Donald Trump’s January 6 Indictment

/156 Comments/in , /by

Is here.

He is charged with 18 USC 371, 18 USC 1512(c)(2), 18 USC 1512(k), and 18 USC 241.

There are six co-conspirators, all uncharged: Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark, and others.

image_print
156 replies
  1. Molly Pitcher says:

    It is confusing to feel relieved and disgusted at the same time. I am glad it has finally happened, I am disgusted that this is where we find our country.

    • scroogemcduck says:

      Interesting that none of the co-conspirators are indicted. Door perhaps not closed on some of them making a deal?

      • ButteredToast says:

        Also, as Dr. Wheeler noted on Twitter, Mark Meadows is not listed among co-conspirators. (He is described in the indictment as Trump’s Chief of Staff.)

      • Patient Observer says:

        Or does the non-indictment of Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark, and others suggest that some of them have entered into a cooperation agreement?

        • ratbastahd says:

          This from the article I read: “Rudy Giuliani, a Trump lawyer who pursued post-election legal challenges, spoke voluntarily to prosecutors as part of a proffer agreement, in which a person’s statements can’t be used against them in any future criminal case that is brought.”

        • Drew in Bronx says:

          This is absolutely true. As co-conspirators their statements, etc can be used as evidence in Trump’s trial and his trial can proceed without the mishegoss of 6 self-serving co-defendants making motions to sever or whatever.

          This does not mean either that any of them will get off the hook, or that any of them are (necessarily cooperating). But it’s not impossible that someone has or will flip. There are also multiple levels of co-conspirators not referred to in the indictment to keep prosecutions going for quite a while–though I have no ideal of what choices the Special Prosecutor’s office will ultimately make.

      • Rugger_9 says:

        Maybe they’re out for now to minimize opportunities for delay by Defendant-1. There is nothing to stop SC Smith from going after them later, as this case proceeds. Perhaps SC Smith thinks the co-conspirators will sing as well. I did see some scuttlebutt that Defendant-1 intends to throw Rudy and Eastman under the bus in an exercise at grasping at straws.

        For me, I’m guessing that Roger Stone is Co-C #6 because he’s already clearly identified by the J6SC as a player. Possibly Ali Alexander, but my 2 cents is on Roger.

        • Fran of the North says:

          Oh, how I hope you are right. Mr. Stone is hip deep in this cesspool, and he needs to learn there are consequences for his type of foul play.

        • CaboDano says:

          There are a multitude of co-conspirators out there, “both known and unknown” to the Grand Jury, and justice demands that they be indicted at some point. I agree that now is not the time to muck up the goods. If Stone is no. 6, that makes sense, but maybe it’s an underling involved in getting the fake electors to Pence.

      • Midtowngirl says:

        INAL, but I’m guessing that indicting Trump alone would eliminate a lot of potential delays that a multi-defendant indictment could bring. My impression is that this indictment was built with “speedy trial” in mind, and to that end, they took great care to “Trump-proof” it.

  2. Sshychka says:

    CNBC… The charges mark the unprecedented third criminal indictment against the former president since he launched his latest bid for the 2024 Republican nomination. No other U.S. president, current or former, has ever faced criminal charges.

    Trump is the BIGGEST crook ever to be elected president.
    Another 1st for Trump!

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You updated your username to “Schychka” to meet the site’s standard. Please make a note of it and use that name each time you comment. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  3. Rick Desper says:

    Test comment.

    [Thanks for updating your username to meet the 8 letter minimum. PLEASE do not post “test comments” especially while we are experiencing more traffic due to current events. /~Rayne]

    • harpie says:

      Co-Conspirators 1-6

      a. CC-1 Attorney who was willing yo spread knowingly false claims […]

      b. CC-2 Attorney who devised and attempted to implement a strategy to leverage VP’s ceremonial role […]

      c. CC-3 Attorney whose unfounded claims of election fraud the Defendant privately acknowledged to others sounded “crazy” […]

      d. CC-4 Justice Department official who worked on civil matters and who, with the Defendant, attempted to use the Justice Department to open sham election crime investigations and influence state legislatures with knowingly false claims of election fraud

      e. CC-5 Attorney who assisted in devising and attempting to implement a plan to submit false claims of election fraud

      f. CC-6 political consultant who helped implement plan to submit fraudulent slates of electors to obstruct certification

      • Savage Librarian says:

        My WAGs:
        1. Rudy Giuliani
        2. John Eastman
        3. Sidney Powell
        4. Jeffery Clark
        5. Cleta Mitchell
        6. Mike Roman

      • boatgeek says:

        Best guesses at the co-conspirators:
        CC-1: Rudy Giuliani
        CC-2: John Eastman
        CC-3: Boris Epshteyn?
        CC-4: Jeffrey Clark
        CC-5: Kenneth Chesebro?
        CC-6: Roger Stone?

