Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The US 2020 Presidential Election & Attempts To Overturn It

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TopHatter
    replied
    Fake Donald Trump electors settle civil lawsuit in Wisconsin, agree that President Biden won


    Former President Donald Trump speaks at a rally, Aug. 5, 2022, in Waukesha, Wis. Ten Republicans who posed as fake electors for former President Trump in Wisconsin and filed paperwork falsely saying he had won the battleground state have settled a civil lawsuit and admitted their actions were part of an effort to overturn President Joe Biden's victory, attorneys who filed the case announced Wednesday, Dec. 6, 2023.

    MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Ten Republicans who posed as fake electors for former President Donald Trump in Wisconsin and filed paperwork falsely saying he had won the battleground state have settled a civil lawsuit and admitted their actions were part of an effort to overturn President Joe Biden's victory, attorneys who filed the case announced Wednesday.

    Under the agreement, the fake electors acknowledged that Biden won the state, withdrew their filings and agreed not to serve as presidential electors in 2024 or any other election where Trump is on the ballot.

    The 10 fake electors agreed to send a statement to the government offices that received the Electoral College votes saying that their actions were “part of an attempt to improperly overturn the 2020 presidential election results.”

    The settlement marks the first time that any Trump electors have revoked their filings sent to Congress purporting that Trump had won in seven battleground states. Nevada on Wednesday became the third state to criminally charge fake electors, following Georgia and Michigan. Trump faces charges in Georgia and in a federal investigation of his conduct related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

    The settlement was announced by Law Forward, Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection and the Madison-based Stafford Rosenbaum law firm.

    “Americans believe in democracy and the idea that the people choose their leaders through elections,” said Jeff Mandell, one of the attorneys who brought the case on behalf of Democratic voters, including two who served as Biden electors. “The defendants’ actions violated those bedrock principles. We brought this case to ensure that they are held accountable.”

    There is no known criminal investigation ongoing in Wisconsin. Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul has signaled that he is relying on federal investigators to look into what happened in Wisconsin, while also not ruling out a state probe.

    Democrats brought the lawsuit last year seeking $2.4 million in damages from 10 Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump as the 2020 election winner in Wisconsin. They also sued two of Trump’s attorneys, including one who has already pleaded guilty to other charges stemming from the 2020 election in Georgia.

    The case was scheduled to go to a trial by jury in September 2024, two months before the presidential election.

    Under the deal, the fake electors don’t pay any damages or attorneys fees and there is no admission of wrongdoing or liability.

    The Wisconsin GOP electors have long said that they were partaking in the plan in case a court later ruled that Trump had won the state. One of the fake electors, former Wisconsin state Republican Chairman Andrew Hitt, repeated that position in a statement Wednesday.

    “The Wisconsin electors were tricked and misled into participating in what became the alternate elector scheme and would have never taken any actions had we known that there were ulterior reasons beyond preserving an ongoing legal strategy,” he said. Hitt said he has been working with the Justice Department since May of 2022 and he will not be supporting Trump in 2024.

    The fake elector plan hatched in seven battleground states was central to the federal indictment filed against Trump earlier in August that alleged he tried to overturn results of the 2020 election. Federal prosecutors said the scheme originated in Wisconsin.

    Fake electors met in Wisconsin and six other states where Trump was defeated in 2020 and signed certificates that falsely stated Trump, not Biden, won their states. The fake certificates were ignored.

    One of the attorneys named in the Wisconsin lawsuit, Kenneth Chesebro, pleaded guilty to a felony charge of conspiracy to commit filing false documents after being charged with participating in efforts to overturn Trump’s loss in Georgia. Chesebro was charged alongside Trump and 17 others with violating the state’s anti-racketeering law.

    The Wisconsin lawsuit cites a memo Chesebro sent to Trump’s attorney in Wisconsin, Jim Troupis, in November 2020 detailing the elector plan.

    Under the settlement, the 10 fake electors promised to assist the Department of Justice with its ongoing investigation. They also agreed to help the Democrats as they continue their lawsuit against Troupis and Chesebro.

    Troupis and Chesebro did not return voicemail messages seeking comment.

    The fake electors also released nearly 600 pages of documents related to their scheme, under terms of the settlement.

    Those show one Republican involved with the fake elector plot texting another one referring to their action declaring Trump the winner of Wisconsin as a “possible steal.” The sender said they felt compelled to go along with the plan or else Trump supporters would be upset and there “would be a target on my back.”

    Government and outside investigationshave uniformly found there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud that could have swung the election from Biden. Trump has continued to spread falsehoods about the 2020 election.

