Witness intimidation in vote fraud allegations?

 John Dietrich:

Dominion Voting Systems is presently going on attack.  Attorneys Thomas Clare and Megan Meier, representing Dominion, sent letters to President Donald Trump's supporters demanding that they cease making false and "defamatory" claims about the company's role in voter fraud.  Their letter to Melissa Carone, dated 22 December 2020, has been posted on the internet.  The letter reveals that Dominion may not be competently represented.  The attorneys claim that Carone was Rudy Giuliani's "star witness" who made outlandish accusations "without a shred of corroborating evidence."  Who designated Melissa Carone a "star witness"?  Giuliani had several witnesses.

The attorneys claim that Carone was "hired through a staffing agency for one day to clean glass on machines and complete other menial tasks."  She was simply a cleaning lady.  John Poulos, Dominion CEO, testified that her role was "really limited to a type one type of technician who provides — she would have been told how to clean the glass read heads or at least she should have been."  Poulos concedes that Carone was a "technician" but still minimized her role.  Wikibious describes her as a "contracted IT worker who was responsible for fixing malfunctioning vote-counting machines at Michigan's TCF Center."

Carone is warned of possible litigation.  "Litigation regarding these issues is imminent."  They present her with a list of demands that would require a full-time staff to meet.  She has to "preserve all documents relating to such claims," including "any and all communications she may have had with Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Jenna Ellis, Rudy Giuliani and any other member of the Trump campaign."  They also demanded "preservation of records for every person who has compensated her — or any entity related to her — for making public statements about Dominion."

The demand for various documents is nearly 400 words long.  They then inform her, "The laws and rules prohibiting destruction of evidence apply to electronically stored information in the same manner that they apply to other evidence."  The laws are spelled out clearly in 18 U.S. Code §1519.  The only problem is that this statute deals with federal litigation.  Clare and Meier have not even begun their court case.  Perhaps they believe that Carone will not be advised by several attorneys that they have no authority.  They are simply trying to intimidate her.

Litigation could be the last thing that Dominion and its Deep State allies would want.  Dominion may have to explain why it was rejected by the state of Texas.  Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick claims that it was rejected three times because it was a "piece of junk" and was "prone to fraud."  Six of the state's experts said the Dominion machines were "error-prone" and did not "meet our standards" and concluded, "Do not buy this software."  They said the software "could change ballots" and not count other ballots.  One example involved an expert who took his cell phone, "hooked it up to a USB port, and was able to download all of the information from that voting machine into [his] cellphone."

...

Carone is repeatedly accused of being intoxicated during her testimony during a Dec. 2 Michigan State House hearing.  She had to be drunk.  How do we know?  She was not sufficiently obsequious when speaking to her betters.  She stated, "I know what I saw, and I signed something saying that if I am wrong, I could go to prison."  This is a powerful statement made by the mother of two children.  Her serious offense, however, occurred when she asked Rep. Johnson, "Did you?"

Carone's basic claim is not directed at Dominion so much as those operating the equipment.  She claims that those feeding ballots into the machines would fail to clear the count when they refed the votes after multiple paper jams.  This led to an overcount of significant size according to Carone.  Her testimony was actually corroborated by another woman who witnessed the same problem.  I thought she was a credible witness and she held up well under cross-examination by legislators who were defending the count.

I suspect that whatever communications she may have had with the lawyers challenging the Dominion count would be any different from her public testimony.

BTW, the corroborating witness had a more calm demeanor, but her testimony did not vary from Carone's in any material respect.  What I find odd is that those defending the count did not call the people operating the equipment who were accused of failing to clear the count after a paper jam leading to the overcount allegations.