Fogbow

Chesebro escaped charges for now as well, he is unindicted co-conspirator 4.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 7:46 pm Chesebro escaped charges for now as well, he is unindicted co-conspirator 4.

I.e., squealed like a rat bastard.

How long until roman tries dirty tricks in Arizona?

The evidence:

https://twitter.com/AnthonyMKreis/statu ... 0959726757

Anthony Michael Kreis
@AnthonyMKreis
Reasons why Kris Mayes may not have sought indictments against Donald Trump.

(1) Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee and we are in the same calendar year as the presidential election. Prudence might dictate no charges before Nov., especially with a 7-year statute of limitations

(2) There are so many cases in the pipeline between NY, D.C., FL, and GA, that trying to jump in line and charge him with these other defendants might be a headache.

(3) By waiting, she can get deals and cooperation from these defendants and then take on Trump one-on-one.

(4) By waiting out the Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity and the November election, a cleaner prosecution could go forward against Trump that has fewer legal uncertainties and political issues.

I have no idea what the thinking is, but that could be a few reasons.

You get an Indictment! And You get an Indictment!...

Luke Johnson @Orly_licious 1m
#AZFalseElectorsINDICTED: "Tyler Bowyer, Nancy Cottle, Jake Hoffman, Anthony Kern, Jim Lamon, Robert Montgomery, Samuel Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Greg Safsten, Kelli Ward & Michael Ward — face 9 felony counts for conspiracy, fraudulent schemes & artifices & forgery."

Ryan Goodman: Arizona Election Interference Indictment- Conspicuous Absences
https://www.justsecurity.org/94956/ariz ... ndictment/

The whole thing is worth reading, but this was particularly interesting:

4. A potential Trump presidency and pressure on defendants to flip

Criminal defendants in the Arizona 2020 election interference prosecution, as well as elsewhere like Fulton County, Georgia, may have reasons to flip and cooperate with prosecutors due to the prospect of a Trump presidency.

A president cannot issue pardons for state crimes, and his or her control over the Department of Justice does not extend to state law enforcement authorities. The state-level prosecutions of false electors and other Trump associates – in Arizona and elsewhere – will accordingly proceed whether or not Trump wins election. But he himself has a high likelihood of being deemed immune (by the Supreme Court if it comes to that) from state and local criminal prosecutions while in office. In other words, co-defendants and co-conspirators may be left holding the bag. That dawning reality may create incentives for some of these individuals to cooperate with law enforcement authorities sooner than later.

AZ Grand Jury has indicated the 11 Fake Electors

https://twitter.com/Tazerface16/status/ ... 897074822

Christopher David
@Tazerface16
Christina Bobb was just hired by the RNC as head of their Election Integrity group.

She's now been indicted for attempting to subvert the 2020 election results in Arizona.

Sounds about right.

https://twitter.com/bgoldbergpdx/status ... 0797845809

BruceGoldberg
@bgoldbergpdx
Lest we forget, this is the same "Miss Integrity" that certified all of the documents had been returned from Mar-a-Lago.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2024 7:27 pm tfg is unindicted coconspirator 1 in the indictment. Always the bridesmaid.

Well, not always.

In an alternate reality…
… Trump being told by an aide "sir, you are coconspirator number three": his face darkens to a deeper orange as he screams "I am coconspirator number one, always number one, fix it!"

The justsecurity.org piece linked above mentions

Prosecutors in Michigan and Nevada have decided not to seek indictments of anyone at the national level and instead focused only on false electors in their states.

Obviously that simplifies the cases and perhaps keeps it manageable rather than a sprawing tangle.

But might another reason be to keep the matter in state courts? Couldn't the national level defendants get the case shifted to federal court due to diversity, or is that not an issue?

This is Jenna Ellis's twitter banner.

Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:19 am The justsecurity.org piece linked above mentions

Prosecutors in Michigan and Nevada have decided not to seek indictments of anyone at the national level and instead focused only on false electors in their states.

Obviously that simplifies the cases and perhaps keeps it manageable rather than a sprawing tangle.

But might another reason be to keep the matter in state courts? Couldn't the national level defendants get the case shifted to federal court due to diversity, or is that not an issue?

Diversity is only an issue in federal civil cases.

The original quote could be read different ways.

If a federal officer was charged in state court, the officer could seek to remove the case to federal court. (This was attempted with a variety of theories in Georgia.) It likely wouldn't succeed, but would be guaranteed to cause delay.

If citizens from various states were charged collectively in federal court, the defendants could dicker over which district should try the case. (Each bickering defendant would argue the crime happened in their state, ergo, that's where the trial should be.) Again, likely unsuccessful but could cause delay.

A federal prosecution also would raise the usual concerns: fear of pardons, possible abatement if a defendant is elected president, etc.

Bottom line, if the goal of such prosecutions would be to punish those who harmed the home state, and to deter future acts in the home state, a state-only prosecution will serve those goals better than a federal prosecution.

Not indicating Turnip means that they don't have to deal with complicated delays in finding places in his busy court calendar.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f5f3&ei=10

Donald Trump Jr. texted White House chief of staff Mark Meadows about a plan to use alternative Republican electors, messages obtained by Arizona prosecutors have shown.

The text was sent just two days after the 2020 presidential election and while votes were still being counted.

Although Meadows and Trump Jr.'s names are redacted in the document, the same text was obtained unredacted in 2022 by the Congressional January 6 Committee.

Donald Trump Jr. sent the text on November 5, 2020, two days before media outlets called Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election.



Trump Jr.'s text reads: 'It's very simple. If through our lawsuits and recounts the Secretary of States on each state cannot 'certify' that states vote the State Assemblies can step in and vote to put forward the electoral slate Republicans control Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina etc. we get Trump electors."

Thanks bob, especially for the concise explanation of the state-federal nexus in this context.

Additionally it surely simplifies the case management in court that the individual fake electors all performed the same acts so it's not hugely more complex than charging one person with one offense. Whereas charging the originators in the same process complicates the charges on top of the problem of managing well-resourced defendants with expensive lawyers.

For the signatories, the case ought to be as simple as:
"This paper is bullshit, isn't it?"
"Yeah, I suppose so."
"That's your signature, isn't it?"
"Looks like it."
"Stop messing iaround, you're under oath and we're serious. Is it your signature?"
"Yes."
"No further questions, we'd like 5 years for this subversive act against our state. Responsibility blah blah, constitution blah blah, integrity blah blah, trust blah blah."

But I imagine proceedings will be a touch more complex than that!

In case you're confused (like I was), the initial reporting made it sound as if only the 11 fake electors were charged. It turns out 7 more were also charged but hadn't yet been served, we now have confirmation on 5 of those 7. Turnip, alas, is indeed an unindicted co-conspirator.

Sounds like Trump Jr. ought to join the list of indictees.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 4:47 pm Sounds like Trump Jr. ought to join the list of indictees.

Haven't spotted a link yet, but CNN reporting Eastman's arraignment in Arizona is today