At this point in our political timeline, we conservatives understand that we will never receive fair and equal treatment from the mainstream media, most large corporations, and many other organizations. That unfair treatment has spilled over into multiple levels of our government.
From pro-life Catholics having their homes raided simply because they pray for the sanctity of human life to be recognized to the Biden administration, alongside local administrations, continuously prosecuting Donald Trump, the leader of the political opposition, the government is being wielded as a tool to undermine and crush conservative values in the United States. Now, that abuse of power can be seen in the Michigan state government, as demonstrated by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel.
Dana Nessel recently announced that she will prosecute 16 Michigan citizens with felony charges due to their involvement in the so-called “fake electors scheme.” A “fake elector,” the phrase that many left-wing news outlets have coined to refer to these 16 Michigan citizens, refers to a slate of electors that are not the “official” slate of electors, meaning that this slate of electors has pledged to vote for the candidate who wasn’t officially certified by the Secretary of State.
In this scenario, the alternative slate of electors, who intended to cast their votes for Donald Trump, believed that they were the duly elected state and desired to be put alongside the “official” slate of electors, which the left immediately decried as a “threat to democracy.” If convicted, some of the individuals named in this supposed “fake electors scheme” could face up to 14 years in prison for the charges of forgery, conspiracy to commit forgery, uttering and publishing, and more. However, Dana Nessel is facing several significant roadblocks in her attempt to push her politically motivated attack.
Firstly, there is historical precedent on the side of the alternative electors. In the 1960 presidential election in the state of Hawaii between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy, two slates of electors were submitted to cast their votes for both candidates, one for Nixon and one for Kennedy. Even though the original count had Nixon barely edging out Kennedy, the second slate of electors intended to cast their vote for Kennedy, meaning that the slate of electors for Kennedy were technically, at that point, not the “correct” or “official” slate of electors.
Upon recounting the votes, Kennedy was declared the winner, meaning that the “alternative” slate of electors turned out to be the correct slate of electors. This is a near direct parallel to the situation that occurred in 2020 with the 16 conservative electors in Michigan, with the only differences being the state in question and that the election in Hawaii was slightly narrower than the election in Michigan, though it should be noted that both elections were considered to be extremely competitive.
Secondly, Dana Nessel needs to prove that there was clear intent to “defraud” and commit forgery on the part of the alternate electors, which she doesn’t have. Many conservatives are understandably skeptical about the 2020 election results in several swing states, and that includes invalidation of the 16 alternate electors. Meshawn Maddock, one of the 16 individuals named in the affidavit, made it clear that she believes she and the other 15 electors were the duly elected slate. Dana Nessel claims that the 16 electors “knew what they were doing,” but provides no evidence of that. Nessel can’t declare intent to defraud without substantial evidence without making it abundantly obvious that this is a political attack.
The hypocrisy of the Democrats with regard to “election denial” cannot go without mention. Rewinding back to the 2016 presidential election, Democrats were shocked when Donald Trump pulled off a remarkable upset victory and defeated Hillary Clinton. Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, immediately claimed interference and fraud affected the outcome.This was echoed by other Democrats, such as Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, who baselessly claimed that Russia “hacked” the election.
Stacey Abrams famously refused to concede to Brian Kemp in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election and continues to claim that election fraud affected the outcome. Most importantly, however, is that Democrats also pushed for an alternative slate of electors in the 2016 elections. Sitting Democratic elected officials, such as Representative Jim Hines (D-CT), called on the electors in the 2016 election to not cast their vote for the duly elected president, Donald Trump. Far-left propagandist and supposed “journalist” Joy Reid of MSNBC also called on the electors to vote for the losing candidate, Hillary Clinton, instead of the actual winner. Democrats stated that electors who decided not to cast their vote for Donald Trump were “American heroes.” In 2016, Democrats had no basis for claiming fraud. No election laws were unconstitutionally changed immediately before the election, as was the case in 2020 in Pennsylvania.
Stacey Abrams and Hakeem Jefferies are often referred to as “rising stars” in the Democratic Party. Yet, when a Republican dares ask reasonable and legitimate questions about the 2020 election, they’re referred to as “extremists” and “threats to democracy.” It is obvious that Dana Nessel doesn’t care about prosecuting actual criminals, but rather, prosecuting the political opposition. Conservatives should take note of Nessel’s abuse of power. If Dana Nessel is going to attack her political opposition with felony charges, why shouldn’t Republican officials in other states take the offensive and do the same thing as Nessel?