      • SMF88011 says:

        My guesses:
        1 – Rudi Giuliani
        2 – John Eastman
        3 – Sidney Powell
        4 – Jeffrey Clark
        5 – Kenneth Chesebro
        6 – Mike Roman

        • Kenneth Fair says:

          I agree with all of these but #6. There were reports several weeks ago that Roman was cooperating with Smith’s probe. My guess for #6 is Boris Epshteyn.

        • bmaz says:

          Give it up. It would be one of the dumbest things in legal history to have rolled up Clarence Thomas’ wife in this indictment.

        • smf88011 says:

          Why do you say that? This is going to be going to SCOTUS and Clarence Thomas will have to recuse himself because his wife is a party of the case. That makes the GQP majority go from 6-3 to 5-3 with a couple of conservative Justices that might flip the other way.

        • smf88011 says:

          Won’t let me edit so I am doing this reply. If they can prove that Ginni Thomas was a part of the efforts to do the fake electors, it could be reasonable to bring her into the case. It is also a good piece of strategy to have a built-in recusal for a justice that is known to support Trump 100% of the time despite what the law says. I seem to remember a 8 to 1 SCOTUS result against Trump where Thomas was the only Justice that sided with Trump.

        • Drew in Bronx says:

          I have no real idea who Conspirator 6 is (I would wishcast Roger Stone, but that’s wishing). However, co-conspirators can also decide to be cooperators, so I wouldn’t rule out Roman just because he’s probably/possibly cooperating.

        • Midtowngirl says:

          These, but replacing 6 – Mike Roman with Boris Epshteyn (who, at the time, made a point of publicly stating he was acting in a political advisor capacity and not as an attorney).

          I wonder if any bookies in Vegas are taking bets on this? :)

    • harpie says:

      [comment in moderation here]

      Between on or about 11/14/20 to 1/20/21

      TRUMP did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the United States by dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government.

      • Tom Marney says:

        Stupid noob question here: how can some co-conspirators be unknown to the Grand Jury, especially when it’s likely that all are household names to some degree?

      • bmaz says:

        Lol, it rarely is when released to the public for the safety of the foreman and all of the grand jurors.

        • BRUCE F COLE says:

          Yes, I knew that anonymity was critical for them, but was crossed up by one of the live feeds that reported the “foreman” returning to the courthouse just before the indictment was announced. They should have reported “foreperson.”

          Hopefully no video or stills were taken of the guy. Same for the whole jury which was reported to have arrived and left the courthouse earlier.

    • harpie says:

      [pdf2/45] 4. Shortly after election day, the Defendant also pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results. In so doing, the Defendant perpetrated three criminal conspiracies:

      a. A conspiracy to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371

      b. A conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified (“the certification proceeding”), in violation of U.S.C. 1512(k); and

      c. A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 241.

  5. RipNoLonger says:

    Hoping to see R. Stone and M. Flynn included. Thank you for keeping us up-to-date. I hope Brandi is involved – her minute-by-minute reporting is incredible – along with her astute analyses.

  7. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Smith stakes out his position right up front:

    “The Defendant lost the 2020 presidential election.

    “Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false and the Defendant knew they were false.”

    Not sure Trump’s reported “reliance on counsel” defense will go farther than I can throw his golf cart, because this is a fact-based crime, not dependent on faux nuanced analysis from corrupt lawyers.

    • Ebenezer Scrooge says:

      A reliance on counsel defense would also explode any attorney-client privilege he may claim. He talked to a whole lot of lawyers, not all of whom were completely corrupt.

    • scroogemcduck says:

      “My normal lawyers told me this plan was crazy, so I found some crazy lawyers to tell me this plan was normal” doesn’t strike me as a foolproof defense strategy.

