Arizona Grand Jury Indicts Donald Trump Allies, 11 Fake Electors

To answer your question, those that commit crimes with guns should take longer to get their RKBA rights back than those who commit crimes without the use of guns, to prove themselves worthy. But, I'm not into absolute deprivation of rights to anyone, unless it's the devil incarnate, himself. I mean, if they are that bad, they shouldn't be let out of jail in the first place.

My broad swipes against guns doesn't kill people.

 

what?

 

They were not presented as alternatives. They were presented as the only and real, true electors. In the hope that Pence would recognize them, rather than the real electors.

As for court cases - two possibilities.
One: trump could have asked for a remedy that if he won, that certain named people would be the real electors from that state. The court would order it. No need to create fake electors.

Two: if time ran out, too bad, so sad. Just like what happened to Gore in 2000. There is a timeline from election to inauguration. If you can’t work within that timeline, you’re out of luck. Constitution rules.

 

Or - if there were security concerns, Trump should have cancelled his speech.

 

Trump did the exact opposite

He complained about the metal detectors keeping people out of the area of his speech.

 

That's the part that no rightist wants to talk about. If they believe that their mango hero was soooooooo concerned about security in DC due to violent people, that he invited, mind you, why didn't that dipshit cancel the event? I guess security in DC really wasn't that important.

 

Why his speech wasn't at the Capitol and security there was not his responsibilty. Pelosi's security and the Mayor assured them and everyone else they had it under control. But do you think anytime extra security is called for, when those HUGE hundreds of thousands of people showing up demonstrations occur they should be cancelled instead of having the extra security?

 

Due to the size of the crowds and the routine employing of additional security when such large crowds are expected. The mayor had already requested 300 NG troops to take over traffic control duties. You think this was the first time NG troops were called on?

 

Yes they were and perposterous for you to claim they were going to be snuck in and no one would notice. The only way Pence could have recognized them would have been through a legal challenge. Trump was not limited to your two choices. And Bush43 electors were challenged during the EC vote counting.


But, as von Spakovsky [ notes, the alternate electors strategy used while legal disputes over Biden’s razor-thin victories in several swing states were pending was not some novel theory. In the disputed 1876 election, in which Southern Democrats were accused of widespread voter fraud, three states offered two sets of electors — one set each for Democrat Samual Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes.

As Reuters notes:

In Southern states, the voting was marred by threats of violence from Democrats who aimed to keep black voters away from the polls. The Democrats also created ballots that carried pictures of famous Republican Abraham Lincoln to try to trick illiterate voters into choosing Tilden.

At the end of the tumultous campaign, competing political camps in three states each sent two different slates of electors – one for Tilden, the other for Hayes – to Congress.

The dueling slates from Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina arrived with varying degrees of authority; the Republican slate from Louisiana supporting Hayes was sent by the state’s governor while the Democratic slate backing Tilden was sent by that party’s gubernatorial candidate.

The election hinged on the disputed states. If their Republican electoral votes were counted, Hayes would be president. If the Democratic slates were counted, Tilden would be elected.

None of the contingent electors was indicted or threatened with years in prison for attempting to protect their candidate in the disputed presidential election.


The same can be said for the 1960 election, when Hawaii’s electors for Richard Nixon, the Republican presidential candidate, and John Kennedy, the Democrat, met on Dec. 19 to “cast their votes for President and Vice President” and certify “their own meeting and votes.” Nixon had won the state by a mere 141 votes and a recount was ongoing.

As The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland wrote last year in a piece headlined, “The Left’s 2020 ‘Fake Electors’ Narrative Is Fake News“:

In casting their electoral ballots for Kennedy, the three Hawaiian Democrats certified they were the “duly and legally qualified and appointed” electors for president and vice president for the state of Hawaii and that they had been “certified (as such) by the Executive.” The Hawaii electors further attested: “We hereby certify that the lists of all the votes of the state of Hawaii given for President, and of all the votes given for Vice President, are contained herein.”

Two of the three Democrat electors were retired federal judges, William Heen and Delbert Metzger, and Heen personally mailed the Democrat electoral votes to Congress on Dec. 20. In fact, the envelope containing the certificates, further attested: “We hereby certify that the lists of all the votes of the state of Hawaii given for president … are contained herein.”

The electors were simply attempting to protect their candidate’s position, even though the initial numbers showed Kennedy lost Hawaii, albeit by just 0.08 percent of the vote.

On Dec. 30, 1960, the judge who had ordered the recount “held that Kennedy had won the election,” Cleveland wrote. The judge, she added, “stressed the importance of the Democrat electors having met on Dec. 19, as prescribed by the Electoral Count Act, to cast their ballots in favor of Kennedy. That step allowed the Hawaii governor to then certify Kennedy as the winner of Hawaii’s three electoral votes and, in turn, Congress to count Hawaii’s electoral votes in favor of Kennedy.”