    Electors are people appointed to represent voters in presidential elections. The winner of the popular vote in each state determines which party’s electors are sent to the Electoral College, which meets in December after the election to certify the outcome.
    __________

    ButButBut sEvErAl sTaTeS iN 2020 vIoLaTeD tHe cOnStItUtIoN iN hOw tHeY cOnDuCtEd tHe eLeCtIoN!!

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Federal prosecutors reveal evidence they want to use against Trump — his own words


    WASHINGTON — Special counsel Jack Smith plans to use former President Donald Trump's own words against him in the upcoming federal election interference trial, according to a new court filing.

    Prosecutors said in Tuesday's filing that they want to focus on Trump's long history of calling election results "fraud" when the results don't suit him, as well as his vocal support for violent Jan. 6 rioters.

    In addition to a lengthy list of Trump's public statements over the past decade, the nine-page filing from Smith's office refers to an incident involving an unidentified Trump campaign employee who allegedly tried to obstruct the 2020 vote count in the battleground state of Michigan, which Trump won in 2016, after the tally began to swing Joe Biden's way.

    According to prosecutors, the employee messaged a lawyer supporting the Trump campaign's operations in Detroit and "encouraged rioting and other methods of obstruction when he learned that the vote count was trending in favor of the defendant’s opponent."

    That portion of the filing, which is largely redacted, said that soon after the messages were sent, "a large number of untrained individuals flooded" the voting site at the TCF Center, since renamed Huntington Place, "and began making illegitimate and aggressive challenges to the vote count. Thereafter, Trump made repeated false claims regarding election activities at the TCF Center, when in truth his agent was seeking to cause a riot to disrupt the count."

    The bulk of the filing focuses on Trump's comments before and after the 2020 election, when he sought to sow doubt about the results and intimidate those who challenged him.

    The filing said Trump's remarks casting doubt on the results of the 2012 and 2016 elections will be presented as evidence in his Washington, D.C., trial, scheduled to begin in March, because they reflect Trump’s “historical record of making such claims."

    Molly Gaston, senior assistant special counsel, cited a tweet from Trump in November 2012 that she said made “baseless claims that voting machines had switched votes from then-candidate (Mitt) Romney to then-candidate (Barack) Obama.”

    “During the 2016 presidential campaign, the defendant claimed repeatedly, with no basis, that there was widespread voter fraud — including through public statements and tweets,” Gaston added.

    Statements like those, prosecutors argue, illustrate Trump's "plan of falsely blaming fraud for election results he does not like."

    A spokesperson for Trump, Steven Cheung, said, “Crooked Joe Biden, Deranged Jack Smith, and the rest of the Hacks and Thugs attempting to interfere in the 2024 election are getting so desperate to attack President Trump that they are perverting justice by trying to include claims that weren’t anywhere to be found in their dreamt up, fake indictment. President Trump will not be deterred.”

    Trump is charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted for trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

    Prosecutors said they intend to show how Trump had "an established pattern of using public statements and social media posts to subject his perceived adversaries to threats and harassment."

    Among other examples, the filing points to Trump's treatment of two Georgia election workers who aren't named but who fit the descriptions of Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea ArShaye "Shaye" Moss, who were falsely accused of rigging votes by Trump and his allies. The filing says Trump continued to "falsely attack" the pair "despite being on notice that his claims about them in 2020 were false and had subjected them to vile, racist, and violent threats and harassment."

    It also noted that after the House Jan. 6 committee published transcripts of its interviews with the two women in December of last year, when they "provided graphic testimony about the threats and harassment they endured after the defendant and his agents falsely accused them," Trump then "doubled down and recommenced his attacks on the election workers in posts on Truth Social. He even zeroed in on one of the election workers, falsely writing that she was an election fraudster, a liar, and one of the 'treacher[ous] . . . monsters' who stole the country, and that she would be in legal trouble."

    The filing said those attacks are "after-the-fact corroboration" of Trump's intent because his remarks came "after it was incontrovertibly clear" that his false claims had caused them harm. That sequence of events, prosecutors argue, means "that the jury may properly infer that he intended that result."

    Another redacted portion of the filing alleges that Trump and "co-conspirator 1," who NBC News has identified as his then-lawyer Rudy Giuliani, retaliated against the former chief counsel to the Republican National Committee for "publicly refuting" their election fraud lies.

    A spokesperson for Giuliani did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Smith's office said it also plans to point to Trump's public support of some Jan. 6 rioters as "patriots" and political hostages.

    "Of particular note are the specific January 6 offenders whom the defendant has supported— namely, individuals convicted of some of the most serious crimes charged in relation to January 6, such as seditious conspiracy and violent assaults on police officers," the filing said. "During a September 17, 2023, appearance on Meet the Press, for instance, the defendant said regarding Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio—who was convicted of seditious conspiracy—'I want to tell you, he and other people have been treated horribly.' The defendant then criticized the kinds of lengthy sentences received only by defendants who, like Tarrio, committed the most serious crimes on January 6."

    Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years in prison, before Trump's remarks on "Meet the Press," for his role in plotting the breach of the Capitol.

    "Evidence of the defendant’s post-conspiracy embrace of particularly violent and notorious rioters is admissible to establish the defendant’s motive and intent on January 6—that he sent supporters, including groups like the Proud Boys, whom he knew were angry, and whom he now calls 'patriots,' to the Capitol to achieve the criminal objective of obstructing the congressional certification," it said.

    "And finally, evidence of the defendant’s statements regarding possible pardons for January 6 offenders is admissible to help the jury assess the credibility and motives of trial witnesses, because through such comments, the defendant is publicly signaling that the law does not apply to those who act at his urging regardless of the legality of their actions."
    _________

    There's that word again and again....'intent'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    That's what I'm afraid of....January 20th 2024. He's not even trying to hide what he plans to do. I can only hope that there are enough men and women of principle and honor to stop him.
    A saving grace is our CJCS is GEN CQ Brown, USAF. I don't see him following anything illegal. I think you would see mass resignations and retirements if it is tried.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post

    If he is not in office yet there will be no impacts on the military...Joe Biden is still president. But after he gets back into office he has talked about setting aside Posse Comitatus in favor of rules in place at the time of the founding of the Republic allowing the military to be involved with domestic activities.
    That's what I'm afraid of....January 20th 2024. He's not even trying to hide what he plans to do. I can only hope that there are enough men and women of principle and honor to stop him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    As with Trump using the U.S. military for his own fascistic goals, I'm hoping that once again people won't be so complacent as they were the morning of January 6th.
    If he is not in office yet there will be no impacts on the military...Joe Biden is still president. But after he gets back into office he has talked about setting aside Posse Comitatus in favor of rules in place at the time of the founding of the Republic allowing the military to be involved with domestic activities.

    DC has always allowed Federal troop involvement cause it has always had a different status than a state. When Eisenhower sent the 101st into Little Rock, AR, in 1957 it was AFTER he had federalized (i.e., called to active duty) the Arkansas National Guard. He used Chapter 15 of Title 10 of the US Code, sections 332 - 334, appointing the Executive as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the land. The 101st backed up the AR ARNG, not taking the lead. It was Trump's failure to follow the same sections which caused the issues on 6 January.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post
    And if you thought that was bad stand by for what will happen in 2024 after the polls close assuming it becomes apparent he's lost the election again.
    As with Trump using the U.S. military for his own fascistic goals, I'm hoping that once again people won't be so complacent as they were the morning of January 6th.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    And if you thought that was bad stand by for what will happen in 2024 after the polls close assuming it becomes apparent he's lost the election again.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post

    The later. There's little to no evidence of him sprouting that kind of demagoguery in private amongst family and employees. He's deliberately whipping up the crowd again.
    Yeah if I had to bet one way or another, I would say it's mostly performative. Still though, the man is a narcissistic sociopath, so I wouldn't put it past him to genuinely believe at least some of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    Impossible to tell what are his own delusions and what he's serving up to satisfy his cultist's delusions.
    The later. There's little to no evidence of him sprouting that kind of demagoguery in private amongst family and employees. He's deliberately whipping up the crowd again.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    I think we’d win [in California]
    That put my Quaker Oats on the screen. Win in California? The man is now officially lost it as I am in CA and hate his guts.
    Impossible to tell what are his own delusions and what he's serving up to satisfy his cultist's delusions.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    I think we’d win [in California]
    That put my Quaker Oats on the screen. Win in California? The man is now officially lost it as I am in CA and hate his guts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    Looks like Fox has gone "woke"
    And Trump has fully gone delusional.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    That Was Awkward: Fox News Forced to Fact-Check Trump’s Lies on Air


    Donald Trump’s former sycophants at Fox News appeared somewhat reformed on Saturday, interrupting the GOP presidential candidate’s unhinged campaign speech to fact-check his election lies.

    During a couple of back-to-back campaign stops in Iowa, Trump reiterated claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen and even went so far as to claim he wanted to “redo the election” and encouraged his followers in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Atlanta to “watch those votes when they come in” in 2024.

    Fox News took note.

    “Well, the former president finally got around to some campaign promises amid lots of cheering as you heard,” said Fox host Arthel Neville. “Many untruths, the 2020 election was not rigged, it was not stolen.”

    The live react could be part of a turning tide for Fox, which earlier this year settled a historic lawsuit for failing to dispute similar election lies, paying a whopping $787.5 million to Dominion Voting Systems. The network is still in the throes of another, $2.7 billion lawsuit by Smartmatic, another voting machine company allegedly defamed by Fox’s conduct.

