official Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

Georgia judge shuts down pro-Trump election official lawsuit

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 02:48:11 +0000

Inset: Ian McKellen as Gandalf the Grey in Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (YouTube/TheLotrTV/New Line Cinema). Background: Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney speaks at the Fulton County courthouse, Tuesday, July 11, 2023, in Atlanta (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson).

A Georgia judge on Monday put to rest long-simmering concerns that powerful allies of Donald Trump might wreak havoc on the 2024 presidential contest by refusing to certify official election results.

And he seems to have used a well-known fantasy character to do it.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney ruled that county election officials exercise a “mandatory” role when it comes to vote certifications and that “no election superintendent (or member of a board of elections and registration) may refuse to certify or abstain from certifying election results under any circumstance.”

In the order clarifying the rules Peach State election board officials must follow, the judge appears to have used a reference to the fantasy novel series “The Lord of the Rings” by author J.R.R. Tolkien.

The underlying lawsuit was filed by Julie Adams, a Republican who joined the Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections member in February. She sought various forms of relief from the court — chiefly that her certification duties were “discretionary, not ministerial in nature.” Secondarily, she also sought “full access” to certain “Election Materials” controlled by the director of the board.

In reverse order, the request for access was granted, while the request for declaratory relief was denied.

“Much of what [elections officials] do is left to their broad, reasoned discretion,” the judge mused. “But not everything — some things an election superintendent must do, either in a certain way or by a certain time, with no discretion to do otherwise. Certification is one of those things.”

Under the relevant section of Georgia law, election officials are instructed that they “shall” certify election results “not later than 5:00 P.M. on the Monday following the date on which such election was held.”

McBurney reinforces the point repeatedly by pointing out that “nothing in” Georgia law, anywhere in the statute, “nor in any case from any appellate court of this State that suggests, hints, indicates, or directs that the plain statutory language” in the relevant subsection “means anything other than precisely what it says: the superintendent must certify and must do so by a time certain.”

The judge goes on at length [emphasis in original]:

After the close of the polls on the day of an election, the superintendent “shall … publicly commence the computation and canvassing of the returns.” The superintendent has the discretion to do this canvassing where she wishes and largely how she wishes (with staff, divided by precinct, etc.) but do it she must — and when she is done she “shall tabulate the figures for the entire county or municipality and sign, announce, and attest the same.”

An even longer discussion about the meaning of the word “shall” in legal discourse is contained in a lengthy footnote.

That’s where the reference to the fantasy series comes in.

In that footnote, McBurney aims to make a distinction between the common, or non-legal, definition of “shall” and the often-different meaning of “shall” where legal definitions are concerned.

The judge says that in the common parlance, the word “connotes instruction or command” as in: “You shall not pass.”

In our contemporary cultural vocabulary, this appears to be a reference to lines uttered by the character Gandalf the Grey.

The full line uttered is:

You cannot pass! I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn! Go back to the Shadow. You shall not pass!

The phrase is well-known to those who have seen Peter Jackson’s 2001 film, “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring.” In the film, the wizard character says the operative phrase to taunt a monster named Balrog in the Mines of Moria — which ultimately allows his comrades to escape and continue their hero’s journey.

The source material, however, the book of the same name, only contains the phrase: “You cannot pass.”

Notably, the phrase is also well-known to readers of history.

During World War I, the French armed forces used an iteration of the phrase to denote a determination not to allow an enemy to advance. The phrase was later used in propaganda posters. Decades later, another iteration was used by Spanish Republican and communist forces as an anti-fascist rallying cry during the Spanish Civil War.

In the Georgia election case, the judge appears to be relying on Gandalf’s version — in order to make the point that the common meaning of the word “shall” is more limited than the sometimes capacious meaning of the word when used by lawyers and judges.

But in this case, the judge says, “shall” is in line with common use.

While ruling against Adams’ foremost request, the judge’s order offers some understanding of her position — even hailing the lawsuit as important for other, similarly-situated officials going forward.

