100 Percent Fed Up Exclusive – Hero and American treasure, Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf and the Barry County Sheriff’s Office is suing MI Attorney General Dana Nessel, MI Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Director of MI Bureau of Elections Jonathan Brater, the MI State Police, MI State Police Trooper Bryan Fuller and MI State Police Trooper David Geyer in their official and individual capacity.
Michigan Election Code specifically states that it is the duty of any police, sheriff or other peace officer, present and having knowledge of any violation of any of the provisions of this act to forthwith institute criminal proceedings for the punishment of such offender.”
MI Election law also states that a MI Sheriff is required to investigate any alleged or suspected illegal or fraudulent voter registration activity:
If a township or city clerk has knowledge that there is a probable illegal or fraudulent registration in the township or city, or in any ward or precinct of the township or city, the clerk has the power and duty to make a full investigation of the facts concerning the registration and to ascertain whether any name has been illegally or fraudulently registered. A township or city clerk is authorized and empowered to call upon the police department of the city or the sheriff of the county in which the city is located, or both, to assist in making the investigation, and the police department and the sheriff are required to render assistance if the clerk makes a request for assistance, and to furnish the clerk at his or her request with all available assistance in making the investigation.
Sheriff Dar Leaf’s lawsuit addresses the lawless and obstructive actions of Attorney General Dana Nessel, who regularly mocks and threatens her political opponents, together with Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who’s blocked the efforts of citizens and law enforcement to investigate voter fraud and voter irregularities related to the 2020 election.
Benson has also been caught in numerous lies related to the election and like her fellow Democrat activist attorney general, she has mocked and threatened her political opponents while preventing Sheriff Dar to perform his duties and responsibilities as an elected official.
The Barry County Sheriff is also suing MI Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s henchman, Jonathan Brater.
Jonathan Brater is Michigan’s Director of Elections, a member of the executive branch of state government, and an employee of the state. As director of elections, Mr. Brater is “vested with the powers and shall perform the duties of the secretary of state under his or her supervision, with respect to the supervision and administration of the election laws.”
Defendant Brater has no law enforcement or executive authority to encroach upon law enforcement functions of a constitutional sheriff.
From the lawsuit, filed by Detroit Attorney Stefanie Lambert:
This lawsuit represents a flagrant violation of constitutional and statutory law on the part of Defendants, both named and unnamed, who took it upon themselves to bully, harass, intimidate, threaten, and ultimately to unconstitutionally usurp, and/or cause to be usurped and replaced, and/or to invade and encroach upon the powers and duties of Plaintiff as the Constitutional Sheriff of Barry County, in the performance of his constitutional and common-law duties, and in adhering to his oath of office by choosing to honor and uphold state and federal laws by exercising his constitutional and statutory duties to investigate alleged election fraud and crime.
The lawsuit states that Attorney General Nessel, who has no accountability to the Barry County Electorate, and even less authority to encroach upon the law enforcement functions of a constitutional sheriff, has committed a flagrant violation of constitutional and statutory laws by usurping the power of Sheriff Dar Leaf by obstructing, impeding, prejudging the ability of a duly elected official to conduct a criminal investigation into allegations of criminal acts related to the 2020 election and voting.
- Defendants, without authority, encroached upon Sheriff Dar Leaf’s duties by obstructing and interfering with his lawful investigation, obstructing justice in the process, and covering up evidence and crimes, including those that they themselves were involved in and conspired with others to commit.
- Defendants usurped and otherwise obstructed an elected constitutional officer and prevented him from performing his constitutional, statutory, and common-law duties as County Sheriff in accordance with the Michigan Constitution, and state and federal laws.
- Defendants, without legitimate authority, also unconstitutionally and unlawfully confiscated property, documents, and information (including voting machines with its attendant software, programs, and data), all of which was required to be sealed, preserved, protected, and retained by federal law.
- Defendants acted in concert or individually to transfer and reallocate the duties and powers of the Plaintiff, usurping his power and removing from him or otherwise preventing his ability to perform his constitutional and statutory duties.
- Defendants acts included but are not limited to threatening, harassing, and interfering with witnesses, local government officials (including township clerks), deputies, agents, and experts, and interfering with, obstructing, and otherwise defiling investigative works and the results of such works; confiscating and/or destroying confidential files and information pertaining to an ongoing investigation; unconstitutionally and unlawfully (and without the proper procedure) usurping Plaintiff’s law enforcement functions and authorities, which are exclusively reserved to him under Michigan common law and statutory law; stepping in to quell an ongoing legitimate investigation, confiscating confidential files and documents related thereto; obstructing, harassing, and/or threatening his deputies and agents conducting the law enforcement function on his behalf as they are allowed to do exclusively and with immunity under Michigan law, confiscating voting equipment and information and data that is required by federal law to be protected and preserved.
On or about November 3, 2020, Plaintiff Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf received information that election fraud and voting machine fraud was taking place in Barry County, Michigan, before, during, and after the November 2020 election.
Pursuant to his exclusive common-law and statutory duties to investigate and ferret out criminal activity occurring within his county, Sheriff Leaf opened an investigation.