  8. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Lawyer co-conspirators one through five appear likely to lose their law licenses, if they haven’t already. And that might be the least of their worries. That also won’t do much for Trump’s “reliance on co-conspirator counsel” defense.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I’d be happy with a dedicated wing at a Club Fed, so long as it’s a federal prison and not bloody home confinement, which would be a farce worthy of a Latin American dictator – or an early Woody Allen film.

    • scroogemcduck says:

      I can only see one brief reference to #6, not sure that it’s possible to identify them from the indictment.

    • Patrick Carty says:

      I just googled “ginni thomas false electors” and I think you might be on to something. She aggressively contacted several states to use this plan.

    • gertibird says:

      I am doubtful of that, but she definitely deserves it. I hope you are right. She appeared to be right in the thick of raising money for the Jan6 attack, spreading the lies and coordinating buses I have read.

    • Senecar says:

      Paragraph 119 part c. – Co-Conspirator 6 attempts to confirm phone numbers for six Senators whom Trump had directed Giuliani to call.

      That doesn’t seem like Ginny would have those numbers.

  11. bloopie2 says:

    When I think that it has been only eight and a half months since Jack Smith was appointed, a Rolling Stones lyric comes to mind: I did not foresee all this happening to Trump. Smith is certainly painting Trump’s world black.

  12. scroogemcduck says:

    Trump’s campaign is comparing the charges, rather than the alleged conduct, as like “Germany in the 1930s”.

    Is there a German compound word for “staggering lack of self-awareness”?

      • Brandnewuser_01AUG2023_1835h says:

        Selbstwahrnehmungsstörung

        [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. “Brandnewuser” is not a unique username. Your name will be edited temporarily to note date/time of your first known comment until you have selected a new username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • Verrückte Pferd says:

      Eklatante Mangel an Selbstbewusstsein, or Erstaunlicher Mangel an Selbstbewusstsein.

  13. GeeSizzle says:

    I thought perhaps William J Olson was one of the co-conspirators, but for that we’d need more lawyer co-conspirators.

  14. earlofhuntingdon says:

    “The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to use the power and authority of the Justice Department to conduct sham election crime investigations”

    Paging Mr. Clark, paging Jeff Clark.

    • David F. Snyder says:

      Thanks, Harpie. Smith is a class act: thanks to all the heroes who defended and are defending our Constitution.

      • BRUCE F COLE says:

        He framed it exactly right: it was an attack on “who we are as a people.”

        And they’re continuing to investigate other individuals (3:15).

      • John Paul Jones says:

        Not sure, but I think this might refer to Johnson, ¶ 101:

        “101. On the morning of January 6, an agent of the Defendant contacted a United States Senator to ask him to hand-deliver documents to the Vice President. The agent then facilitated the receipt by the Senator’s staff of the fraudulent certificates signed by the Defendant’s fraudulent electors in Michigan and Wisconsin, which were believed not to have been delivered to the Vice President or Archivist by mail. When one of the Senator’s staffers contacted a staffer for the Vice President by text message to arrange for delivery of what the Senator’s staffer had been told were” [a]ltemate slate[s] of electors for MI and WI because archivist didn’t receive them,” the Vice President’s staffer rejected them.”

  17. P-villain says:

    Interesting that there seems to be very little here that had not already been daylighted by the J6 Committee and newspaper reports.

    [my last comment went to moderation, maybe because I’m commenting from my laptop at my office, rather than from my phone?]

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You are adding stray blank characters, possibly tabs, to your username which creates a new identity requiring clearance through moderation. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • P-villain says:

      Possibly my lazy use of autofill? Typed it all in this time.

      [I don’t know, I don’t care, all I know is you are causing me a LOT of extra work clearing each of your comments when I need it the least while cluttering a rapidly-filling thread with unnecessary chatter. /~Rayne]

  18. Rugger_9 says:

    Judge Tanya Chutkan, Obama appointee and the only judge so far to consistently sentence J6 defendants on the high side, is assigned as trial judge.

    Defendant-1: Rut roh. (Actual translation of ‘Truth Social’ logorrhea).

  19. boloboffin says:

    Breitbart’s email alert about this breathlessly informed me that this was the day after Hunter and Joe Biden were implicated in… something. So, clearly Hunter and Joe are guilty as sin. *eyeroll*

    (Yes, I sub to Breitbart and the IJR emails. That’s my way of keeping tabs on what they’re saying.)