    Still, It’s not the first time Trump and Neville have clashed—in 2019, the former president tweeted that Neville and fellow hosts Leland Vittert and Shepard Smith should quit Fox in favor of CNN.

    That wasn’t the only headline Trump was after on Saturday. In the same tour, Trump claimed that he invented the term “caravan” and unironically claimed that he was God-chosen in the 2020 election.

    “I think if you had a real election and Jesus came down and God came down and said, ‘I’m gonna be the scorekeeper here,’ I think we’d win [in California], I think we’d win in Illinois, and I think we’d win in New York,” Trump said.
    ___________

    Looks like Fox has gone "woke"

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Judge finds Eastman culpable for ethics breaches in 2020 bid to keep Trump in power


    A California judge made a "preliminary finding" Thursday that attorney John Eastman breached professional ethics when he aided Donald Trump's bid to overturn the 2020 election, a significant milestone in the lengthy proceedings over whether Eastman should lose his license to practice law.

    Eastman said Thursday that the extensive disbarment proceedings — which delved deeply into his allegations of election fraud and irregularities, as well as his fringe theories about the vice president's power to unilaterally choose the winner of the presidential election — had strengthened his belief that the 2020 election was tainted. Now, state bar officials are preparing to present "aggravation" evidence aimed at justifying their call to strip Eastman, a veteran conservative attorney who once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, of his law license.

    The proceedings, which began in June, featured 30 days of testimony from witnesses that included former Vice President Mike Pence’s legal counsel Greg Jacob, former Bush administration attorney John Yoo, officials from numerous state election offices, statisticians and data analysts that Eastman relied on for some of his claims of widespread election irregularities, and constitutional law experts who delved into the history of the counting of electoral votes.

    Eastman took the stand for more than a dozen hours throughout the trial and described his interactions with Trump in a Jan. 4, 2021, Oval Office meeting; his work with other members of Trump’s legal team like Boris Epshteyn and Kenneth Chesebro; and the drafting of his infamous memos describing options for Pence to assert control of the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021.

    Eastman’s fight for his bar license comes as he is also fending off criminal charges in Georgia, where he was charged alongside Trump and 17 others with a sweeping racketeering conspiracy aimed at subverting the state’s election laws in 2020.

    Eastman said he never considered the impact of his words on Jan. 6, 2021, when he addressed the crowd of Trump supporters gathered near the White House ahead of their march to the Capitol. He said the crowd was already convinced the election was stolen and was there to see Trump, not him, and did not view his remarks as somehow “solidifying” their anger.

    “I didn’t have any thought about that one way or the other,” he said on the witness stand. “My point in speaking on Jan. 6 was to raise concerns about illegality in the conduct of the election that may well have led to the certification of somebody who did not win the election.”

    Investigators for the California bar spent much of the trial delving deeply into Eastman’s claims of fraud that he used in a failed attempt to convince state legislatures to send “contingent” presidential electors to Congress on Jan. 6. They argued that Eastman relied on obviously flawed methods and assumptions meant to secure a predetermined outcome: that Trump should remain in power.

    Throughout his testimony, Eastman emphasized that he never showed Trump his two-page and six-page memos outlining options for Pence, which he said were merely meant as “internal” documents outlining “scenarios” to be considered by Trump’s lawyers. He said he recalled only sharing the memos with Epshteyn and Chesebro before meeting with Trump on Jan. 4, 2021.

    At that meeting, Eastman said he advised Trump to ask Pence to simply delay the Jan. 6 proceedings of Congress, rather than declare Trump the victor — an option he considered more politically palatable. States with Republican-controlled legislatures — where Biden had won decisive electoral votes — could have used a delay to decide whether to appoint pro-Trump electors instead, citing some of the allegations of fraud that Eastman had been pushing.

    Pence resisted the plan, contending that it would require numerous violations of the longstanding federal law known as the Electoral Count Act, and resisted pressure from both Trump and Eastman that continued even as a violent mob ransacked the Capitol, some hunting for Pence himself.

    The lead bar attorney, Duncan Carling, also pressed Eastman about his view of the recent plea deal reached by co-defendant Jenna Ellis, an attorney who admitted to orchestrating false testimony about election fraud to Georgia legislators in 2020. Eastman said her plea — which was connected to her role in a Dec. 3, 2020, hearing held by Georgia Republican lawmakers at which Eastman was also a key witness — had no impact on his continued views about election fraud in 2020, he said.

    “My statements were prefaced by caveats that make them all true,” he said.
    _________

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post

    True, but there's an entire industry out there dedicated to keeping not just Uncle Sam's but all other Government's mitts off wealthy peoples money. Its pretty successful industry to. Go figure.
    Truth.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X