Points in the indictment of activities that were legal:
- ·
He ran for reelection in 2020 and lost.
- ·
He disputed the election results, as is his
right.
- ·
He made false claims about the election process;
he knew the claims were false; he filed charges and launched investigations to
support his claims; he lost those efforts to prove outcome-determinative fraud;
all of which is within his rights.
Points in the indictment of activities that were illegal:
- ·
He conspired to defraud the United States using dishonest
means in an attempt to obstruct and defeat a lawful government process of
collecting, counting, and certifying the presidential election.
- ·
He conspired with others to obstruct the lawful
January 6 congressional proceeding to certify the election results.
- ·
He conspired to disenfranchise the rights of
others to legally vote.
All of this was in furtherance of Trump’s efforts to
overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 election. The document goes on to list six unnamed
coconspirators who worked with the defendant to overturn the election. One part in this process involved the
submission of fraudulent slates of electors from seven states.
These were not “backup” electors where a disputed count
existed in a key state, but were fake electors sent to disrupt the legitimate proceedings
sent from states where the results were not in dispute. All legal election challenges in these states
had failed. While these efforts ultimately
failed, the effort to defraud the United States was illegal.
There was also an effort to use the power of the Justice
Department to conduct sham election investigations in furtherance of the crime
of overturning the election results.
They further tried to enlist the Vice President in their efforts to
alter the legitimate results.
The document goes on to explain how, when, and why the
defendant knew that he had lost the election and that he knew that there was no
evidence or avenue for proving outcome-determinative fraud. Eight paragraphs of explanation are provided in
detailed list form on this point.
They then provide six different examples of wild unfounded
speculations created from whole cloth by the defendant and his coconspirators
designed to sway public opinion and to solicit others to act in furtherance of
their crimes. References to dead voters,
non-existent voters, suspicious vote dumping, double voting, non-citizen voting,
and voting machine manipulation were made by the defendant with the full
knowledge that these claims were false.
By page ten of the indictment, a state-by-state analysis is
given listing the activities that assisted in the fraud being committed. An employee of the defendant, Co-Conspirator
1, made a claim to the Arizona House Speaker where he charged that non-citizens,
non-residents, and dead people had voted in their election. When asked for proof the employee had to
admit he had no such evidence. His actual
comment was, "We don't have the evidence, but we have lots of theories." Even with that admission, he still tried to elicit
the help of that official to select a phony slate of electors that would support
the Defendant which would be contrary to the actual certified outcome of the
election in Arizona.
It is an important distinction to be made here that, while
the First Amendment to the Constitution protects speech, even speech that is
knowingly untrue, it provides no such protection for speech that is used to
commit a crime. In fact, virtually all frauds
and conspiracies begin and are dependent upon speech and verbal communication. None of the speech referenced in the actual charges
in the indictment is protected by the First Amendment. It is part and parcel of the crime being
committed.
The next section with a Georgia reference identifies
specifics surrounding the falsified claim of voter fraud perpetrated by manipulation
of election machines and election software.
There was no evidence to support these claims, they were but theories. There was also no foundation for the claim
that 10,000 dead people voted while diligent research had found just 2 such instances. A senior campaign advisor to the Defendant
wrote, "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."
In item 31 (f), of the indictment under the Georgia heading,
the phone recording from the Defendant to the Georgia Secretary of State is
referenced where the Defendant asks him to “find 11,780 votes.” This activity is also part of a separate
action by state officials against the Defendant.
The document goes on to describe similar activities, all of
which had already been investigated and found to be without merit in Michigan,
Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. While the
charges had no merit and lacked evidence the goal was to muddy the waters with
claims of fraud to then disenfranchise the voters in those states with a false
slate of electors that would overturn the actual results for key states.
In Michigan, the Senate Majority Leader was sent a text
message from the Defendant’s lawyer (Co-Conspirator 1) that stated, "So I
need you to pass a joint resolution from the Michigan legislature that states
that, * the election is in dispute, * there's an ongoing investigation by the
Legislature, and * the Electors sent by Governor Whitmer are not the official
Electors of the State of Michigan and do not fall within the Safe Harbor
deadline of Dec 8 under Michigan law."
The subsequent
public statement from the Michigan House Speaker is telling. He states in part that, “We've diligently
examined these reports of fraud to the best of our ability..., I fought hard for
President Trump. Nobody wanted him to win more than me. I think he's done an incredible job. But I love our republic, too. I can't fathom
risking our norms, traditions, and institutions to pass a resolution
retroactively changing the electors for Trump, simply because some think there may
have been enough widespread fraud to give him the win. That's unprecedented for
good reason. And that's why there is not enough support in the House to cast a
new slate of electors. I fear we'd lose our country forever. This truly would
bring mutually assured destruction for every future election in regard to the Electoral
College. And I can't stand for that. I
won't.”
