On November 19, 2020, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and Jenna Ellis took the center stage at the RNC. On the surface, their outrageous declarations served as fodder for political satire. Yet, beneath the media circus, a more insidious approach lurked. A recurring theme contrived by Trump and his sympathizers equated easy access to voting to cheating, insinuating that ballots cast by lawful voters should be discarded if voting regulations weren’t stringently obeyed.
Behind the scenes, this argument paved the way for a calculated attempt to subvert democracy spearheaded by the likes of John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro. They proposed politically motivated mass disenfranchisement cloaked under the guise of increased ballot access, furtively molding a blueprint to undermine democratic norms. While the public was entertained by Giuliani and Powell’s series of conspiracy theories, intellectuals like Eastman and Chesebro plotted a coup using high-flown legalese.
Eastman achieved notoriety due to his speech on the Ellipse and court battles over his emails, recognized as “Co-Conspirator 2” in the January 6 Trump Indictment. However, Chesebro, aka “Co-Conspirator 5” is not so well-known. An ex-editor of the Harvard Law Review and an adept corporate attorney, Chesebro maneuvered Trump’s fake electors scheme across three legal memos, referred to in the indictment.
The New York Times recently disclosed the second of these memos. Prepared by Chesebro on December 9, it laid out the requirement for both pretexts for litigation to question election results and effective public messaging to portray the installation of “alternative” electors as a routine measure.
Chesebro acknowledged that his plan likely will not hold up in the Supreme Court. He seemed, however, to be unconcerned with the consequences of Pence rejecting millions of swing state ballots. He even meticulously detailed how to impede Biden from securing 270 electoral votes, even if Trump’s legal actions or state legislative resolutions were insufficient to invalidate the election outcomes.
Chesebro has also drawn upon the so-called “Hawaii precedent”, a distorted interpretation of the 1960 elections, which has been thoroughly deconstructed. His use of this precedent, alongside the words of liberal commentators including Lawrence Lessig, Sherrilyn Ifill and Larry Tribe, was called out by Tribe himself, who denied assertions attributed to him by Chesebro.
It appears Chesebro and Eastman were tapped in order to lend a semblance of legitimacy to a largely unlawful endeavor. Eastman has ultimately discarded any pretense of legality, branding their scheme as a necessary measure against a perceived anti-American liberal elite.
Eastman is now petitioning for a stay in the disbarment proceedings in California against him, as he anticipates an imminent indictment.
For further reading on this topic, please refer to this article, ‘Previously Secret Memo Laid Out Strategy for Trump to Overturn Biden’s Win‘ published by New York Times.