The prosecution of Kenneth Chesebro

 

This is Kenneth Chesebro.  He's a lawyer.   Yeah, that's a mugshot from Fulton County Georgia and he is the defendant who asked for a speedy trial in the Trump scandal.  I guess a lot of fellow Democratic Party members are happy about this Georgia case because it's way fun to have mugshots of Donald Trump and all his cronies?  For me the most Schadenfreunde I got was from Sydney Powell's mugshot.  She is excrutiatingly obnoxious to me and the devils of my worse nature delighted in seeing her humiliated after hearing that nasal horrible voice of hers whining on a year or so ago about 'releasing the kraken' and how she had all this proof of a stolen election. Pure lies it turned out .... causing old Sparky himself...Rudy Giuliani to say,  "we have lots of theories but no evidence".  

But, as a lawyer I was intrigued by this legal move of Chesebro to demand a speedy trial. As a long time criminal defense trial lawyer,  I am pretty familiar with the defendant type that demands a speedy trial. Yeah...it's right there in the Constitution as a guaranteed right as prominent as the right to remain silent, the right to a lawyer, right to a trial by jury.  But  you don't hear much about this particular right and you see it in action even less. Generally,  clients that demand a speedy trial fall into two classes:  A. Hard Boiled experienced convicts sitting in jail with hopeless cases who are willing to play a 'game' with the overworked prosecutor team that if they put this kind of pressure on them and the system to put a trial together that fast (within 70 days in Indiana) they will wilt and make a sweet sweet deal OR they won't be able to put it together and the case will fail. In "game theory" this is known as "playing chicken with the prosecutor".   It's a really really bad strategy in my opinion.    The other kind of defendant is B. Somebody who is NOT GUILTY and knows it.  

Which of these is Chesebro?  Well...we know he's not sitting in jail.

Look,  I am putting aside my partisan hat and putting on my 'lawyer' hat.  And I 'dug in' to the case against Chesebro. I read the Georgia indictment all the way through.  I read it again focused on the specific allegations against Chesebro.  

Mostly,  he is accused of writing a memorandum on the topic of 'when the deadline for counting all the votes is'.   I am boiling this down significantly, but essentially, he wrote a legal memorandum challenging the generally understood deadlines for completing State vote counts in national elections.  He basically theorized that it the vote count could go on right on until the President of the Senate (ie the Vice President Pence)  certified the electoral college count which didn't necessarily have to be on January 6.    Pshaww you say!  

But, as a lawyer, some things sort of leap out at me. First, this is exactly the sort of legal memorandum that is written every day of the year as analysis to help clients sort out complex situations.  Usually you see this sort of thing in the business or corporate world. Chesebro's memo assumes certain things: a. That the suspicions about the true count have a basis in fact.  b. that a proper count is more important than a rushed count.    He winds up giving the 'client' a basis for moving forward and getting a slate of electors for your side 'certified' so that if it turns out you win in the final recount...you have electoral votes to present to Congress.  Chesebro wasn't just making that up either.  He found that in 1960 Hawaii Democrats had their slate of electors and when a very late recount put Kennedy ahead of Nixon, they sent those electors to Congress where...get this...Nixon accepted them as President of the Senate.

So, I am asking myself...how is that or any of that criminal?  

The whole scheme might be criminal if somewhere along the line someone on 'your team' committed some criminal act.  In this case there seem to be two or three acts that could be seen as criminal. First the attempt to stop Congress on January 6.  Curiously,  Chesebro was in DC on January 6 and tagging along with notorious Alex Jones.  But he did not enter the Capitol, or so far as I can tell do anything personally,  to physically delay the process of Congress. 

 Chesebro on Jan. 6

Other overt acts were when a team of trump supports seem to have harassed some election workers at their homes. Chesebro doesn't appear to be involved in that and isn't accused of that.

Then the final questionable act is the Trump team getting access to the computer voting system and monkeying around with it.  Again, Chesebro isn't in on that. 

The actual indictment mentions him a few times sending emails to other team members. But I am having a hard time believing that a jury will make that 'criminal'.  

Chesebro apparently was an acolyte of famed Harvard Law Professor and Brahman Lawrence Tribe. (who has now disowned his former student) and Chesebro seems to be a truly gifted, former liberal, lawyer with a first rate legal mind.   

Here's my prediction:  Chesebro goes to trial.  Some surprises come bouncing out at trial.  He is found not guilty on all counts.  He is portrayed as a proxy for Trump and it builds Trump and his supporters up far more in the national zeitgeist as the Geogia prosecution comes off as a 'failure'.  

As we go forward,  I am going to keep myself open minded. But,  as much as I don't support his cause...I think this case is weak weak tea.