Time after time the Defendant and his Co-Conspirators were
rejected by Republican leaders in the various states who abhorred the
thought of overturning the popular vote so as to appoint a slate of electors who
would then vote for the Defendant. Repeated
claims by the Defendant that 205,000 more votes in Pennslyvania were counted
than there were actual voters, were wholly unfounded and without any basis in
reality.
In Wisconsin, the Defendant paid for a recount that only managed
to increase the margin of defeat. The
Defendant’s challenge of the election was heard and rejected by the state
Supreme Court. The Wisconsin Governor
accordingly certified the election. At
that point the Defendant decided to take the fate of the Wisconsin election
into his own hands. The plot was then
expanded to include Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania. In those seven states the Defendant would fraudulently
identify false slates of electors with phony certifications to send to
Washington to name the Defendant the winner in those states.
A ”Wisconsin Memo” was drafted that was ultimately used as the
basis for similar documents in the other states, designed to subvert the
federal government function by stopping Biden electors’ votes from being
counted and certified. While the
original Wisconsin Memo was written on the premise that the alternate slate of
electors was being sent to “preserve” the rights of Wisconsin voters, the new memo,
the new memo for the remaining “contested” states were designed to establish a
fake controversy to derail the certification process that would establish Biden
as the new president-elect.
The new fraudulent electors were given special instructions
on how they could mimic the legitimate electors in those six states. This would be necessary because the
fraudulent electors wouldn’t have access to the legitimate state process or
official resources. They elicited the
help of the RNC Chairwoman to gather electors for those states. She was told these electors would only be
used if the “contested” elections in those states were litigated successfully.
Attorney’s in each of the states was selected who could
assist with the process. The Arizona
attorney recounted the conversation with the Defendants Co-Conspirator 5. The idea was to have the electors send in
their votes, even though the votes would be illegal under federal law as they
hadn’t been signed by the governors of the respective states, so as to precipitate
a fight in Congress on January 6th.
The wild idea was that Congress is not bound by federal law because they
make laws. They believed this could be
successful as they would be sent to the Defendant’s Vice President and he could
get “someone” to object to the actual votes being counted and the fake votes
substituted.
In Arizona, it was planned that the Arizona lawyer would file
a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court to falsely claim that litigation
was pending to provide cover for the fake electors. This would be necessary because two
participants in the Arizona part of the plot feared their actions would “appear
treasonous” if there was no pending court proceeding.
In Pennsylvania fears that they were doing something illegal
resulted in assurances from Rudy, I mean Co-Conspirator 1, that the signed
certificates would only be used if litigation was successful. Co-Conspirator 6 then circulated conditional
language to that effect, but only for Pennsylvania. The Defendant feared that if the other states
heard about the conditional language they too might want similar language and “it
could snowball.”
With all the confusion, the Defendant asked for an update. In a text message from the Deputy Campaign Manager
responded, "Here's the thing the way this has morphed it's a crazy play so
I don't know who wants to put their name on it." A senior Advisor wrote, “Certifying illegal
votes.” Participants in the group text
then refused to put their names on it because none could “stand by it.”
On December 14, 2020, the legitimate electors in all 50
states and the District of Columbia cast their ballots for president. The result, 236 votes for the Defendant and
306 for Biden. On this same day, at the
direction of the Defendant and Co-Conspirator 1, convened a sham proceeding in
the seven targeted states to cast their fraudulent votes. In some states, the fraudulent electors
attempted to gain access to state capitol buildings to satisfy legal requirements
but were denied access. In any case, the
fraudulent votes from the fake electors in the targeted states were mailed to the
President of the Senate, the Archivist of the United States, and others. These votes were subsequently used to target
the government function in the legitimate election process contrary to promises
made that this would not be how they would be used.
In late December, the Defendant attempted to have the Acting
Attorney General sign a letter outlining claims of election fraud in the selected
states. When the Acting Attorney General
told the Defendant that the Justice Department could not and would not change
the outcome of the election, the Defendant responded, "Just say that the
election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican
congressmen."
On December 28, 2020, a Justice Department letter was
drafted by Co-Conspirator 4 claiming election fraud in Georgia, and this letter
was duplicated with appropriate changes to the other targeted states. The letter requested that the states convene a
special legislative session so they could choose the fraudulent electors over
the legitimate electors.
The Acting Deputy Attorney General promptly responded to
Co-Conspirator 4 by email and told him that his proposed letter was false,
writing, "Despite dramatic claims to the contrary, we have not seen the
type of fraud that calls into question the reported (and certified) results of
the election." Shortly after this
exchange, Co-Conspirator 4 was directed to not have unauthorized contact with
the White House.
