The Democrat who ran for re-election as Michigan’s Attorney General in 2022, far-left Dana Nessel, has been prosecuting her Republican opponent, Matt DePerno, because he tried to investigate voter fraud by getting access to a Dominion Voting machine.
“This is what lawfare looks like: an unconstitutional appointment of a political ally to persecute a political opponent. Illegal funding. All to attack your former opponent,” said Matt DePerno
Michigan’s far-left Attorney General Dana Nessel is currently still prosecuting the 2020 Trump electors, as well as also engaged in, critics say, another outrageous abuse of power to punish her former GOP opponent, Matt DePerno, through what many believe is a blatantly unlawful prosecution.
DePerno, who challenged Nessel in the 2022 election, is currently facing charges stemming from his involvement in the investigation of election equipment in the aftermath of the 2020 election. His investigation was authorized pursuant to a court order in the case of Bailey v Antrim County and Jocelyn Benson. But in legal filings DePerno’s legal team is asking the court to dismiss the charges outright—arguing that Nessel and her office have violated multiple statutes, constitutional provisions, and budgetary laws in orchestrating a political vendetta.
DePerno is specifically charged with “unauthorized access to voting machines.” This stems from the Bailey case where DePerno successfully proved vulnerabilities and susceptibility to election results and equipment being administered remotely and anonymously through an open VPN.
At the core of DePerno’s motion is Nessel’s unprecedented maneuver to hand-pick Muskegon County Prosecutor Dale “DJ” Hilson—a political ally and rumored successor—as “Special Prosecutor” to go after DePerno.
Hilson is the Prosecutor who has repeatedly refused to bring charges against GBI Strategies and the notorious Muskegon Voter Registration Fraud run by the far-left company. Nessel ‘took over’ the investigation from the City of Muskegon, only to quietly terminate and cancel the investigation, lying to the public when she said it had been handed off to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. DJ Hilson, who was also on the 2020 ballot to serve as Muskegon County Prosecutor which he won apparently did not want results of the election reviewed and therefore put the GBI fraud investigation on ice.
According to the motions in the prosecution of DePerno, filed by attorney Michael J. Cronkright, this appointment of Hilson is not only unethical but outright illegal and unconstitutional:
- MCL 49.160, the only statute permitting the appointment of a special prosecutor, only applies when a county prosecutor has a conflict of interest and submits a formal petition, not when the Attorney General has one.
- The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office never declared a conflict and were the proper ones to file a complaint; but they reportedly declined to take up Nessel’s obvious persecution of DePerno.
- Nessel declared her own conflict, then tried to use that same statute to shoehorn in Hilson—a blatant misuse of the law.
- The Prosecuting Attorneys Coordinating Council (PACC), which processed the appointment, has no legal authority to assign special prosecutors under Michigan law. Instead, the only statutory authority given to PACC is to educate county prosecutors on changes in the law.
In documents, it appears that the Prosecuting Attorneys Coordinating Council is coordinating payments to the prosecutors involved in the case. This arrangement is very strange, and prevents any public review over the operations of the prosecutor’s office. The way in which Nessel has appointed the prosecutor for this case is enabling her to set up her own governmental channels to prosecute political cases that is completely under her control; yet at the same time she has publicly stated that she no longer has any interest in the case, an obviously false statement.
DePerno’s motions in the case further allege that the appointment was not only illegal but also came with a potential $500,000 price tag, funded without proper legislative appropriation. In response to Freedom of Information Act requests from the Gateway Pundit, the Michigan Attorney General’s office claims they have spent nothing so far on the prosecution of DePerno other than meals and mileage. No doubt this means that the state is incurring a large invoice which will be paid and processed at the end of the prosecution.
Under Michigan’s Appropriations Act, all government spending must be explicitly authorized by the Legislature. Yet there is no record that the Michigan Department of Attorney General received proper legislative approval to pay for Hilson’s prosecution. Dana Nessel, who claims no further control of the case, is having her office pay for the prosecution; the very same office which acknowledge it was conflicted. But Mr. Hilson is the Muskegon County prosecutor and not authorized to act outside Muskegon County. Yet he has been tasked to enter Oakland County to prosecute a case the Oakland County prosecutor rejected. At the same time, Muskegon County is profiting.
