Specifically, Senator Ron Johnson’s role:
Source: MSNBC via YouTube.
From the indictment, USA v. Donald J. Trump:
101. the morning of January 6,an agent ofthe Defendant contacted a United States
Senator to askhimto hand-deliver documents to the Vice President. The agent then facilitated the receipt by the Senator’s staff ofthe fraudulent certificates signed by the Defendant’s fraudulent electors inMichigan and Wisconsin,which were believed not to have been delivered tothe Vice President orArchivist by mail. When one ofthe Senator’s staffers contacted a staffer forthe Vice President by text message to arrange for delivery ofwhat the Senator’s staffer had been told were [a lternate slate[s] of electors for MI and WI because archivist didn’t receive them, the Vice President’s staffer rejected them.
From Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
About 20 minutes before a joint session of Congress was set to convene to begin certification of Biden’s victory that day, Johnson chief of staff Sean Riley told a staffer for Pence that [Wisconsin Senator Ron] Johnson wanted to hand-deliver to Pence votes from Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan who posed as fake presidential electors for Trump.
“Johnson needs to hand something to VPOTUS please advise,” Riley texted Pence staffer Chris Hodgson at 12:37 p.m. that day, according to evidence presented Tuesday by the House select committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
“What is it?” Hodgson, a former legislative affairs director for Pence, replied.
“Alternate slate of electors for MI and WI because archivist didn’t receive them,” Riley wrote back.
Hodgson then told Riley: “Do not give that to him.”
Ron Johnson’s comments on video, here (at about 1 minute in).
Here is a list of the Wisconsin false electors, from MJS:
- Bob Spindell, Republican appointee to the Wisconsin Elections Commission and current chairman of the 4th Congressional District GOP
- Andrew Hitt, then-chairman of state Republican Party, now partner at Michael Best Strategies
- Kelly Ruh, current chairwoman of the 8th Congressional District GOP
- Carol Brunner, former vice chairwoman of the 1st Congressional District GOP
- Scott Grabins, former chairman of the Dane County Republican Party
- Bill Feehan, current chairman of the 3rd Congressional District GOP
- Kathy Kiernan, current second vice chairwoman of the state Republican Party
- Darryl Carlson, former chairman of the 6th Congressional District GOP
- Pam Travis, former vice chairwoman of the 7th Congressional District GOP and former staffer for Sen. Ron Johnson’s 2022 reelection campaign
- Mary Buestrin, former national committeewoman for state Republican Party
RonJon! It appears that Trump’s lawyer thinks this is solely a free speech issue. Of course that is BS but guess who else is saying that? Jonathan the Trumpian Turd Turley.
They seem to have missed the fact that speech was never “free” for any and all words that may spill out of your mouth. Lots of lies have been prosecuted for the harm they did to others. Lots of con men are in jail for the words that spilled out of their mouth.
“96. That same day,the Defendant encouraged supporters to travel to Washington on
January 6, and he set the false expectation that the Vice President had the authority to and might
use his ceremonial role at the certification proceeding to reverse the election outcome in the
Defendant’s favor, including issuing the following Tweets:
At 11:06 a.m., The VicePresidenthas the powerto reject fraudulently
chosenelectors.” This was within 40 minutes of the Defendant’s earlier
reminder, SeeyouinD.C.
a .
b . At5:05p.m., Washingtonisbeinginundatedwithpeoplewho don’twant
to see an election victory stolen . . . . Our Country has had enough, they
won’ttakeitanymore! We hearyou(and loveyou) from the OvalOffice.
35
Case 1 :23- cr- 00257- TSC Document 1 Filed 08/01/23 Page 36 of 45
97. Also on January 5 , the Defendant met alone with the Vice President. When the
Vice Presidentrefused to agree to the Defendant’s request that he obstruct the certification,the
Defendant grew frustrated and told the Vice President that the Defendant would have to publicly
criticize him. Upon learning of this,the Vice President’s Chief of Staff was concerned for the
VicePresident’s safety and alerted the head ofthe Vice President’s Secret Service detail.