  20. earlofhuntingdon says:

    You rely on lawyers to interpret the law and to convey the legal meaning of agreed facts. It’s not reasonable reliance on counsel to use them to invent your own facts.

    Can’t wait for Trump’s next arraignment.

  21. pdaly says:

    Special Counsel Jack Smith: “And our investigation of other individuals continues.”

    Top guy is already indicted, but the investigation is not over.
    Wondering if “other individuals” is a descriptor for a number that exceeds the six undicted co-conspirators?

    • Fraud Guy says:

      Donald Trump, Song of Myself

      The hack and MAGA—I have thrill’d them, emptied them.
      And proceed to fill my next billfold for the future.

      Follower out there! what have you to provide to me?
      Look in my face while I snuff the truth of ev’rything,
      (Trust me honestly, I alone fight for you, and you can pay monthly or even longer.)

      Do I contradict myself?
      Very well then I indict myself,
      (Grifting large, I bezzle multitudes.)

      I embellish all that is lies, I take all that I can grab.

      Who has done my dirty work? who will soonest be indicted co-conspirator?
      Who wishes to take the fall for me?

      Will you donate before my funds are gone? will you realize too late?

      • Student Driver says:

        Because I did not cop some Meth,
        I wisely copped a Plea—
        The Narcan kicked in just in time
        To shut down Casuistry—

    • Stephen Calhoun says:

      The cast of (likely) culpable characters is nameable and extends beyond the inner circle to the next circle, (and beyond?!)

      I’m patient. The popcorn supply is full.

  22. surfer2099 says:

    Finally.

    Just in time for my birthday tomorrow. I’m putting a bow on it and not complain seditious conspiracy is not in the mix and just be thankful they actually had the balls to charge that asshole.

  23. sohelpmedog says:

    Good work by the SC in improving upon the Indictment in Watergate where the President was named as an un-indicted conspirator.
    This former president is getting the recognition he deserves.

  24. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Classic Trump business model:

    Paraphrasing para. 18, p. 11: On January 4, 2021, CC 2 called the Arizona House speaker to get him to have the legislature de-certify the electors it had already certified and passed on their documentation to Congress. The speaker said he had no evidence of voter fraud. CC-2 waffles with don’t, “know enough about facts on the ground,” but urged the speaker to de-certify anyway, and “let the courts sort it out.”

    They already had, as had the state legislature. Apart from any crimes he might be charged with, CC-2’s demonstrated disregard for the facts, law, procedure and ethical cannons should lead to his disbarment.

  25. DChom1234 says:

    “Biden did it” Tourette’s syndrome just went into ludicrous speed 

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You updated your username to “DChom123“; please make a note of it and use that name each time you comment. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  26. Kenneth Fair says:

    I agree with all of these but #6. There were reports several weeks ago that Roman was cooperating with Smith’s probe. My guess for #6 is Boris Epshteyn.

    • Kenneth Fair says:

      Sorry, that was meant to respond to an earlier email guessing at the co-conspirators. I think #1 is Giuliani, #2 is Eastman, #3 is Powell, #4 is Clark, #5 is Chesebro, and #6 is either Mike Roman or Boris Epshteyn.

  28. jdmckay8 says:

    I’m mildly surprised nothing specifically about Jan.6. I do not know what interested Lawyers may have speculated. Maybe there’s nothing that Smith thinks is a slam dunk.

    I have often wondered how much of a birds eye view Smith got into happenings in the Willard. Seems like a lot more than 6 co-conspirators.

    And knowing what it does to quality of like at EW, I hope Smith has no more superseding indictments in the pipeline.

    • P J Evans says:

      It makes sense – this is the top of that pyramid. Nothing directly connected to the people at the Capitol, but the drivers behind that insurrection.

      • jdmckay8 says:

        Yes. Just wild speculation on my part, but I can’t help thinking there is an effort to dovetail Willis’ upcoming indictment, not overlap it. The notion of having very well, finely tuned machine(s) going forward is going to matter.

        I have a notion Smith is not underestimating Trump (taking him very seriously), which is a good thing. Heritage’s published 2025 Project last week gave me the chills. Seems to me I recall Heritage handled lion’s share of staffing for GWB admin. This one seems more… ambitious.

        This is most unsettling time in America in my 6+ decades visiting. :)

        • Rayne says:

          It’s not just the Fulton County case but the fake elector cases in each state where perps are being prosecuted. It also works in the other direction; AG Nessel’s indictment of the MI fake electors carefully avoids overlap with the federal case.

