Judicial Malfeasance

OSC Legislative Investigation Subjected to Three Simultaneous Dane County Lawsuits (WI)

Established Fact, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, United States, Wisconsin /

Established Fact [Established Fact – Three suits filed] The Wisconsin Legislature’s Office of the Special Counsel (OSC) under Special Counsel Michael Gableman faced three separate, simultaneous lawsuits filed against it in Dane County Circuit Court – a Democratic-leaning jurisdiction. These actions forced the OSC to expend significant investigative resources in defensive litigation rather than investigation. […]

OSC Legislative Investigation Subjected to Three Simultaneous Dane County Lawsuits (WI) Read More »

Coordinated lawfare strategy against DOGE staff (US)

Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Reasonable Inference, United States /

Reasonable Inference Democratic-aligned groups and Democratic officials are actively using investigations and lawsuits to challenge DOGE’s legality, activity, and personnel in an attempt to prevent discovery of illicit transactions pertaining to NGO’s engaged in questionable election practices. Multiple lawsuits have been filed against DOGE by progressive or Democratic‑aligned organizations (e.g., CREW, Democracy Forward, unions, public‑interest

Coordinated lawfare strategy against DOGE staff (US) Read More »

Civil Coercion of Alternate Electors – Forced Political Confessions (WI)

Disputed Fact, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, United States, Wisconsin /

Disputed Fact Activist legal organizations Law Forward and Georgetown University’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) weaponized civil litigation against Wisconsin’s alternate electors and their attorneys, eventually forcing settlements that required defendants to publicly acknowledge Joe Biden’s victory and legally agree not to serve as presidential electors for Donald Trump in any future election.

Civil Coercion of Alternate Electors – Forced Political Confessions (WI) Read More »

Pre-Election Simulation – Documented Planning for Post-Election Legal Retaliation (US)

Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Reasonable Inference, United States /

Reasonable Inference Pre-election simulation exercises conducted by Democratic-aligned political operatives – including Stuart Karaffa, a former U.S. State Department analyst and Democratic Socialists of America activist – explicitly included plans to retaliate against Trump supporters who raised post-election legal challenges. Documented strategies included exclusion from media platforms, future employment blacklisting, and coordinated legal pressure. This

Pre-Election Simulation – Documented Planning for Post-Election Legal Retaliation (US) Read More »

Intimidation and Harassment of Special Counsel Investigative Personnel (WI)

Established Fact, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, United States, Wisconsin /

Established Fact Personnel in the Wisconsin Office of the Special Counsel (OSC), who were formally authorized by the Wisconsin Legislature to investigate the 2020 election, were systematically targeted via ethics complaints, private investigators hired to probe their personal lives, coordinated media attacks, and reputational-destruction campaigns. These tactics were designed to delegitimize the investigation, exhaust investigative

Intimidation and Harassment of Special Counsel Investigative Personnel (WI) Read More »

Dominion Mass Cease-and-Desist Campaign Against Citizen Poll Challengers (US)

Established Fact, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, United States /

Established Fact Dominion Voting Systems, through its retained law firm Clare Locke LLP, transmitted more than 150 cease-and-desist letters nationally – including more than 30 in Michigan – to private citizens who had served as poll challengers and signed sworn affidavits detailing election anomalies observed at the TCF Center and other locations. The letters demanded

Dominion Mass Cease-and-Desist Campaign Against Citizen Poll Challengers (US) Read More »

DOJ Letter Threatening Arizona Senate Audit – Chilling Effect on Legal Counsel (AZ)

Arizona, Featured, Intimidation, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Reasonable Inference, United States, Weaponization of Government /

Reasonable Inference The U.S. Department of Justice, through its Deputy Assistant Attorney General, transmitted a letter to Arizona Senate Majority Leader Karen Fann explicitly attempting to halt the Arizona Senate’s legislatively authorized forensic audit of Maricopa County election systems. This federal intrusion into a state legislative oversight function – using DOJ letterhead and implying federal

DOJ Letter Threatening Arizona Senate Audit – Chilling Effect on Legal Counsel (AZ) Read More »

Politically-Biased Pre-Election Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rule Changes – Election Rule Modifications Made Without Legislative Authorization (PA)

Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Pennsylvania, Reasonable Inference, United States /

Reasonable Inference [Reasonable Inference – Appearance of impartiality concern] The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a series of 2020 pre-election orders, extended mail ballot receipt deadlines (to November 6 for ballots postmarked by November 3), altered ballot-curing procedures, and modified signature-verification requirements – changes that were made by judicial order rather than by the legislature, which

Politically-Biased Pre-Election Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rule Changes – Election Rule Modifications Made Without Legislative Authorization (PA) Read More »

Pre-Election Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rule Changes – Election Rule Modifications Made Without Legislative Authorization (PA)

Established Fact, Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Pennsylvania, United States /

Established Fact [Established Fact – Orders were issued; legislative authority was not invoked] The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a series of 2020 pre-election orders, extended mail ballot receipt deadlines (to November 6 for ballots postmarked by November 3), altered ballot-curing procedures, and modified signature-verification requirements – changes that were made by judicial order rather than

Pre-Election Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rule Changes – Election Rule Modifications Made Without Legislative Authorization (PA) Read More »

Dominion Cease-and-Desist Campaign – Systemic Chilling of Election Integrity Speech and Litigation (US)

Judicial Malfeasance, Lawfare, Reasonable Inference, United States /

Reasonable Inference The law firm Clare Locke, LLP, transmitted more than 150 cease-and-desist letters nationally on behalf of Dominion Voting Systems, including more than 30 to Michigan citizens, targeting private individuals who had publicly cited evidence of election irregularities involving Dominion systems. It is reasonable to infer that this campaign had a chilling effect upon

Dominion Cease-and-Desist Campaign – Systemic Chilling of Election Integrity Speech and Litigation (US) Read More »