98. As crowds began to gather in Washington and were audible from the Oval Office,
the Defendant remarked to advisors that the crowd the following day on January 6 was going to
be angry.
99. That night,the Defendant approved and caused the Defendant’s Campaign to issue
a public statement that the Defendant knew, from his meeting with the Vice President only hours
earlier,was false : The Vice President and I are intotal agreement that the Vice President has the
powertoact.
At 5:43 p.m., I will be speaking at the SAVE AMERICA RALLY
tomorrowon the Ellipse at 11AMEastern. Arriveearly doors open at
7AMEastern. BIGCROWDS!
100. January 6, starting in the early morning hours, the Defendant again turned to
knowingly false statements aimed at pressuring the Vice President to fraudulently alter the election
outcome,andraised publicly the false expectation that the Vice President might do so:
At 1:00 a.m., the Defendant issued a Tweet that falsely claimed, IfVice
President @Mike Pence comes through for us, we willwinthe Presidency.
Many States want to decertify the mistake they made incertifying incorrect
& even fraudulent numbers in a process NOT approved by their State
Legislatures (which it must be) . Mike can send itback
a .
b . At8:17 a.m., the Defendant issued a Tweet that falsely stated, States want
to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities
and fraud, plus corrupt process never received legislative approval. All
Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States , AND WE WIN. Do
itMike, this is a time for extreme courage
Paragraphs 96-100 show why Pence has turned on Trump.
I guess Trump learned something from his German father:
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/08/02/trump-indictment-2020-election-grisham-jack-smith-ebof-vpx.cnn
Repeat it enough times and the sheeple will believe it.
Former Trump White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham recalls a moment when former President Donald Trump told her, “As long as you keep repeating something, it doesn’t matter what you say.”
That is how JohnH does it for sure.
Awww—is pgl annoyed by my constant calling attention to the fact the median usual weekly real earnings are less than 1% above where they were before the pandemic three and a half years ago? And this despite the vaunted tight labor market, and despite a rise in per capita GDP, and despite Krugman’s pollyannish claims that “It’s hard to overstate how good the U.S. economic news has been lately.” https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2018/02/are-wages-increasing-or-decreasing/
Simply hushing up the reality of stagnant wages is good form for economists of certain political persuasion. And ignoring Corporate America’s contribution to greedflation is equally good form for partisan hacks like pgl.
I am never annoyed by reality. You are the troll who keeps getting things wrong. But I see you decided once again to engage in dishonest and pointless name calling. I would ask you to grow up but your mommy assures us that you are incapable of doing so.
“the fact the median usual weekly real earnings are less than 1% above where they were before the pandemic three and a half years ago?”
I trust you have seen where our host has called you out on this one. Poor little Jonny boy – he misleads and when called on it goes whining to mommy.
https://www.rawstory.com/ron-desantis-slavery-guidlines/
Ron DeSantis doubles down on slavery benefited blacks. I get he is a racist but damn the stupidity burns.
Trump’s lying defense lawyer dusted off this canard about the 1960 election:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/07/1960-electoral-college-certificates-false-trump-electors-00006186
See the 1960 Electoral College certificates that the false Trump electors say justify their gambit
Their explanation relied heavily on the 1960 election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, who was vice president at the time.
When Donald Trump’s allies signed false documents claiming he won several states he lost — and that they were his legitimate presidential electors — they came armed with an excuse: Democrats did it first, 60 years earlier in Hawaii.
Their explanation relied heavily on the 1960 election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, who was vice president at the time.
By December 1960, it was clear Kennedy had won. Only Hawaii’s result remained in doubt. Nixon had prevailed by just 140 votes, according to the initial results, which were certified by the governor. A recount was underway on Dec. 19, 1960, when presidential electors across the nation were required by law to meet and cast their ballots.
Nixon’s Hawaii electors met and cast their three votes in an official ceremony. But nearby, Kennedy’s three elector nominees gathered and signed their own certificates, delivering them to Washington as though Kennedy had won the state.
