The fake GQP electors in Georgia that Defendamf Donald Trump recruited as part of his failed coup d’état attempt to stay in power are starting to point fingers at each other and tatting each other out.
The Daily Beast reports, Trump’s Fake Georgia Electors Are Now Ratting on Each Other:
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, the Atlanta-area prosecutor who’s investigating Trump’s effort to upend American democracy there, laid out the details in a legal memo to a state judge—one that hints at criminal indictments to come.
According to the memo, prosecutors in July last year dangled immunity deals for “alternate electors” who were willing to cooperate with the investigation—but their defense lawyer is now accused of never telling them about the potential deal.
Lawyers are obligated to convey offers like this to their clients. A failure to do so has serious repercussions. If true, this could signal serious developments for the Fulton County case. https://t.co/6ecp2EJ9kV
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) April 19, 2023
Following a special purpose grand jury recommendation in December that the DA seek indictments against some people involved in the fraudulent scheme, investigators have turned up the pressure.
It turns out, these Republican officials and political operatives are now starting to squirm, identifying illegal behavior by their colleagues while trying to save their own skin—a sudden pivot that came when Willis’ investigators met with these fake electors last week.
Wednesday and Friday, “some of the electors stated that another elector… committed acts that are violations of Georgia law and that they were not party to these additional acts,” Willis explained in her court filing.
That description means that certain Republicans are now identifying crimes committed by a colleague while distancing themselves from that criminal behavior.
But that situation has created what Willis calls “an impracticable and ethical mess,” [see Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients] because 10 of these fake electors are being represented by a single Atlanta defense lawyer—who can’t possibly advocate for clients who are simultaneously ratting each other out. The DA’s office is using those details to make the case that the judge should intervene and disqualify that defense lawyer, Kimberly Bourroughs Debrow, citing a conflict of interest.
The DA also accused Debrow of highly unethical behavior, noting how several fake electors interviewed last week revealed that they’d never been told about the potential immunity deals—because Debrow never conveyed the message. The DA said that failure “is in direct conflict” with what Debrow’s fellow defense lawyer, Holly A. Pierson, told the judge in August last year.
Debrow, a former local prosecutor in a neighboring county, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Pierson, a former federal prosecutor, called the allegations “entirely false” and said the court has documents that undermine the DA’s previous attempts to disqualify the defense lawyers.
“Sadly, the DA’s office continues to seem more interested in media attention, trampling on the constitutional rights of presumptively innocent citizens, and recklessly defaming its perceived opponents than in the facts, the law, or the truth,” Pierson said in a statement.
The DA’s filing on Tuesday is the first indication of who exactly will get hit with criminal charges when Willis seeks an indictment through an Atlanta grand jury—which is expected in the coming weeks.
Debrow represents 10 of the 11 fake electors in question. That list includes Mark Amick, Joseph Brannan, Brad Carver, Vikki Consiglio, John Downey, Carolyn Fish, Kay Godwin, Cathy Latham, Shawn Still and Chandra “C.B.” Yadav.
All of this raises the obvious question, “What is the status of Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes’ investigation into the two groups of fake GQP electors in Arizona?,” which includes the former Arizona Republican Party chair and Republican candidates for office, including current serving members of the state legislature. The media silence on this criminal investigation no longer is sustainable. The public is entitled to regular updates on the status of this criminal investigation.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Attorney Norm Eisen writes, “A new clue in the Fani Willis investigation”, https://blogforarizona.net/fulton-county-da-pleading-seeks-to-disqualify-fake-gqp-electors-attorneys-for-unethical-conflict-of-interest/
(excerpt)
Fani Willis’ motion is based upon new interviews with some of the fake electors in the presence of their lawyer Kimberly Debrow. Several of these electors apparently alleged that another fake elector represented by Debrow had committed further (unspecified) violations of Georgia law. The motion also alleges that Debrow failed to communicate an immunity offer to the group, despite her former co-counsel Holly Pierson’s representation to the court that it had been communicated.
The motion suggests Willis is willing to offer immunity to some or even most of the fake electors. That is consistent with what we already know; the conclusion that a small subset was principally responsible for the election fraud scheming was also the view of the Jan. 6 House committee. Its report highlights, for example, testimony from Georgia Trump campaign official Robert Sinners claiming that most of the fake electors were treated as “useful idiots or rubes.”
All of this is good news for innocent electors. The revelations in the motion seem to be positive for Willis as well, because they suggest electors are already working with her to build her case. And the more blameless they are, the better. (This situation may also help explain the delay in bringing charges, despite Willis saying months ago a decision was “imminent.”)
The motion is not such good news for the fake elector who allegedly committed an as-yet-unrevealed “further crime.” It’s not clear whether that possible offense relates to the fake electoral slates or something else. In either event, the development could serve as an important breakthrough for the district attorney. When a prosecutor has that kind of proof with a culpable party, they are better able to negotiate cooperation. Instead of offering immunity and hoping for assent, for example, Willis can push for a plea deal with the credible threat of prosecution.
Nor is the motion encouraging for Trump. Willis appears to be gathering momentum. Trump already faces prosecution in New York and, once Willis secures her cooperators, a Georgia indictment may not be far behind.
But perhaps the biggest loser is Debrow. Failing to communicate an offer of immunity to a client is a serious violation of professional ethics. And if she played a part in her co-counsel Pierson’s alleged misrepresentations to the court, that would be a serious matter as well. (Of course, none of this makes Pierson look good either. She may well be facing her own ethics investigation, especially if she knowingly made a false statement to the court. Judges look askance at this kind of thing, as we just saw from the reprimand doled out in Delaware to the lawyers for Fox.)
[If] Willis prevails on the motion, Debrow will likely have to stop representing some of her elector clients. All state attorney’s codes of ethics, including Georgia’s, prohibit lawyers from representing a client “if there is a significant risk that the lawyer’s own interests or the lawyer’s duties to another client, a former client, or a third person will materially and adversely affect the representation of the client.”
[I]ndeed, if Willis proves her claims, Debrow may be compelled by ethical considerations to step down from representing any of the electors, given “there is a serious possibility of future ethical problems concerning confidentiality of information obtained in the course of her representation thus far.”
This is just the latest example of lawyers tied to the Trump probes being accused of potential wrongdoing. Thankfully, prosecutors and the courts are well equipped to handle these problems as they arise. Willis has done just that here and — given Judge Robert McBurney’s careful consideration of the case thus far — we are confident that he will get to the bottom of the matter. Justice demands nothing less