Previously Secret Memo Laid Out Strategy for Trump to Overturn Biden’s Win. In a stunning revelation, a lawyer closely aligned with former President Donald J. Trump has been linked to a calculated plot aimed at leveraging false slates of electors to undermine the integrity of the 2020 election. This internal campaign memo, which is emerging as a pivotal piece of evidence in ongoing investigations, sheds light on the evolution of the Trump team’s efforts into what prosecutors are now calling a criminal conspiracy. Social contact.
Unraveling the Memo: An Inside Look
The memo in question, dated December 6, 2020, has recently come to the forefront due to its significance in the indictment of Mr. Trump. While the memo’s precise details had remained largely undisclosed, The New York Times has obtained a copy that exposes the initial proposal by attorney Kenneth Chesebro. This document underscores Chesebro’s acknowledgment that he was advancing a “bold, controversial strategy” that he believed the Supreme Court would ultimately reject.
A Dual-Purpose Strategy
Despite its potential legal vulnerabilities, Chesebro’s memo outlined a strategy with two key objectives. First, it aimed to draw attention to claims of voter fraud, diverting the public’s focus to alleged irregularities in the election process. Second, the memo suggested that this strategy would buy the Trump campaign additional time to pursue litigation, potentially altering the electoral outcome in favor of Trump.
A Missing Piece in the Puzzle: Deciphering the Memo
The Dec. 6 memo provides critical insights into the formation of Mr. Trump’s allies’ strategy to overturn the election results. While the broader plan involving false electors was already known, the memo’s existence adds a layer of detail to the narrative. It reveals how Chesebro proposed a “messaging” strategy to justify the presence of pro-Trump electors in states where Biden had been declared the winner. This tactical move aimed to portray the electors’ actions as a precautionary measure to ensure electoral integrity.
A Continuation of Earlier Ideas
Notably, Chesebro’s proposal was not entirely unprecedented. In November, he had discussed a similar concept, albeit for a different purpose—to secure Trump’s rights in the event of a court victory in Wisconsin. However, the Dec. 6 memo marked a significant departure from these earlier discussions, transforming into what prosecutors characterize as a criminal conspiracy to disrupt the legitimate certification of Joe Biden as president-elect.
The Road to Implementation: Detailing the Memo’s Contents
Chesebro’s memo, referred to by prosecutors as the “fraudulent elector memo,” contained specific instructions for creating fraudulent electors in multiple states. The House committee investigating the January 6 riot cited this memo, along with a previously reported one from November, which detailed similar plans. However, the Dec. 6 memo had not been previously disclosed.
Chesebro’s Strategic Outlook
Chesebro’s memo revealed a nuanced understanding of the potential outcomes of the proposed strategy. He acknowledged the audacity of his plan and recognized the numerous challenges it might encounter. However, he argued that as long as the option remained viable, it was crucial for the Trump-Pence electors to cast their votes on December 14. This approach was designed to maintain flexibility and keep the option open for execution on January 6.
A Bold Proposal and a Controversial Path
The memo underscored the dichotomy between Chesebro’s acknowledgment of the strategy’s boldness and his determination to preserve it as a viable option. By presenting the memo as a possibility, Chesebro aimed to underscore the significance of the Dec. 14 vote by Trump-Pence electors.
The Indictment and Beyond: Unfolding the Investigation
In the larger context of Mr. Trump’s efforts to challenge the 2020 election results, the false elector’s scheme emerged as a sprawling endeavor involving lawyers, electors, and widespread resistance. While other figures, like John Eastman, played crucial roles, Chesebro was a foundational architect of the scheme. He was initially brought in to assist with legal challenges in Wisconsin and later became a key strategist in the broader effort.
Continued Investigations and Implications
Even after the charges were filed against Mr. Trump, ongoing investigations suggest that prosecutors are delving deeper into the events surrounding the false electors scheme. The House committee’s release of emails showed Chesebro’s involvement in disseminating key memos to allies in multiple states. While the Nov. 18 and Dec. 9 memos were previously known, the Dec. 6 memo introduced more audacious ideas, reflecting Chesebro’s strategic acumen.
Scholarly References and the Messaging Strategy
Chesebro’s memo strategically referenced legal scholars to bolster its arguments. Notably, it cited writings by Harvard Law School professor Laurence H. Tribe, aiming to support the idea that deadlines and procedures in the Electoral Count Act were unconstitutional. Chesebro’s intent was to present a coherent messaging strategy that aligned with these legal interpretations.
Clarifications and Contradictions
However, Chesebro’s use of these references has come under scrutiny. Professor Tribe himself criticized Chesebro’s selective use of his scholarship, pointing out misrepresentations and misinterpretations. The memo’s reliance on Tribe’s work was, in some instances, taken out of context, potentially undermining its legal standing.
A Controversial Legacy: Conclusion and Implications
The Dec. 6 memo, now exposed, stands as a testament to the audacity and complexity of the efforts to challenge the 2020 election results. Chesebro’s strategic thinking, while bold, was not without controversy and potential legal pitfalls. The memo’s existence and contents shed light on the inner workings of a campaign that ultimately faced legal consequences.
A Lasting Impact and Unanswered Questions
As investigations continue, the memo’s significance resonates beyond its initial intent. The enduring legacy of this episode serves as a reminder of the fragility of democratic processes and the lengths to which individuals may go to challenge electoral outcomes.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What role did Kenneth Chesebro play in the false electors scheme? Kenneth Chesebro, a lawyer closely aligned with former President Trump, was a key architect of the false electors scheme. He proposed a strategic memo outlining a controversial plan to challenge the 2020 election results.
- What was the primary objective of the Dec. 6 memo? The Dec. 6 memo aimed to draw attention to alleged voter fraud claims and buy more time for litigation to potentially alter the electoral outcome in favor of Trump.
- How did Chesebro reference legal scholars in the memo? Chesebro cited writings by Harvard Law School professor Laurence H. Tribe to support the argument that the Electoral Count Act’s deadlines and procedures were unconstitutional.
- What impact did the false electors scheme have on the 2020 election? The false electors scheme was part of a broader effort to challenge the election results. It involved lawyers and electors across multiple states and became a central focus of investigations.
- What does the investigation into the false electors scheme entail? Ongoing investigations are delving into the details of the false electors scheme and its key players, including Kenneth Chesebro. The House committee has released emails and memos that shed light on the scheme’s development.