The Hawaii episode has become an important flashpoint as prosecutors scrutinize whether the pro-Trump electors broke any laws. Justice Department leaders say the matter is under investigation, and several Democratic secretaries of state and attorneys general have similarly raised the specter of crimes like mail or election fraud. The Jan. 6 select committee is probing the false electors for evidence of coordination with the Trump campaign or White House.
While Republicans have used the incident to justify the actions of Trump’s illegitimate electors for the past year, POLITICO has newly obtained records that shed light on those claims.
The Hawaii documents
Until now, it’s been unclear whether the 1960 case of the Kennedy electors was truly analogous to 2020 Trump electors. But the unofficial Democratic certificates, obtained by POLITICO from the non-digitized files of the National Archives, show the three Kennedy electors signed documents that are remarkably similar to the false Trump-elector certificates.
The certificates describe the three Democrats as the “duly and legally appointed and qualified” members of the Electoral College. The envelope containing the certificates, stamped Dec. 22, 1960, includes another avowal: “We hereby certify that the lists of all the votes of the state of Hawaii given for president … are contained herein.” The documents do not mention the ongoing recount or that Nixon’s Hawaii victory had been certified. Instead, the Hawaii Democrats used virtually the same language that the false Trump electors in five states used in their effort to upend the 2020 race. In those documents — from Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia — the pro-Turmp activists described themselves as “duly elected and qualified.” In two other states, Pennsylvania and New Mexico, Trump allies submitted alternative elector slates but included a caveat: their votes would only be counted if ongoing court battles broke in favor of Trump. Charlie Gerow, a veteran Pennsylvania Republican strategist who signed one of the pro-Trump elector certificates, said he and several other electors who were lawyers devised the strategy to include a caveat. “We put in the contingent language quite bluntly because I and several others in the room who were lawyers insisted upon it,” said Gerow, who is currently running for governor. “We inserted that language specifically to avoid some of the charges that are coming from the left.” Gerow said the Trump allies met at the offices of his firm, Quantum Communications, to sign the Pennsylvania certificates. At that time, several of Trump’s long shot court challenges were still pending, he noted, and the Trump electors in those states wanted to be ready in the off-chance a court handed Trump a win.
Why Hawaii 1960 isn’t the same as Trump 2020
Although the three Democratic electors in Hawaii took the same action — signing false certificates — it does not appear they ever faced similar scrutiny, in part because of what happened next. Namely, that Hawaii’s recount ultimately did reverse the state’s election outcome. Kennedy prevailed by an eyelash when the recount concluded on Dec. 28, 1960. A newly sworn-in governor certified the Kennedy victory and transmitted a new slate of Electoral College certificates — signed by the same three Democrats who falsely claimed to have won two weeks earlier. When Nixon, like Mike Pence, presided over the Electoral College counting session on Jan. 6, 1961, he acknowledged receiving all three sets of certificates: the GOP slate, the uncertified Democratic slate and the certified Democratic slate. He then agreed that the newest one — the Democrats certified by Gov. William Quinn — should be counted, even though they were certified weeks after the required meeting of the Electoral College. Nixon added a caveat of his own: His decision should not be seen as a precedent for the future.
That newest slate “properly and legally portrays the facts with respect to the electors chosen by the people of Hawaii,” Nixon said. One crucial feature of the 1960 episode is that a state court weighed in on Jan. 4, 1961, two days before Nixon oversaw the electoral vote count. In that case, Judge Ronald Jamieson agreed that the certified Kennedy electors were legitimate. But, more significantly, Jamieson said it was important that those electors met and gathered on Dec. 19, 1960, as prescribed by the Electoral Count Act. Rather than suggest the Democratic electors committed fraud, the judge pointed to their meeting as a key step that preserved their ability to be counted after the recount showed Kennedy had actually won the state. Jamieson also reportedly threw out an effort by the GOP electors to scrap the entire election because of fraud allegations. The ruling wasn’t appealed and holds no binding weight, but it’s the only legal precedent for dueling Electoral College slates since the Electoral Count Act passed in 1887.
