit in September 2022, in a separate but relevant federal case, Pearson v. Kemp, the Governor of Georgia, the Secretary of State, and members of the State Election Board all argued that “the Secretary of State has no lawful authority over election officials” in a lawsuit seeking an investigation of the Dominion Voting machines in Cobb, Gwinnett, and Cherokee Counties. Plaintiffs responded they could amend the complaint to add the election officials from those counties, “obviating the issue of whether the proper officials had been named.”
This withheld evidence could potentially squash the case as it pertains to the Coffee County “breach”, which, as mentioned, was a drumbeat for the Mockingbird Outlets in their effort to win the court of public opinion on the matter and create a trail of “reliable sources” for any inquisitive minds that seek further explanation regarding the debacle that is DA Fani Willis’s RICO case.
The post Sidney Powell’s Attorney Alleges Brady Violations: DA Fani Willis Withholding Key Evidence appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.