As with all such law enforcement investigations, confidentiality, protections and investigatory privileges are sacrosanct and necessary to properly perform the law enforcement function because leaks and disclosures that erode these principles reduce the likelihood that true justice and truth will prevail. As one court has noted, generally, “the law enforcement privilege plays a critical role in litigation involving the government. The purpose of the privilege… is to prevent disclosure of law enforcement techniques and procedures, to preserve the confidentiality of sources, to protect witness and law enforcement personnel, to safeguard the privacy of individuals involved in an investigation, and otherwise to prevent interference with an investigation.”
Under MCL 168.941, “It is hereby made the duty of any police, sheriff or other peace officer, present and having knowledge of any violation of any of the provisions of this act, to forthwith institute criminal proceedings for the punishment of such offender.”
Defendant Nessel has shown her inherent bias against any fraud claims or suspected criminal acts committed in relation to the investigation of rampant voter fraud that occurred during the November 2020 election, including the suspected hacking and manipulation of voting machines.
Even before the November 2020 election was over, Defendant Nessel “predicted” that counting of ballots would not stop and go on much longer than election day.
- Defendant Nessel even attacked Monica Palmer for not wanting to certify the 2020 election.
- In light of these admitted biases and her mockery and disdain for Plaintiff, and all others who point out the now demonstrated problems with voter fraud, illegal ballot harvesting and trafficking, and voting machine hacking, Defendant Nessel is conflicted out and unable to ethically or legally overview, direct, authorize, or otherwise involve herself in any ostensible “investigation” of voter fraud and alleged criminal activity that may have occurred in Barry County, and in the process of that she is nonetheless forbidden from obstructing, interfering with, encroaching upon, or otherwise usurping the exclusive constitutional duties of Plaintiff County Sheriff.
Nessel preemptively threatened anyone who questioned the results of the election. In a series of two tweets, the lawless MI AG used her power as Michigan’s top law enforcement officer to warn anyone from questioning the election results saying, “Any effort to discount over half of all votes in our state is nothing short of a coup.” She then threatened the citizens she represents, “The Michigan Department of Attorney General will be ready to counter such an effort.”
Defendant / Respondent Jocelyn Benson SOS (SOS Benson), is the Secretary of State for the State of Michigan and a member of the executive branch of state government.
Secretary Benson is responsible for assuring Michigan’s local election officials conduct elections in a fair, just, and lawful manner.
Beyond this, Secretary Benson, or any other Defendant or party, has no law enforcement or executive authority to encroach upon law enforcement functions of a constitutional sheriff.
- Defendant Benson has shown her inherent bias against any fraud claims or suspected criminal acts committed in relation to the investigation of rampant voter fraud that occurred during the November 2020 election, including the suspected hacking and manipulation of voting machines (finally acknowledged by the media and as demonstrated in multiple unbiased and impartial expert analyses).
- Defendant Benson has also shown her mockery and disdain for Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf in her multiple “Twitter” posts and on other social media and biased “news” articles.
In light of these admitted biases and her mockery and disdain for Plaintiff and all others who point out the now demonstrated problems with voter fraud, illegal ballot harvesting, and trafficking, and voting machine hacking, Defendant Benson is conflicted and unable to ethically or legally overview, direct, authorize, or otherwise involve herself in any ostensible “investigation” of voter fraud and alleged criminal activity that may have occurred in Barry County, and in the process of that, she is nonetheless forbidden from obstructing, interfering with, encroaching upon, or otherwise usurping the exclusive constitutional duties of Plaintiff County Sheriff.
The lawsuit includes Michigan State Police:
Michigan State Police (MSP), is an unelected and unaccountable strong arm of the state, a partisan and politically controlled, run and operated “state police” force in every sense of the term, acts as a law enforcement branch for and on behalf of the executive branch of the state government, including Defendants AG Nessel, SOS Benson, Director Brater, and at all times relevant to the facts and circumstances described in this complaint, acted at the direction of or in collaboration with any and all of the other Defendants, named or unnamed, and who were and remain an arm of the executive branch of government.
Defendant MSP and Individual Trooper Defendants (to be named) have no law enforcement or executive authority to encroach upon law enforcement functions of a constitutional sheriff.
The lawsuit, filed on June 3, 2022, can be viewed here:
BARRY CO., MI SHERIFF DAR L… by 100PercentFedUp
Here is one example of SOS Benson, Jonathan Brater, and the MI State Police working together to reportedly usurp the power of a duly elected clerk:
On May 23, 100 Percent Fed Up reported about Michigan’s lawless Secretary of State Benson, who has yet to pay any price for asking clerks across the state to break the law by telling them to ignore signature matching but was hell-bent on making Adams Twp. Clerk Stephanie Scott pay a steep price for not complying with voting machine updates on her timeline.
The Adams Twp. Clerk became the target of SOS Benson when she refused to allow updates to her voting machine over concerns that election data from the 2020 election that, by law, is supposed to be preserved for 22 months will be compromised or, worse, erased.
