I dunno... I'd imagine there's something about "fraud" and "impersonating a government official" and, you know... TRYING TO OVERTURN A LEGITIMATE ELECTION!
This guy's making excuses.
this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
136 points (98.6% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3451 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
What's the law say? What's the loophole that the fake electors exploited? What's the change that the AG proposes?
Do you know anything about what you're talking about?
gee i wonder how all those other fake electors are being prosecuted then... remains a mystery
In different states, which have different laws. I'm going to assume you're just temporarily ignorant
The fake electors in those states are facing federal charges, buddy.
Then they're not relevant, friendo. This article is about the New Mexico AG, who by definition can only bring state charges against people, explaining that he can't bring state charges against these people. Bringing up other people in other states facing federal charges is about as relevant as bringing up recent criminal cases from Vietnam.
The article is talking about New Mexico's laws, pal
oh look, he's wrong AND an asshole
Loophole was they added fine print
In New Mexico and Pennsylvania, fake electors added a caveat saying the certificate was submitted in case they were later recognized as duly elected, qualified electors. That would only have been possible if Trump had won any of several dozen legal battles he waged against states in the weeks after the election.
Imo this is what they were supposed to do. Depending on other circumstances I'd say the same as the ag
seems like this is akin to the same "qualified immunity" crap that cops have. I don't give a fuck if there's not a state law written specifically addressing this particular instance of participating in a fraudulent scheme to overturn the results of a legitimate election. Every other state where this happened the fake electors are facing federal charges.
Except here, in New Mexico, where the democrat attorney general for the state decided that THEY would do a state investigation instead of throwing it up to the federal level. It is within this narrow window that he decided they can't prosecute them. Raul Torrez. This man. He's the one making the decision to not go for federal charges. He is the person responsible for letting these people off the hook.
I'm pretty sure forging government documents is illegal everywhere, both at the state and federal level. They just don't want to prosecute, otherwise they'd "find" a law to apply to this.
Why the fuck is the legal hole still gaping three years later? Our legal system is garbage.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — New Mexico’s top prosecutor said Friday that the state’s five Republican electors cannot be prosecuted under the current law for filing election certificates that falsely declared Donald Trump the winner of the 2020 presidential race.
Republican Party of New Mexico Chairman Steve Pearce said Friday that the state faced numerous election challenges that had the possibility of going before a court.
In 2020, President Joe Biden won the vote in New Mexico by roughly 11 percentage points — the largest margin among the states where so-called fake electors have been implicated.
Three fake electors also have been charged in Georgia alongside Trump and others in a sweeping indictment accusing them of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally overturn the results of the presidential election.
While saying it was disgraceful that New Mexicans were enlisted in a plot to “undermine democracy,” Torrez acknowledged that the conduct by GOP electors in New Mexico was not subject to criminal prosecution.
Michelle Lujan Grisham and the Democratic-controlled Legislature to amend state election code to give prosecutors more latitude to pursue charges in these types of cases in the future.
The original article contains 689 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Complicit.
You'd prefer he make up laws?
Fraud is still illegal.
According to state law, they didn't commit fraud.
That's the point of the article
Article doesn't mention fraud at all.
What do you think filing false paperwork constitutes?
So is fraud legal in New Mexico, or only if you're a Republican and the AG doesn't want to pursue the case?
Why are you saying he doesn't want to pursue the case?
Because that's what the article says. There are absolutely charges that could be brought against them. Fraud, for one.
So you want the AG to bring fraud charges against the fake electors, despite his professional opinion as the head legal officer of the state of New Mexico that what they did does not constitute as fraud according to New Mexico law?
You're just happy that he's letting fake electors walk, so you're instantly accepting any excuse.
Because I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Assuming the worst of everyone is an awful way to live
Instantly accepting bullshit excuses is how you get taken advantage of.
If he didn't want to be called complicit, he shouldn't have been complicit.
Fraud is a crime. If he doesn't want to be called complicit, he can stop being complicit.
Are you complicit because you have no legal way to do anything about it?
What a chickenshit.
That’s a big ole’ desert that state has. Wouldn’t it be nice for those fake electors to be given a courtesy tour, to show the state’s appreciation for their misguided efforts but no hard feelings, of the deep wilderness?