Super-Dumb Trump Lawyer Burned By Own Burner Account
Whoopsie, hope those prosecutors don't hold it against you.
Dingus Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro is back in the news a mere couple of weeks after we learned about his extra-super-smart plan to keep Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s win on January 6, then spend two weeks destabilizing society while he and the other law-talking-guys kept presenting “evidence” of voter fraud over and over and over until Congress was too paralyzed to work, at which point the adults of the Supreme Court would step up and declare Donald Trump the winner. Then everyone would just shut up, go home, turn on the NFL playoffs, and live with it, we guess?
It’s the kind of genius that could only come from the mind of a mediocre dork who had a midlife crisis, made a pile of money in crypto, allegedly snagged himself a wife much younger than the age-appropriate hag he divorced a few years back, and is now feeling like the king of the world. The only cliché that hasn’t yet made an appearance is a cocaine habit, but we know which way we would bet on that question.
Then Chesebro had a change of heart — getting charged with crimes and sitting for your first-ever mugshot will do that to a guy — or at least decided he probably should cut bait now if he wants to save his bar license. So he pled guilty in Georgia. Then he went up to Michigan, which has its own investigation into the fake electors scheme he helped draw up, and came clean to prosecutors there.
At least he claimed he had come clean. CNN dug into his now-deleted Twitter account, the one he kept using to share Gateway Pundit content, and strongly suggests that maybe he didn’t:
Kenneth Chesebro […] concealed a secret Twitter account from Michigan prosecutors, hiding dozens of damning posts that undercut his statements to investigators about his role in the election subversion scheme.
Yes, at the same time Chesebro was describing for prosecutors a spectacularly stupid plan to steal the election for the world’s largest navel orange, he told them when asked directly about his social media presence, golly no, he didn’t tweet and was not using an anonymous account to push for a much more aggressive effort to implement that plan than he was admitting to.
Now that Talking Points Memo has found his account and CNN has dug deeply into it, he’s had to admit he may have been a wee bit misleading. Thwarted by the evil genius of the Wayback Machine!
Anyway, this entire excuse from Chesebro’s lawyers is too good to not quote in its entirety:
Chesebro’s lawyers confirmed to CNN that the BadgerPundit account belonged to Chesebro, describing it as his “random stream of consciousness” where he was “spitballing” theories about the election – but insisted that it was separate from his legal work for Trump’s campaign.
“When he was doing volunteer work for the campaign, he was very specific and hunkered-down into being the lawyer that he is, and gave specific kinds of legal advice based on things that he thought were legitimate legal challenges, versus BadgerPundit, who is this other guy over there, just being a goof,” said Robert Langford, an attorney for Chesebro.
Ha ha, it was “some other guy over there” and just a goof, this Twitter feed where Chesebro was publicly claiming that GOP-controlled legislatures could ignore the voters and sub in their own electors for funsies.
Some people would keep a journal. Some would just bore the hell out of their young spouse while she was trying to get through her seventh re-watch of that “Gilmore Girls” reboot. But some people apparently would think: I can tweet anonymously about this all I want, no one will ever connect an account called BadgerPundit to a guy from Wisconsin.
One example of Chesebro’s dishonesty is this: He told Michigan investigators that he saw the slate of fake — excuse us, “alternate” — electors as something of a contingency plan, ready to go in case Trump miraculously won one of his court challenges. But, he claims, he told the Trump campaign that state legislatures did not have the power to override the courts if they didn’t like the result.
But BadgerPundit, that impetuous goof who was this other guy over there, was tweeting this on the day the election was called for Biden:
“You don’t get the big picture. Trump doesn’t have to get courts to declare him the winner of the vote. He just needs to convince Republican legislatures that the election was systematically rigged, but it’s impossible to run it again, so they should appoint electors instead.”
So no biggie, just the exact opposite of what his alter ego claimed to have told the Trump campaign.
Chesebro’s attorneys acknowledged in an interview with CNN that “there’s clearly a conflict” between some of his tweets and what he told Michigan prosecutors, and that some of the elector theories he embraced online were “inconsistent” with his subsequent legal advice to the Trump campaign.
Let us help Chesebro’s attorneys out: Your client lied in a desperate attempt to make himself seem less like the scheming Iago and more like Othello with less strangling. It would serve him right if the prosecutors in Michigan decide to revisit their deal.
In conclusion, reading Gateway Pundit rots your brain, the end.
[CNN]
What even is the point of lying about one's social media presence? I'm thinking of that super-racist from yesterday who got fired from TPUSA for saying "I hate all the blacks, fuck 'em, end of story" or something like that and then she goes to get a job clerking for Clarence Thomas and she's all "Oh, didn't you hear? Mr. Smallface said that was someone else producing tweets that were faked up to look like mine!" They do this ALL THE TIME.
I mean, I don't allow my offline name to be connected to my commenting under Crip Dyke (even the e-mail I give out is in the name of another pseudonym), but I'm under no illusions that if I were being investigated for a security clearance to work at SCOTUS or for a felony indictment that, yes, there exist people who have the skills to connect my CD and offline identities. What would I gain from lying and having them find out anyway that is so much better than just giving up the goods myself?
I mean, this is assuming you are an immoral/amoral fuckwad and the only question is what's in your personal best interest. If they were moral they wouldn't have lied in the first place, so we can dismiss the moral arguments as ineffective against whateve they call a "thought process". But even so, if you're trying to get yourself the most goodies or least punishment, don't you have to, at some point, factor in that you're not the most super genius internet hacker that ever created a pseudonym?
officer taking mugshots: "Say Cheese Bro!"
Chesebro: *pictured*