        • jdmckay8 says:

          Yes, and yes on Nessel’s indictment. IMO the Michigan ladies have acquitted themselves very well. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Whitmer running for president sometime in not too distant future. She’s battle tested, came through with strong character IMO (do you live there?)

          There’s just been so much speculation (I waste too much time reading same stuff in different articles :( ) they would be stepping on each other’s toes. Not the main event, I know. I find myself often looking for grounds for optimism in a good outcome on all this stuff collectively, and at this moment seems more like well-oiled-machine than broke down jalopy.

          I will be pleased to see dovetail rather than trip-over-each-other.

        • Narpington says:

          Rayne, I’m not sure you’d see this if I replied to the commenter in question but my Android adds spaces at any opportunity, including autofill for my name and email. I’ve no idea what platform you’re using so it may not be possible but in general removing trailing tabs and spaces is a trivial computing task. While you’re looking at that, have you considered the indentation problem I mentioned a while back? At this level in portrait view on my phone I can’t see any comments and there’s no left/right scrolling.

          Also, the comment I made just now had no edit button – what’s up there?

          Thanks

        • Rayne says:

          The problem with the blank spaces is NOT me, as in the WordPress platform. There’s either a blank space/tab/other non-visible character or there isn’t. We also have a LOT of Android users here on tablets and phones and I’m only seeing this problem with P’villain’s comments.

          The disappearing comment edit button may be related to some updating going on in the background, thanks for your patience. As for the indent situation: we will be looking at that soon. Again, thanks for your patience.

        • Narpington says:

          All sites are ad-free, I use an ad-blocker.

          “The coffee’s free so don’t complain that it’s cold” isn’t a great argument. Defending the site is one thing but allowing the guard dog frequently to attack the patrons (no, not me) is also not what I would expect from a serious professional establishment.

        • Rayne says:

          Look, you can vote with your feet. If you do not like the way this site operates, find the exit.

          You might ask yourself why a guard dog is necessary on the way out.

        • bmaz says:

          Plus said person is lying. Don;t even need an “ad blocker” here because we do not even have ads at all. Hope the door does not hit that guy.

        • Narpington says:

          I’m pretty sure it didn’t happen before my recent new phone, so it may require Android 13 + autocomplete + not removing the spaces manually (which I’m generally fussy about but did consider not bothering with here assuming the site could cope), which would be a smaller number of users.

          It was just a reminder as I’m here mainly for the editorial and the comments are still usable so it’s not a deal-breaker.

  29. CaptainCondorcet says:

    Pence’s response to the indictment is revenge years in the waiting. But even more damning IMO was the DeSantis non-statement. No way in hades a former JAG officer doesn’t at least skim a literally historic indictment of a rival candidate. He was clearly told by his staff to not read it so he could say he hadn’t and offer vague “weaponization” remarks instead.

    • jdmckay8 says:

      He doesn’t like DC jurors either.

      “While I’ve seen reports, I have not read the indictment, (…) I do, though, believe we need to enact reforms so that Americans have the right to remove cases from Washington, DC to their home districts. (…) Washington, DC is a ‘swamp’ and it is unfair to have to stand trial before a jury that is reflective of the swamp mentality.”

      (…)

      “One of the reasons our country is in decline is the politicization of the rule of law. No more excuses—I will end the weaponization of the federal government.”

      A most unimpressive individual, AFAIC.

      • fubar jack says:

        Wow. Pretty weird statement from a political rival. Advancing a project seems to override his political aims.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        DeSantis self-knowledge is well below that of Larry, Curly or Moe. Like Sen. Kennedy, though, and despite his two Ivy League degrees, Ron enjoys playing the ignorant rube, as if he were not one of the political elite he disdains.

        His talk of “removal” is farcical and he knows it. It would take away jurisdiction from the place where the crime occurred, where the evidence is, and relocate it to a defendant’s home district. Presumably, that’s because he thinks it would only benefit Southern Republican politicians.

  30. gertibird says:

    “Special Counsel Jack Smith: “And our investigation of other individuals continues.””
    Whomever those co-conspirators are, they and other Republicans must really be sweating given that comment from Jack Smith. There were so many involved. Perhaps even Congressional members.

    • BRUCE F COLE says:

      Yes. It’s notable that he didn’t frame that as “…our investigation of the listed co-conspirators continues.” The target field is wide.