“Plaintiff’s demand for a declaration must be met so that she, her colleagues on the FCBRE, and other superintendents around the State understand the scope of their authority when called upon to certify election results,” McBurney observes.

Still, the judge says, the basic presumption behind the lawsuit — that an election official can refuse to certify voting results they find to be incorrect or suspect — is entirely off-base.

“[I]f election superintendents were, as Plaintiff urges, free to play investigator, prosecutor, jury, and judge and so — because of a unilateral determination of error or fraud — refuse to certify election results, Georgia voters would be silenced,” the order concludes. “Our Constitution and our Election Code do not allow for that to happen.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Georgia judge shuts down pro-Trump election official lawsuit appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Creative Legal Fundings company was ‘neither creative nor legal,’ SEC official alleges

homesafetytechpros — Sat, 14 Sep 2024 19:23:23 +0000

Criminal Justice

Creative Legal Fundings company was ‘neither creative nor legal,’ SEC official alleges

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 5, 2024, 9:08 am CDT

A California woman who created a company ostensibly to loan money to personal-injury attorneys is accused of spending millions of dollars in investor funds to support her “lavish lifestyle.” (Image from Shutterstock)

A California woman who created a company ostensibly to loan money to personal-injury attorneys is accused of spending millions of dollars in investor funds to support her “lavish lifestyle.”

Maria Dickerson, 47, of Sacramento, California, who is also known as Dulce Pino, is facing federal criminal charges and a civil lawsuit by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, according to Sept. 3 press releases here and here.

Reuters, ABS-CBN News and KGTV are among the publications with coverage.

ABS-CBN News described Dickerson as a “Filipino beauty queen.” She allegedly ran her company, Creative Legal Fundings, in the manner of a Ponzi scheme, paying guaranteed returns to early investors with money from later investors, according to the SEC suit.

The company did not lend money to lawyers and did not make other investments, the suit says.

“As alleged, Creative Legal Fundings’ operations were neither creative nor legal,” said Monique C. Winkler, director of the SEC’s San Francisco regional office, in the press release. “This was nothing more than fraud perpetrated against retail investors, many of whom were members of the Filipino American community.”

The Aug. 29 federal indictment charges Dickerson with 24 counts of wire fraud, one count of securities fraud and seven counts of money laundering. More than 140 people invested more than $10 million in the company, more than $4 million of which was lost during the course of the scheme, according to the indictment.

The alleged scheme lasted from about December 2020 through September 2023, the indictment says. The SEC suit focuses on March 2021 through May 2023. During that period, the SEC says, Dickerson sold interest in her company to more than 130 investors who paid $7 million.

She used at least $2.5 million for her personal benefit, according to the SEC.

Dickerson’s spending was apparent in her social media photographs, which showed her traveling on private jets, participating in adult pageants and sporting luxury goods, according to the Aug. 29 indictment. She is also accused of spending investor money on real estate, luxury vacations, home furnishings, appliances and “extensive gambling.”

When Dickerson was unable to raise new investor funds quickly enough, she shut down Creative Legal Fundings and opened a new company called the Ubiquity Group, the SEC suit says.

“Her scheme, however, remained the same,” according to the suit.

Mark Reichel, Dickerson’s lawyer, told ABS-CBN that his client started a “creative and honest plan to form a beneficial investment fund,” but it grew at an unmanageable speed. Many early investors solicited funds from others while making promises, often without Dickerson’s awareness, he said.

“Many investors made extreme returns on their investments and then refused to share their exorbitant returns with those they had brought in,” Reichel said. Dickerson was “trying to liquidate assets to make everyone whole when this arrest occurred.”