Von Spakovsky noted that in more recent presidential elections numerous legislators, particularly Democrats, have filed objections to electoral votes. In January 2017, Democrats voiced their disdain for Trump by attempting to object to some states’ Electoral College votes, as NBC News reported at the time. ..."
https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/0...usade-ramps-up-as-2024-election-draws-closer/

The current very liberal PA governor was AG at the time and when they investigated

Shapiro’s office: GOP elector plan not illegal, but misleading

Not illegal, but misleading.

That’s how the office of Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro on Thursday characterized actions by state Republicans who planned to nominate their own electors following the 2020 presidential election in which their candidate lost.

The statement emerged as those plans are coming under increased scrutiny, including the involvement of former U.S. Rep. Lou Barletta — he and Democrat Shapiro are seeking their respective parties’ nominations for governor in this year’s race.
https://www.timesleader.com/news/1538076/shapiros-office-gop-elector-plan-not-illegal-but-misleading

In Wisconsin the State Election board first reject such claims of illegality and then the far left AG agreed and said nothing illegal about alternates recording their votes.

"Last year, when it rejected the complaint the first time, the commission attached a letter from the Wisconsin Department of Justice that said that Republicans who attempted to cast the state’s 10 electoral college votes for Trump did not break any election laws. The state Justice Department concluded that Republicans were legitimately trying to preserve Trump’s legal standing as courts were deciding if he or Biden won the election."
https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-fake-electors-trump-2020-062c7b6638b945f816185bdf1f231195

And then New Mexico

New Mexico attorney general says fake GOP electors can’t be prosecuted, recommends changes

New Mexico’s top prosecutor said Friday that the state’s five Republican electors cannot be prosecuted under the current law for filing election certificates that falsely declared Donald Trump the winner of the 2020 presidential race.
https://apnews.com/article/new-mexico-fake-electors-9ec6f35313c6bbfe8f1ac65e8d5b323c

The intent was the same in ALL the states where alternates recorded their votes AS REQUIRED by law in case any challenge was sustained. NOTHING illegal about it.

 

New Mexico and PA have not indicted the electors because they included on the certificate that their votes were contingent on Trump winning some kind of court case. They did NOT declare themselves the "duly qualified and elected" electors. The other slates of fake electors DID state that. That is what being a FAKE elector is about. Claiming a status of elector that is not true. It is fraud and forgery.

 

Because fake was incorrect, they were alternates for the contengency plans.

Quiant and stupid is not illegal.

I already told you I don't care what McConnell said in the heat of the moment.

You can't argue he conspired with or urged anyone to engage in violence or violate the law and you can't argue he told people multiple times to act peacefully and follow the directions of the police.

It was a stupid plan, they shouldn't have tried. But NOT ILLEGAL.

When you can cease with the false narrative let me know, it only shows your desperation.

 

Your opinion of their credibility at the time is of no matter it is what credibility TRUMP assigned to them and it was rather large. They were TO BE appointed in the event of a successful challenge. See above.

 

OH well throw them all in prison for TWENTY YEARS because they left that wording off their piece of paper...................geeezzzz. The plans were all the same and the intentions all the same. FAKE would have been some plot to somehow secretly remove the certified electors and FAKE everyone out into thinking they were the REAL electors. They would only get the certification from the respective state IF a challenge was successful. That was the ONLY way.

And again, have by some miracle such a challenge had been successful and those recorded votes NOT been taken then NO votes could have been cast.

See above #248


Do you REALLY believe these people had some CRIMINAL intent here?

 

Totally IRRELEVANT Whataboutism...
...which has ZERO to do with the situation in AZ in 2020...
None of those examples were anywhere near what was happening in AZ in 2020...
Those examples cited, did not even qualify as a good try at a "rebuttal" (Just an Epic FAIL on multiple levels)...
Better luck next time...

 

There was a plan to replace the real electors with the fake electors. Fortunately Pence refused to go along with it.


Yes, they had a criminal intent.

They KNEW they were not the electors and yet they signed an official looking document that said they WERE the electors.

There's your intent.

 

Take note of the dates, specifically the safe harbor and Certificates of Ascertainment dates: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11641
Then consider the Trump electors were convened after that date, so there was no court cases/challenges to be prepared for as the time for that was over when the "fake" electors were convened and submitted a fake certificate of ascertainment.

 

Part of the plan was to provide Pence with the list of electors and their votes with the fake electors replacing the official ones. An assistant to Pence refused to take it when one of the White House lawyers texted and said "don't do it or we'll all go to jail".
So yes, part of the plan was for the "fake" electors to replace the actual ones. read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot
Additional reading: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/21/jan-6-panel-trump-overturn-2020-election-00040816

 

Yes they beleived that a LEGAL challenge just ad the orevious I already cited.