This may amount to an illegal diversion of state funds—a charge that would raise serious questions not just about legal ethics but also criminal misuse of public money.
DePerno’s motion also requests the court dismiss the case because of a violation of MCL 49.158. That section states that the Attorney General is not “permitted to prosecute or aid in the prosecuting any person for an alleged criminal offense where he is engaged or interested in any civil suit of proceeding.” Discovery in the case against DePerno has revealed that during the Bailey case (in which Nessel represented Jocelyn Benson), Nessel’s office contacted DePerno’s expert witnesses and threatened them with criminal prosecution unless they revealed confidential attorney privileged and work product information.
Indeed, during one witness interview Danielle Hagaman-Clark, the Attorney General’s Division Chief, acknowledged that she needed to find a way to file the case in Oakland County rather than Roscommon County. She acknowledged that no grand jury will return an indictment “up there.” She said, “I think she’s a great prosecutor,” referring to then Roscommon County prosecuting attorney Mary A. Beebe; but “I don’t want to be picking a jury of her peers up there on this kind of crap.”
Danielle Hagaman-Clark then stated that they better make up a crime “you know even if it’s conspiracy to you know commit a legal act in an illegal manner.” For that reason, she stated they need to “charge them all with some kind of conspiracy charge down here [in Oakland County]. I like that idea much better than trying to individually pick these guys off up in Roscommon.”
For that reason, they needed a back up plan when the Oakland County prosecutor declined to prosecutor. Plan B was to illegally bring in Dana Nessel’s trusted friend – who had already killed the GBI investigation – to prosecute out of his jurisdiction, presumably with the promise to endorse him for Attorney General if he can bring home a conviction.
Further, DePerno pointed out a recorded statement made by Det/Sgt David Geyer during the investigation in which he acknowledged his office was being played to obstruct justice. Det/Sgt. Geyer stated:
“Oh, there’s no doubt about it. Well, they just dumped the entire voting investigation on me because all of a sudden, after six months there is a conflict of interest, ya know. Um, so, I mean, I’m not, er . . . my investigation is probably not going anywhere because . . . you know what I realize, I got thrown into the middle of a political absolute shitstorm of an investigation. Okay? Absolutely. Do I think there was voter fraud? I do. Do I think it had anything to do with the ballot boxes? Absolutely not. Do I think it had to do with mail-in voting and absentee ballots and ballot harvesting? Absolutely 100%.”
DJ Hilson is currently trying to suppress these statements made by Danielle Hagaman-Clark and Det/Sgt. Geyer.
Political Lawfare in Action
“This is complete corruption,” DePerno said during a recent call. “What they are doing here is not about justice—it’s about punishment. It’s lawfare.”
His legal team has called on the Michigan State Legislature to intervene, demanding subpoenas for:
- Communications between Nessel and Hilson,
- Records of promises or inducements made to Hilson,
- Budgetary records that show how this prosecution was funded.
DePerno has requested all emails from Nessel—including from her unofficial Gmail accounts. Apparently, Dana Nessel’s entire office copies emails to themselves through Gmail accounts and then by deleting the official email, can deny FOIA requests because the records no longer exist. DePerno warned the AG’s office that he does not expect them to “lawfully comply,” prompting him to cc the House Committees on Judiciary and General Government.
The 44th District Court in Oakland County has denied one of DePerno’s initial six motions to dismiss, but an appeal to the Oakland County Circuit Court is underway. DePerno said he also plans to file further motions as he continues to find exculpatory evidence not turned over during discovery, perjured testimony of prosecution witnesses, and willful ethical violations of the prosecutors. As the legal battle escalates, the case is shaping up as a constitutional test of executive overreach—and a glaring example of political lawfare deployed against conservatives like Matthew DePerno, the 2020 Trump electors, and other conservatives.
Nessel has been caught covering up the Muskegon fraud since before the 2020 election, and she was also caught threatening journalists from reporting on election fraud prior to the 2020 election.
The post “Complete Corruption”: Michigan’s Far-Left Atty General Dana Nessel Accused of Illegal Prosecution Against her 2022 GOP Opponent Matt DePerno, Criminal Violations of FOIA appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.