Source link

The post Creative Legal Fundings company was ‘neither creative nor legal,’ SEC official alleges appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Former DOJ official who alleged election fraud violated at least one ethics rule, ethics committee says

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 09 Apr 2024 14:27:58 +0000

Ethics

Former DOJ official who alleged election fraud violated at least one ethics rule, ethics committee says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 5, 2024, 9:14 am CDT

Jeffrey Clark, then-assistant attorney general for the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, speaks during a news conference in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 14, 2020. (Photo by Susan Walsh/The Associated Press)

Former U.S. Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark violated at least one ethics rule in connection with his false claims of election fraud during the 2020 presidential election, according to a preliminary finding announced Thursday by an ethics hearing committee.

The preliminary finding is not binding, according to the three-person committee of the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility. It will prepare a report and recommendation that will be forwarded to the board.

Law360, Reuters and Politico have coverage.

The ethics charges against Clark allege that he tried to engage in conduct involving dishonesty by trying to send a letter to Georgia officials with false statements about election fraud, and that he tried to engage in conduct that would seriously interfere with the administration of justice.

The draft letter claimed that the DOJ had “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states, including the state of Georgia.”

Clark, who was the acting chief of the DOJ’s Civil Division, had asked other officials to sign the letter, but they refused.

During an ethics hearing that included six days of testimony, Clark’s lawyer argued that his client was being accused of a “thought crime.” There was an internal debate, and the letter was never sent, said lawyer Harry W. MacDougald.

According to Politico, the preliminary finding “jump-starts a process that could lead to the suspension or even permanent revocation of Clark’s license to practice law, even as he’s considered a candidate for a senior position in a second Trump administration.”

Source link

The post Former DOJ official who alleged election fraud violated at least one ethics rule, ethics committee says appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Is ex-DOJ official facing ethics trial for ‘thought crime’? His election-fraud letter was based on sincerely held belief, lawyer says

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 03 Apr 2024 16:42:24 +0000

Ethics

Is ex-DOJ official facing ethics trial for ‘thought crime’? His election-fraud letter was based on sincerely held belief, lawyer says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 27, 2024, 10:01 am CDT

A former Department of Justice official accused of drafting a letter with false allegations of election fraud that he hoped to send to Georgia officials did not violate ethics rules, his lawyer said at a disciplinary hearing Tuesday.

Jeffrey Clark, who was the acting chief of the DOJ’s Civil Division, is facing ethics charges for “”what amounts to a thought crime,” Clark’s lawyer, Harry W. MacDougald, said in an opening statement Tuesday.

Law360 reported the remark. The Washington Post, Legal Ethics Roundup, Law.com and Reuters are among the other publications with hearing coverage.

Clark had asked other department officials to sign the letter, but they refused, according to the charges by the District of Columbia Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Clark then told those officials that former President Donald Trump had offered him the job of acting U.S. attorney general, and he was thinking of accepting it if the letter was not sent.

The two officials, then-Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen and then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, told Trump that he should expect all the assistant attorneys general to resign if Clark became the acting attorney general. Clark did not get the job.

Clark’s draft letter claimed that the DOJ had “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states, including the state of Georgia.”

Hamilton P. “Phil” Fox III, the lead prosecuting attorney in the discipline case, said Tuesday during the hearing Clark engaged in “coercive tactics to get this letter sent” and what he was trying to do “was essentially a coup at the Department of Justice,” according to Law360.

MacDougald emphasized that the letter was never sent, the Washington Post reports.

“This was an internal debate and an internal disagreement. The letter was never released by Mr. Clark or by the president,” he said. “Mr. Clark did nothing wrong in having a different opinion from his Justice superiors, especially when it was sincerely held, as the evidence will show.”

Clark is also facing criminal charges in the Georgia election-interference case against Trump.

The ethics charges allege that Clark tried to engage in conduct involving dishonesty by trying to send the letter with false statements, and that Clark tried to engage in conduct that would seriously interfere with the administration of justice.

The hearing, which is streaming live on YouTube, is happening before a committee of the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility, which will make a recommendation to the full board if it finds ethics violations, Reuters explains. After action by the full board, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals has the final say on discipline.

Source link

The post Is ex-DOJ official facing ethics trial for ‘thought crime’? His election-fraud letter was based on sincerely held belief, lawyer says appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.