 

I know them full well and he had challenges still planned and pending.

 

Ued they knew they were ALTERNATES in case Trump won his challenge

 

Total bromides and platitudes. No rebuttal my facts remain unrefutted.

 

Not according to the emails that we have from Chesbro

 

Forged documents (certs of ascertainment) are illegal. Electors held for purpose of being replaced at the joint session of congress, which was attempted, held them past the litigation contingency plan, which rendered them illegal at that juncture.

The Joint Session of Congress is not the forum for replacing elector slates, or remanding electoral votes back to the states both of which was in the 'plan'. All challenges are supposed to be done via audits and through the courts, all of which were done, and none successful to prove Trump's claim that 'Democrats stole the election.

Contesting votes is allowed during the session, but they are supposed to be resolved in session, there is a two hour allowance for this purpose. Another illegal aspect, there was, as a hail mary attempt, to delay the congress and deny Biden his 270 minimum votes, which would force the VP to throw the vote for Prez to the house, where Repubs knew they had a two state majority in the state delegations, which would have meant Trump would be victorious.

Thank providence Pence saw that that plan was unlawful and refused to comply. Trump's conspiracy led to the delay of congress and the delay was for the attempt to subvert the election, which is illegal, and a disruption of the peaceful transfer of power, which is anti-democratic and dereliction of duty.

As described above, and in more detail, below, it was illegal.

And I don't care what you don't care about. It wasn't in the 'heat of the moment', he gave a thorough, robust, eloquent, thought out, speech, as Did Kevin McCarthy. He has never taken what he said back.

Point not in dispute.

Chesebro pled guilty, several conspirators indicted, Giuliani, Powel & Eastman disbarred. They violated the law, and, as attorneys, they should have known a better.

That's not quite right. He mentioned it ONCE in fleeting, but told them to 'fight' including 'fight like hell to take back your country' some 20 times and Trump, with the help of Giuliani and Mo Brooks, whipped up the mob to a juggernaut of rage.

From where else could that rage come? -- but from Trump's inculcating his followers, at every rally, over and over and over again, that 'Democrats stole the election" a lie which he first began telling it before the first ballot was ever cast, which resulted in the 'stop the steal' mantra which was the driving wind cast by the bellows of ill will blown across America by none other than Donald J Trump.

There is simply no counter argument to this inescapable fact.

So, a teaspoon of goodwill doesn't a truckload of ill will off the hook.

WATCH: Trump used ‘fight’ or ‘fighting’ 20 times in rally speech, Dean says
Trump said 'go peacefully' ONCE.

"Storm the capital'
"Invade the capital'
"Take the capital right now'.
These are the words the crowd were shouting as Trump told them to
'fight like hell' as he whipped them up into a fevered frenzy.

This video is conclusive proof.


You are as wrong as wrong can be and it's high time you admit it.

Not only was it hair brained, aspects of it were seriously illegal.

The only thing I will let you know is that your comment is not accurate.

Donald Trump's actions following the 2020 U.S. presidential election have been subject to significant scrutiny due to allegations that they were part of a broader attempt to overturn the election results. These actions could potentially violate several federal and state laws. Here are some of the key federal laws that might have been violated:

Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371):

This statute makes it a crime to conspire to defraud the United States or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. Allegations that Trump and his associates attempted to interfere with the electoral process or obstruct the counting of votes could fall under this law.

Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241): This law makes it illegal for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any state, territory, commonwealth, possession, or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Efforts to pressure state officials to change election results or to discard ballots could be seen as a violation of this statute.

Obstruction of an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)):

This statute includes provisions against obstructing, influencing, or impeding any official proceeding, or attempting to do so. Given that Congress's certification of the Electoral College results is an official proceeding, any efforts to disrupt this process could potentially be seen as obstructive.

Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503, § 1505):

These sections of the law cover efforts to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice. Depending on the specifics of Trump’s actions, particularly in relation to investigations or other legal processes tied to election procedures, these statutes might apply.

Seditious Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384):

This law makes it a crime for two or more people to conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States. The actions leading up to and including the events of January 6, 2021, when a mob attacked the U.S. Capitol, could potentially be framed under this statute.

State laws could also be implicated, especially those relating to electoral processes, fraud, and the coercion of public officials (Arizona & Georgia).

Ad homs do not improve your argument.

Donald Trump is a criminal, a fraudster, a con man, and a pervert, and belongs in prison as far away from the oval office as possible, for the good of the nation. His base will be pissed, but they will get over it, as details of his crimes, transcripts of the trials, evidence revealed, slowly propagate the land.

 

Yes, they had criminal intent. They were trying to keep Trump in power after he lost the election.

 

Those "facts" are complete joke which aren't even worth dignifying with a "rebuttal"...
That said, better luck next time...