That admonition was ignored and Co-Defendant 4 and on
January 3, he met with the Defendant who made him the new Acting Attorney
General. On that same day, the newly
minted Acting Attorney General met with Deputy White House Counsel and reiterated
that there was no outcome-determinative fraud and that if the Defendant remained in
the White House beyond January 20th, there would be “riots in every
major city in the United States.” Co-Conspirator
4 responded with, “Well, that’s why there is an Insurrection Act.
At this point the Acting Attorney General has not been
officially fired, Co-Conspirator 4 thinks he is the Acting Attorney General and
there is a pending national security briefing scheduled that includes the
Defendant. That meeting happens where
they also discuss Co-Conspirator 4’s (aka Acting Attorney General???) plans to
investigate election fraud, and the current/former/who knows Acting Attorney
General questions his job position. It
is then related to the Defendant that the entire Justice Department is on
record that they will resign if Co-Conspirator 4 is appointed its new head. The Defendant relents and un-promotes Co-Conspirator
4.
With January 6th fast approaching the Defendant
tries to enlist his VP who has a ceremonial role in the certification process
in Congress. It is here that the
Defendant tries to convince the VP to accept the Defendant's fraudulent electors,
reject legitimate electoral votes, or send legitimate electoral votes to state
legislatures for review rather than count them.
Not wanting to join the coup and knowing, like the defendant, that the claims
of voter fraud and election manipulation are false, the VP declines to alter or
otherwise agree to throw the country into chaos.
The Defendant, on December 19, 2020, using the widespread
anger he had fomented within his supporters, tweeted, "Big protest in D.C.
on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"
In weeks that followed, the Defendant continued to disseminate information
that he knew to be false to his followers to get them to rally in Washington
and disrupt the ceremonial proceedings that would formalize the election of
Joseph Biden.
While the Defendant and his co-conspirators knew that the
Vice President had no such power as they advocated, they continued in their
efforts to get the VP to override the official votes and “make the
determination on his own.”
Co-Conspirator 2, who had previously acknowledged in writing that such
an action would be in violation of the Constitution and the ECA (Electoral
Count Act). On January 1, 2021, the
Defendant called the VP and berated him for not supporting his lawsuit seeking
a judicial decision that, at the certification, the VP would have the authority
to invalidate the election results. When
the VP rightly informed the Defendant that this would be unconstitutional, the
Defendant told the VP, “You’re too honest.”
The Defendant continued in his efforts to disrupt the constitutional
process of certifying the election when he tweeted, "The BIG Protest Rally
in Washington, D.C., will take place at 11.00 A.M. on January 6th. Locational
details to follow. StopTheSteal!"
Calling this a “protest” conveyed the Defendant’s dissatisfaction with the
results of the validated election. The
conspiracy to overthrow the valid election results continued with
Co-Conspirator 2 (CC2) circulating a memorandum with a plan calling on the VP
to send the elector slates back to the states for a final determination as to
which slate of electors to count.
On January 4, 2021, the Defendant, CC2, the VP, the VP’s
Chief of Staff, and the VP’s Counsel met to once again convince the VP of
widespread election fraud that would require him to reject Biden’s legitimate
electoral votes. The White House Counsel
was not invited as he had already weighed in on the fact that the claims of outcome-determinative
election fraud were false. The Defendant,
as recorded in contemporaneous notes taken by the VP from the meeting, claimed
that he, “Bottom line-won every state by 100,000s of votes” and “We won every
state.”
During this meeting, the VP questioned CC2 on whether the
proposal was defensible. The response was
that it had never been tested before.
The VP turned to the Defendant and said, “Did you hear that? Even your own counsel is not saying I have
that authority.” The Defendant
responded, "That's okay, I prefer the other suggestion" of the Vice
President rejecting the electors unilaterally.
Also on January 4th, CC2 acknowledged to the
Defendant’s Senior Advisor that no court would support his proposal. The Defendant’s Senior Advisor then told CC2,
“You’re going to cause riots in the streets.”
CC2 responded that there had previously been points in the nation's
history where violence was necessary to protect the republic. After that
conversation, the Senior Advisor notified the Defendant that Co-Conspirator 2
had conceded that his plan was "not going to work."
The following day, January 5th, the Defendant had
the VP’s Chief of Staff and Counsel meet with CC2 so they could convince the VP
to unilaterally reject the electors from the targeted states. CC2 admitted that, should this ever be subject
to judicial review, the proposal would be unanimously rejected by the Supreme
Court. The VP’s Counsel told CC2 that
following this proposal would be disastrous and the election might be “decided
in the streets.”
