 |
| C-SPAN/YouTube |
The electors and those working with them on behalf of Trump have had their lives and livelihoods uprooted due to the Democrats’ lawfare. The president’s pardons seek to end the injustice.
President Donald Trump pardoned 77 U.S. citizens targeted by Democrat attorneys general for their participation in alternative elector efforts and challenges to 2020 presidential election vulnerabilities. A memo obtained exclusively by The Federalist explains the theory behind the presidential pardons issued to defendants charged with various violations of state criminal law — a novel theory but one that corners the Democrats behind the weaponization of the criminal justice system.
On Friday, the Trump Administration began contacting the scores of Republicans still facing criminal charges in a handful of blue states for their service as alternative electors — or connection to the alternative electors — conveying the president’s decision to pardon them. The official pardon provides that “the President grant[s] a full, complete, and unconditional pardon for all conduct relating to the advice, creation, organization, execution, submission, support, voting, activities, participation in, or advocacy for or of any slate or proposed slate of Presidential electors, whether or not recognized by any state or state official, in connection with the 2020 Presidential Election.”
President Trump’s pardon adopts the recommendation the Office of U.S. Pardon Attorney Edward R. Martin provided in a 15-page memorandum obtained exclusively by The Federalist. In that memorandum, Martin detailed the numerous illegal changes to election laws that proceeded the 2020 presidential election, stressing that “[l]awsuits brought to challenge the unconstitutional changes to election laws, procedural violations, ineligible voters, and election irregularities were dismissed by courts on technical and procedural grounds rather than being fully adjudicated on the merits.”
To preserve those legal challenges, the Republican electors in the contested states met and cast votes as alternative electors for Donald Trump, transmitting those results to Congress consistent with, as the memo explained, “core Article II and Twelfth Amendment federal functions.” Martin’s memorandum further explained:
Those actions were taken based on sound historical and legal precedent, and ensured that legislatures in the Challenged States could select the rightful winner of the Election in the event the legislatures or the courts determined there had been a flawed calculation of votes or an unconstitutional deviation from state election law resulting in the wrong electoral votes being counted.
Martin, of course, is right, as The Federalist detailed in “The Left’s 2020 ‘Fake Electors’ Narrative Is Fake News.” As The Federalist reported and as Martin also explained in his memorandum, the Trump campaign’s submission of alternative electors mirrored the process the Kennedy campaign used in 1960 after the acting governor of Hawaii certified the Republican electors to Nixon. There, as in Trump’s case, Kennedy had filed a challenge to the results in state court, and accordingly Democrats certified three alternative electors to cast their ballots for Kennedy in the event the court ruled in his favor.
Two of the three Democrat electors were retired federal judges and yet they certified — as did the Trump alternative electors — that they were “duly and legally qualified and appointed” electors for Kennedy. The Democrats further certified “the votes of the state of Hawaii” were given to Kennedy. Kennedy later prevailed in his legal challenge, with his alternative electors then casting their votes in his favor.
Notwithstanding the clear precedent for using alternative electors, former FBI Director Christopher Wray, with then-Attorney General Merrick Garland’s explicit approval, launched a criminal investigation into Donald Trump, his lawyers, and the alternate electors based on the supposed “fraudulent certificates of electors’ votes [] submitted to the Archivist of the United States” for Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. Whistleblowers have since revealed “that the FBI wasn’t merely targeting Trump or a few high-level officials, but potentially more than 150 individuals.”
Following an extensive federal investigation into the use of alternative electors, “Special Counsel Jack Smith only charged Donald Trump with crimes related to the contested election, although the indictment described several supposed co-conspirators. However, several states — or in the case of Georgia, Fulton County — pursued nearly identical criminal cases against the alternative electors, as well as other lawyers and members of the Trump campaign.”
Those “so-called state criminal proceedings involving Trump electors filed by Democrat state attorneys general in Arizona (Kris Mayes), Nevada (Aaron Ford), Michigan (Dana Nessel), and Wisconsin (Josh Kaul), and the now disgraced Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in Georgia, are not truly state proceedings,” election lawyer Cleta Mitchell maintained last week at The Federalist. In “Presidential Pardons Are Needed For Trump Electors Persecuted By Biden DOJ,” Mitchell, who had represented the Trump Administration in his challenge to the Georgia election outcome, claimed “[e]very one of the indictments stemmed from the Arctic Frost investigations conducted by the Biden FBI and DOJ, and the Democrat prosecutors acted at the behest of the Biden DOJ in bringing the fake criminal charges against Trump and his electors, lawyers, and supporters.” --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.
No comments:
Post a Comment