  31. FL Resister says:

    It took me a while to read the entire indictment and I am glad I did.
    As usual for Jack Smith’s work, it is a dense, fact-filled, and to the point explanation of charges.
    Even though we are aware of much that went on, it is still eye-popping and jaw-dropping to read.

    Only found one bit of humor in #25 found in email excerpt from a Senior Campaign Advisor:
    “When our research and campaign legal team can’t back up any of the claims made by our Elite Strike Force Legal Team, you can see why we’re 0-32 on our cases. I’ll obviously hustle to help on all fronts, but it’s tough to own any of this when it’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.”

    Item #81 includes an exchange between Co-conspirator 4 (Jeffrey Clark) and Deputy White House Counsel who states there would be “riots in every major city in the United States” were Trump not to leave office on January 20, to which Clark responds, “Well, that’s why there’s an Insurrection Act.”

    • John Paul Jones says:

      For guys like Clark, I always think of the quotation from Measure for Measure, about “pelting petty officers,”

      Drest in a little brief authority,
      Most ignorant of what he’s most assur’d,
      His glassy essence, like an angry ape,
      Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven,
      As make the angels weep.

    • Narpington says:

      It’s an unpopular view (because some would like to add Mike Flynn’s brother Charles to the conspiracy) but I see good reasons why the grown-ups were reluctant to call out troops or the National Guard. Some may have feared Trump’s ire in setting them against his supporters but I suspect some saw that he would invoke the Insurre tion Act. That’s why the insurrection leaders hoped for Antifa Central Command to turn up.

  32. Midtowngirl says:

    Does anyone else notice there is only *one* word in the entire narrative written in boldface font?
    Because I don’t know how to do markup here, it’s on Page 24, within #60 – the word “treasonous”:
    “”Co-Conspirator 5 explained that Co-Conspirator 1 had heard from a state official and state provisional elector that “”it could appear treasonous for the AZ electors to vote on Monday if there is no pending court proceeding “””
    Any ideas on this?

    • PostToaster says:

      Kelli Ward, then Chair of the Arizona Republican Party, led the primary group of fake electors from Az, though she got one of her more gullible colleagues to sign as leader. Ward said in an email that the effort “could look like treason” – then went full steam ahead anyway. Which was consistent with the total lack of political morals she showed during her tenure as Chair, with incessant rants against election-stealing demoncrats. She has now, finally, been replaced.

      To demonstrate that Az repugnants are at least as crazy as in any other state, we had an even more clueless group of trumpies who all on their own (perhaps fearing to miss out) declared as fake electors and even forged the state seal on their document. We hear nothing about them, but I hope they don’t get in the way of Ward being brought to account. As they were not apparently connected to Trump’s Fake Electors Plot, it would be a shame if they’re crucified and she isn’t.

      [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username AND EMAIL ADDRESS each time you comment so that community members get to know you. We don’t even ask for a valid email address, only that community members use the same one each time they comment. The email address you used not only has a bad domain but it’s not the same as the one you used on your first comment, creating a new identity needing clearance by moderation. Thanks. /~Rayne]

      • Midtowngirl says:

        That’s some really interesting background info – especially the bit about a second slate of fake electors! Thanks for sharing that!

    • Purple Martin says:

      That’s a second-hand but direct quote that Kenneth Chesebro said Rudy Giuliani told him came from an Arizona official. I assume the word treasonous was bolded in the original quoted text.

      • Midtowngirl says:

        Thanks! Also thank you for bolding treasonous. I took a look at the page source – something I should have done long ago – and was able to see the markup. Thanks again!

        • bmaz says:

          You are going to bring “treasonous” shit here? Don’t do that. It will make you look like a fool.

        • Midtowngirl says:

          Just asking if there was a reason for that word being the only one in bold font in the entire narrative; I was curious if there was any significance.
          Apologies, and thank you for advising my transgression would make me look like a fool, rather than my being one already. I somehow read a tone of gruff kindness in that. <3

  33. Student Driver says:

    Fuckingassholocracy was a noble experiment but it’s time for the American people to move on.

  34. Veritas Sequitur says:

    One small step in court towards Trump’s comeuppance; one giant leap for truth, justice, safety. Thanks, Dr. Wheeler, for your sustaining insights into these vital legal proceedings.

Comments are closed.