Conspiracy is a crime.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/conspiracy#:~:text=Conspiracy is an agreement between,requirement%2C not a constitutional one.
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act, along with an intent to achieve the agreement's goal. Most U.S. jurisdictions also require an overt act toward furthering the agreement. An overt act is a statutory requirement, not a constitutional one. See Whitfield v. United States, 453 U.S. 209 (2005). The illegal act is the conspiracy's "target offense.”
Coercion is a crime.
https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/coercion/
Coercion generally means to impose one's will on another by means of force or threats. Coercion may be accomplished through physical or psychological means. It may occur in a variety of contexts, such as unfair trade practices, which prohibits coercion to sell insurance in most states.
Direct Headline: The Electoral College should be eliminated
Twelve Democratic presidential candidates have explicitly called for the abolition of the Electoral College, while five others have said they are open to the idea...Some, like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, said they would back a constitutional amendment....Still others, like South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, called the Electoral College “undemocratic,” but hasn’t been clear on how he would repeal the system...Four Democrats said they are open to abolishing the system but didn’t explicitly back doing so. Sen. Kamala Harris said she’s "open to the discussion," while Sen. Bernie Sanders said it’s “hard to defend the current system”
https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/elections/electoral-college/
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CHIAFALO ET AL. v. WASHINGTON
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON
No. 19–465. Argued May 13, 2020—Decided July 6, 2020
“A State may enforce an elector’s pledge to support his party’s nominee—and the state voters’ choice—for President. … Electors are not free agents; they are to vote for the candidate whom the State’s voters have chosen.”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-465_i425.pdf
1948 Democratic Convention
Nearly two weeks after the convention, the president issued executive orders mandating equal opportunity in the armed forces and in the federal civil service. Outraged segregationists moved ahead with the formation of a States' Rights ("Dixiecrat") Party with Gov. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina as its presidential candidate...In the meantime, Thurmond, winning four states and 39 electoral votes, had fired a telling shot across the Democrats' bow.
Alonzo L. Hamby August 2008
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1948-democratic-convention-878284/
U.S. Supreme Court Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214 (1952)
No. 649 Argued March 31, 1952 Decided April 3, 1952
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/214/
Direct Headline:
Five Quotes From Joe Biden’s Eulogy of Famed Republican Racist Strom Thurmond
"Strom Thurmond was also a brave man, who in the end made his choice and moved to the good side. I disagreed deeply with Strom on the issue of civil rights and on many other issues, but I watched him change. We became good friends."...1973 Joe Biden would be stunned to hear that he “disagreed deeply” with Strom on the issue of civil rights given that 1973 and 1974 Biden consistently voted against bills that would have integrated schools. He even used the same “forced busing” phrase that Thurmond used to voice his opposition to the bills he joined Biden in opposing.
By Jacob Weindling April 5, 2019 9:41am
https://www.pastemagazine.com/politics/joe-biden/five-quotes-from-joe-bidens-eulogy-of-famed-republ/
*****
Pennsylvania - No faithless elector laws
Georgia - No faithless elector laws
Michigan - Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector (Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.47 )
Arizona - Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector (Ariz. Rev. Stat § 16-212 )
Wisconsin - Vote counted as cast (Wis. Stat. § 7.75(2) )
Nevada - Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector (Nev. Rev. Stat. § 298.075(2) )
New Mexico - Vote counted as cast (N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-15-9 )
- New Mexico is the only state that has some form of legal penalty on this list for electors whom refuse to vote as pledged.
*****
The states in dispute are Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin, Nevada and New Mexico.
The United States Constitution does not cover the "Electoral College" in depth and never specifically does so by name. Article II and the 23rd Amendment are about logistics. The 12th Amendment defers specific breakdown of electors to state legislatures. ( SCOTUS reaffirms this in Chiafalo, but the distinction still remains that this is a matter for state legislatures to hash out for themselves in the details and previous precedents have only resulted in "fines" i.e. Colin Powell/Hillary Clinton)
Two of the states mentioned have no laws regarding faithless electors. Three of the states mentioned allow some mechanism to replace electors in the case of faithless electors. Again, discretion is given to each respective state. The two states that could drive serious problems here are Wisconsin and New Mexico, but again, there would a require a deeper dive into their legislatures and election laws.