In a threatening Oct. 25, 2021 letter from Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office written by Director of Elections Jonathon Braeter with a copy sent to Dana Nessel’s office, the Adams Twp. Clerk was “directed” to “provide immediate access to all election equipment and records, including tabulator, voter assist terminals, absentee ballot applications, ballot envelopes, and polling place materials. They also informed her that her access to the Qualified Voter File would be suspended until further notice and that she would be charged with a misdemeanor if she refused to comply.
On October 29, only four days after receiving the letter from SOS Benson’s office, Sergeant Barkley of the Michigan State Police, apparently acting at the behest of Michigan’s partisan Attorney General Dana Nessel and allegedly at the direction of the dishonest and lawless Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, seized the township’s election tabulator from a locked cabinet in the office of Adams Township’s Clerk, Stephanie Scott.
A “search warrant” was procured seeking a scan unit for a Hart inter civic tabulator used in the November 2020 election and to be used for an upcoming local election being held in the township on November 2.
According to Ms. Scott’s attorney, Stephanie Lambert, the County Treasurer entered the Clerk’s office and unlocked the cabinet to allow Sergeant Barkley to remove the tabulator and other items. Lambert explained, “The treasurer has no authority to go into the Clerk’s office to open the cabinet.”
At 2:52 pm, the Clerk’s attorney received a message from Sergeant Barkley saying he had what he was looking for and that her client did not need to come to unlock the cabinet in her personal office.
Ms. Scott’s attorney asked the state police sergeant whether the Treasurer had opened the cabinet without her client’s permission, which had obviously occurred. She also asked if the sergeant had any questions for her client, to which he replied, “I will come up with a list of questions and get with you in the next few business days.” When asked for a copy of the affidavit, which would have to have been presented to the judge who authorized the search, Sergeant Barkley refused to provide it and said that she would have to obtain it from the court where the warrant and affidavit would be filed. In order to obtain a search warrant, the requesting entity or individual officer has to sign an affidavit to explain the probable cause basis for the search warrant, which must then be reviewed and approved by a judge. In this case, the warrant was presented to and signed by magistrate Megan Stevenson for the 2nd District Court in Hillsdale County.
Stephanie Scott, who was elected to run her township’s elections, has been officially stripped of her election responsibilities and is now facing a recall over her actions.
On May 13, the County Election board approved the language for the recall petition of Stephanie Scott. The recall is based on Jonathan Braden’s letter, which Lambert says is unlawful. Lambert is appealing the recall language that is not accurate or clear and has filed suit against defendant Hillsdale County Clerk Marney Kast, who made the resolution for the petition and for essentially usurping Scott’s authority.
Sheriff Dar Leaf is seeking Temporary Injunctive Relief to:
- prevent Defendants from further usurping and interfering with the performance of his duties and his investigations;
- prevent Defendants from seizing and keeping property and information and data created during, related to, or subject of said investigations, and order Defendants to return all such information;
- prevent Defendants from tampering with or otherwise adulterating the property and evidence that it unlawfully confiscated;
- prevent Defendants from harassing, threatening, seizing, or otherwise interfering with by interviewing and confiscation of their property all deputies and agents lawfully engaged by the Plaintiff to assist him in conducting his investigation;
- prevent Defendants from obstructing justice, interfering with, and/or destroying all investigatory confidences and privileges;
- prevent Defendants from leaking information related to Plaintiff’s investigation to the press and to further refrain from commenting or otherwise alerting the public of the nature of such confidential investigatory information as is protected by law; enter an order pursuant to MCR 3.310, enjoining Defendants from carrying out or otherwise causing to be carried out any and all tampering, deletion, erasing, or adulteration of the data and evidence related to the general election of November 2020 as required by federal law, and order that all evidence related to the investigation that is in their possession be returned to Plaintiff;
- Order Defendants to show cause as to why its proposed actions are authorized by law and are not ultra vires of their constitutional and statutory authority, and thereby in contravention of and directly violative of Plaintiff’s exercise of his constitutional and statutory duties as a constitutional, elected official of a known legal character with certain duties and powers provided by law, and beholden to his electorate;
- Order that a hearing be held on the merits of this Complaint wherein it shall be determined whether the Defendants must honor their respective constitutional, statutory and legal obligations vis-à-vis Plaintiff in his official capacity as a constitutional officer and perform those actions and procedures deemed necessary to bring about compliance by Defendants with state and federal law and to restore to Plaintiff his ability to perform his independent duties and functions; whether Defendants must further refrain from unconstitutionally encroaching upon the Plaintiff’s constitutional office in violation of the doctrine of separation of powers and the exercise of his exclusive powers, and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and equitable under the law.
It’s about time a sheriff in Michigan stood up to Michigan’s top two elected officials whose job it is to serve all of the citizens of the state of Michigan. Instead, they have chosen to ignore their demands to investigate the 2020 election, and, even worse, to obstruct and threaten one of the only duly elected sheriffs in the state of Michigan who is brave enough to investigate the 2020 election.