Thanks for posting this pgl.
There are a six unindicted co-conspirators in the latest Trump indictment. Can unindicted co-conspirators subsequently face prosecution? Yes, they can.
Consider, for instance, the Stormy Daniels case. Trump was described, but not named nor indicted, when Micheal Cohen was indicted. Trump is now under indictment on related charges.
Senator Johnson is apparently not among the six, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be charged. CNN (among others) has identified five of the six:
Rudolph Giuliani
John Eastman
Sydney Powell
Jeffrey Clark
Kenneth Chesebro
The mystery conspirator is a political consultant.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/01/politics/co-conspirators-trump-indictment/index.html
Trump’s lawyer and Jonathan Gurley both claimed that Jack Smith is indicted Trump for his exercise of Free Speech. Did either one of these clowns even read the indictment. Paragraph 3:
The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won . He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases, the Defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the outcome in any state through recounts , audits, or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful.
Right after than – the indictment makes clear what Trump unlawfully did. And it was not simply speaking. OK – Trump’s lawyer is a liar. What’s new? But someone please call Georgetown University and Turley should be fired from the law faculty.
Off-topic, but loosely related
Most of us, with just casual knowledge of software technology, gave up on Microsoft software and hardware roughly one quarter-century ago. When is the federal government going to wise up??
https://www.wsj.com/articles/microsoft-faces-mounting-scrutiny-over-china-linked-email-hack-7a028523
pgl wants reality? Really? LOL!!!
What’s reality is the BEA statistic that shows that median usual weekly real earnings rose by less than 1% in the three and a half years since before the start of the pandemic. https://econbrowser.com/archives/2023/08/a-wisconsin-senator-in-the-conspiracy?replytocom=302718#respond
Let me know if you ever see pgl cite that statistic, corporate shill that he is!
JohnH: First, it’s a BLS statistic (I am however glad that you are now able to find a series that you used to assert the government was hiding. Do I have to dig up your comments to remind you of this? I will, if I have to).
Second, usual weekly earnings are the product of hours and wages. Hours per week have fallen as people have substituted more leisure for labor. Real hourly wages are up. Hence, it is problematic to focus on usual weekly real earnings as a measure of welfare.
“Second, usual weekly earnings are the product of hours and wages. Hours per week have fallen as people have substituted more leisure for labor. Real hourly wages are up.”
I have made the same point to JohnH many times. Maybe he does not understand it as it requires being able to do 1st grade arithmetic.
I would put this in the most recent post thread, but thought it fit the topic here better.
I’m curious to know when were our network television anchors, Nora O’Dumbnell, David “I shoulda bin a adult film star” Muir, and Lester “Look at the humongous number of regular citizen North Koreans on the ski slopes!!!” Holt going to tell us about this manipulating of Republican delegates by donald trump?? Right after they show video of baby ducks in the sewer “saved from drowning” by grotesquely overweight police officer Joe “Shoot darkies in the back” Kowalski???
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/04/trump-rewriting-gop-rules-00109842
“Where the hell are my delegates? Cuccinelli took them from me!” Trump would joke.
At one point, Cuccinelli offered to help Trump “fix” the system so that wouldn’t happen. But by then, Trump was realizing he could play the same games Cruz had played — maybe even better: “Well, maybe I want them rigged now,” he told Cuccinelli.
“He is against rigged elections when they hurt him,” Cuccinelli said. “He doesn’t appear to be against rigging elections to help him.”
If my source material is correct, you could have say, 40% of California’s 21.9 million voting population, whose vote means nothing when they voted for the 2nd place candidate (say a DeSantis) when all of the delegates go to the lead candidate. 8.76 million Republicans whose vote means zero when they vote for the 2nd place candidate. California Republicans are content with that situation?? I mean I’m happy to be corrected if someone thinks my population numbers or math is wrong here. Seems like a hell of a lot of Republican voters who are being told their vote doesn’t mean squat in the presidential nomination process.