From an optics standpoint, dragging out the "rebellious electors" narrative and the "strong arming electors" narrative and "fake electors" narrative will push the conversation back to Strom Thurmond and how SCOTUS got to the point to rule on elector vote adherence (i.e. Ray). Then it pushes back to Joe Biden's relationship with Thurmond and their role together on Civil Rights issues. Biden pushes identity politics when his entire political career, outside of the protection of the activist complicit MSM, shows him as a racist. This is not the kind of backdoor media narrative that the Biden Administration is going to want in the Mid Terms and 2024.
This issue also drags out that POTUS contenders Warren, Sanders, Klobuchar and Buttigieg all wanted, on record, the electoral college to get wiped out. Kamala Harris maintains a fence sitter position here. None of this helps any of them if Trump and Eastman push the failures of the electoral college in the national daily media cycle. This particularly can hurt Buttigieg, and with the Afghanistan disaster, the Party apparatus needs a military man in tow for 2024 in some capacity.
In short, there needs to be a state by state breakdown, considering their respective laws, of what is being considered "fake electors"
I actually don't agree with what Trump did and said on J6. It was not in the best interests of functional governance and it was not what was best overall, by intent, for all Americans. That being said, these issues with the electors, on a broad scale, are still functionally MATTERS OF LAW and need to be examined by each state in question and by each accusation levied against what each respective state legislature has ruled and put in place.
What are these "fake documents to change electors" if you have states that have mechanisms to actually replace electors?
What exists as an "alternate/fake elector scheme" if you have states that have mechanisms to actually replace electors?
So you'll ask, did Trump and Eastman commit conspiracy? Eastman presented a legal theory to Trump. They both approached Pence with it. Pence said I'll look into this and do my due diligence. Now Pence might have privately thought they were both insane and idiots and could see the dangerous pathway where this could all spiral out of control concerning rioting and violence in the streets. But it's Pence's job to do due diligence. He discussed it with his staff and legal experts around him and he told Trump and Eastman he could not support their claim.
The faithless elector issue, which is a real complex legal discussion BEFORE TRUMP EVER ENTERED PROFESSIONAL POLITICS, is enough of a hedge that Trump can believe, in his own state of mind, that he won the election.
I've seen someone mention "treason" in this thread. OK, treason is off the table ( Trump is an idiot, he's not in league with the CCP and Xi to start World War III against the US). Sedition is off the table ( i.e the force test) . With the faithless elector issue, I'm going to have a hard time seeing conspiracy fly here and it provides some cover against obstruction. If even one single of the radical lefty lawyers here comes out to say Trump staying silent for hours as the riots and breaching kept going proves specific intent, go ahead and set your law degree on fire right now.
I'll say it again, many of the states in question have mechanisms by state law to actually replace electors. A few have no laws at all regarding faithless electors. How easily can you unpack "illegal" here?
If some of you don't like the current law, then use the formal established method via our Constitution to change the law. How do you do that? You win a crapload of elections and you get the majorities you need, and you get SCOTUS reloaded with your Party's loyalists and you get to infuse the Judicial system with your judges to uphold your public policy. Just keep winning elections and lots of them.
Do you know how you win lots of elections? YOU DELIVER WINS FOR EVERYDAY WORKING CLASS AMERICAN CITIZENS. Because there are more of them in masses than college aged/college educated liberal zealots trained as woke shock troopers, Limousine Liberals (plenty of those here in the PSF) and LGBTs. Has the Democratic Party been doing a good job of delivering wins for the average American at the ground level who is a paycheck and a half away from being homeless? No, not by a long shot.
If some of you want Trump in prison, look at the pardons of Paul Manafort and Roger Stone. There's way more fire there than smoke. It's not Trump's fault that Team Blue and most of you are looking in the wrong place if you want him put in chains.
