Reposted by Meanwhilefl
This is just a relentlessly horrific story.
It’s hard to adequately contextualize the moral desolation of this unfolding in the midst of a midterms against a ruling party helmed by inveterate rapists and rape apologists.
www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/congres...
phoenixnewtimes.com
Congressional candidate is raped while repairing her campaign signs
Embarrassed, she initially didn’t want to report attack. Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office's investigation is ongoing. A Phoenix New Times exclusive.
![CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
In accordance with S.D. Fla. L. R. 88.9(a), counsel for Plaintiffs certify that they have
conferred with all parties relevant to this motion in a good faith effort to resolve the issues
identified in the motion without court intervention. To the extent Local Rule 88.9 addresses parties
against which the underlying criminal case has been dismissed, the positions of the three original
defendants in the above-captioned case are included here.
The United States Government. As described in the foregoing motion, undersigned
counsel attempted on multiple occasions to seek resolution short of court intervention. On August 28, 2026, counsel relayed general concerns related to Volume II disclosures to the government via video conference. Later that same day, the government responded via email to those concerns by
asserting that its "work does not disturb [the] Order." On September 4, 2026, undersigned counsel sent detailed concerns to government counsel via letter correspondence. On September 11, 2026,
having received no substantive response to the concerns raised in the letter correspondence,
undersigned counsel requested "the government's position for why the relief sought is/is not
needed" to include in this filing. On September 17, 2026, the government responded that
"Iplerhaps the best course of action is to simply file whatever relief you and your team deem appropriate. We will answer accordingly." On September 21, upon a request for clarification as to whether the government opposes, objects, or does not object to the relief sought, the government
responded that it "take[s] no position on your filing and will respond accordingly."
Donald J. Trump. On October 1, 2026, counsel for former defendant Donald J. Trump ...](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vrmx2e5gsi23srsy2n7vljvb/bafkreigj64q6nbxp4asx42o5oh46zmn4ivunbo3z5whdy2yjp6ws5zefj4)
![ORDERED that Plaintiff’s [74] Motion to Unseal is GRANTED IN PART. The Clerk of the Court shall unseal in full the [65-2] Delta PowerPoint. Defendants shall submit to Plaintiff and the Court any proposals for narrowly tailored redactions to the [65-1] JLL Plan, accompanied by particularized and substantial written justifications, no later than October 14, 2026. Plaintiff shall file any response to the proposed redactions no later than October 19, 2026. The Court will then review the proposals and rule by separate order.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:353gzbhcjbznfxegvayffqek/bafkreigfpxmpkokcoamisifm756idoe4lh5pai7tk3yrqlpkpsmlurijky)