Even knowing that the VP was not on board with his plan, the
Defendant continued with his efforts to use his supporters to disrupt the
certification process and he falsely claimed that the VP had the authority to
reverse the election outcome. That same
day, the Defendant tweeted again that the VP had the authority to reject the
election results. In a second tweet at 5:05
p.m. the Defendant tweeted, "Washington is being inundated with people who
don't want to see an election victory stolen .... Our Country has had enough,
they won't take it anymore! We hear you (and love you) from the Oval
Office."
Later on January 5th the Defendant met with the
VP and told him he would have to publicly criticize him. Fearing for his safety, the VP alerted his Secret
Service detail. When the crowds began
gathering and could be heard from the White House, the Defendant told all
within earshot that the crowd was going to be angry. The Defendant, through his campaign office,
issued a public statement that he knew was a lie: "The Vice President and
I are in total agreement that the Vice President has the power to act." This would mean that, when the VP did as he
said he would, it would look like a betrayal.
On January 6th, the Defendant continued fomenting
his followers with false information. He
put the burden wholly on the VP upon whom the Defendant again falsely claimed
had the power to overturn the election.
If the VP would only do this one little thing, “WE WIN.”
The Defendant also had a Senator’s office attempt to deliver
certificates for alternate slates of electors for Michigan and Wisconsin to the
VP’s office claiming that the archivist didn’t receive them. The VP’s office rejected them. At 11:15 a.m. the Defendant made a final plea
to the VP to reject Biden’s legitimate electoral votes. When the VP again refused, the Defendant
changed his planned public remarks to be issued on the Ellipse and reinserted
the language about the VP’s authority to change the election outcome. Advisors had previously convinced him to
remove those remarks as they were knowingly a lie. They would become part of what has been
referred to as The Big Lie.
At the Ellipse, CC1, CC2, and the Defendant, lied to all
present continuing to claim election fraud and urging the VP to overturn the
election results. CC1 called for the
crowd to initiate, “trial by combat.”
CC2 continued with similar rhetoric as did the Defendant. The Defendant lied to the crowd when he
stated that the Pennsylvania legislature wanted “to recertify the votes.” The only way this can happen is if Mike Pence
sends them back. The crowd chanted, “Send
it back.” The Defendant further said
that regular rules no longer applied, “And fraud breaks up everything, doesn’t
it?” When you catch somebody in a fraud,
you're allowed to go by very different rules."
The Defendant finally told the crowd at the Ellipse, “We fight,
We fight like Hell, And if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have
a country anymore.” The crowd was then
told to march on the Capitol to “take back our country.” Thousands then marched toward the Capitol.
We all know what happened next. We have seen it all repeatedly on video tape
from that assault and heard about it firsthand in testimony. The Defendant also saw and heard what was
happening. He let it continue hoping it
would save his presidency. His family
and advisors asked him to call it off.
He started it and he alone could end it.
Through a series of tweets and finally a Twitter video message from the
White House Rose Garden, he finally told his rioters that even though “we had
an election that was stolen from us,” they should leave the Capitol.
The Defendant, after his video tweet, joined others in the
outer Oval Office and said while watching the video of the attack on
television, “See, this is what happens when they try to steal an election. This is what happens.” At 6:01 p.m., the Defendant tweeted,
"These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide
election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great
patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with
love & in peace. Remember this day forever!"
It wasn’t over for the Defendant. He and
CC1 still tried to call Senators and Representatives to get them to delay the
certification. On one such call the voicemail
message left for one Senator said, "We need you, our Republican friends,
to try to just slow it down so we can get these legislatures to get more
information to you. And I know they're reconvening at eight tonight but the
only strategy we can follow is to object to numerous states and raise issues so
that we get ourselves into tomorrow-ideally until the end of tomorrow."
At 7:01 p.m. the White House Counsel called the Defendant and
asked him to withdraw his objections to allow the certification. He refused.
At 3:41 a.m. on January 7, as President of the Senate, the
Vice President announced the certified results of the 2020 presidential
election in favor of Biden.
All of the above was contained under the heading, Count One
of the indictment, Conspiracy to Defraud the United States. It described in detail the Conspiracy as
charged. This description took 42 pages
of the 45 total in the indictment.
Count Two of the indictment is labeled, Conspiracy to
Obstruct an Official Proceeding and incorporated all of the above by reference. The same is true of Count Three, Obstruction
of, and Attempt to Obstruct, an Official Proceeding. These three counts reference differing
statutes covering the described events.
Count Four was slightly different in that it was
Conspiracy Against Rights in that the Defendant and his Co-Conspirators and
others, did injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate one or more persons in
the free exercise and enjoyment of a right and privilege secured to them by the
Constitution and laws of the United States-that is, the right to vote, and to
have one's vote counted. Count Four
falls on page 45, the last page that bears the signature of Jack Smith, Special
Counsel, United States Department of Justice.
