Trump Allies Hit With SHOCKING New Felony Charges

Newspaper headlines about Trumps indictment.

Wisconsin’s Attorney General’s latest legal maneuvers against Trump’s allies raise serious concerns about prosecutorial overreach and potential political motivations.

Story Highlights

Wisconsin AG Josh Kaul filed 10 additional felony charges against Trump attorneys related to the 2020 fake electors scheme.
The charges claim fraud by misrepresenting the purpose of alternate electors’ certificates.
The case is unique as the only state-level prosecution for the fake electors scheme in Wisconsin.
Defendants argue the prosecution is politically motivated and lacks proper authorization.

Charges and Allegations: A Closer Look

In December 2024, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed 10 additional felony charges against key figures from Trump’s 2020 election campaign, including Jim Troupis, Kenneth Chesebro, and Mike Roman.

These charges supplement an earlier forgery charge and allege that the defendants defrauded 10 Republican electors by misrepresenting how their signed certificates would be used. The certificates falsely claimed Trump won Wisconsin’s electoral votes.

The defendants argue that their actions were intended to preserve legal options if courts ruled in Trump’s favor. They claim the certificates were never meant to be submitted to Congress without a favorable court ruling. Wisconsin’s DOJ contends that the electors were misled, with many not consenting to their signatures being used without such a ruling.

Legal and Political Context

This case stands out as the only state-level prosecution of the fake electors scheme in Wisconsin, amidst similar charges in other states like Arizona and Georgia. The Wisconsin Elections Commission had twice rejected complaints against the electors, raising questions about the legitimacy of the charges.

Critics argue that the prosecution is politically motivated, given that Kaul is a Democrat in a state Trump won in 2024.

Despite these challenges, a Wisconsin judge recently denied motions to dismiss the charges, indicating the court found a sufficient legal basis for prosecution. The defendants’ legal team contends that procedural issues, including the absence of a referral from the Wisconsin Elections Commission, weaken the prosecution’s case.

Implications and Broader Impact

The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for how state attorneys general can prosecute election-related offenses without local referrals. If convicted, the defendants face substantial penalties, including up to six years in prison per charge.

The case also highlights the broader debate over election integrity and the balance of power between state and federal prosecution of election crimes.

The prosecution sends a strong message about accountability for election-related conduct, though it risks being perceived as partisan. The case’s resolution may influence similar proceedings across the country and shape future interpretations of the legal boundaries for alternate elector schemes.