By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The 2020 presidential election fallout continues, as evidenced by the disbarment of ex-Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro in New York. Chesebro, considered a key architect of the fake electors scheme, was found guilty in Georgia of conspiracy to commit filing false documents, a “serious crime” that led to the disciplinary action. This followed his indictment in Georgia related to efforts to overturn the state’s election results. Chesebro also faces charges in Wisconsin related to the fake electors scheme, and a presidential pardon would not offer relief.
Read the original article here
Kenneth Chesebro, ‘architect’ of pro-Trump 2020 fake elector scheme, disbarred in N.Y., now finds himself stripped of his license to practice law in New York. This is a significant fall from grace, a professional exile for a man who played a key role in a scheme that aimed to subvert the will of the voters. The judicial panel’s declaration, that his conduct undermined “the very notion of our constitutional democracy that he, as an attorney, swore an oath to uphold,” is a stinging condemnation. It goes beyond simply stating he made mistakes; it accuses him of betraying the fundamental principles upon which the American legal system is built.
This disbarment comes as a natural consequence for someone deeply involved in a plot to undermine the integrity of an election. There’s a sense that this should have happened much sooner, and the long period it took has raised some questions. But better late than never, right? Now, what does the future hold for Chesebro? It’s doubtful that he’ll be welcomed back into the legal profession, at least not anytime soon.
The conversation surrounding Chesebro’s situation shows a range of reactions. Some see him as a “shithead” who got what he deserved. Others feel this is not enough, that more significant consequences are warranted. The fact that he admitted guilt in the Georgia RICO case suggests he was willing to take responsibility, or at least understood the gravity of the situation.
The responses also highlight the perception that Chesebro was just one piece in a larger puzzle. The fact that the scheme was orchestrated on a national scale, with potential consequences for the entire nation, underscores the significance of his actions. His actions weren’t just a legal misstep; they were an attack on the democratic process itself.
The comments also touch on the motivations of those involved. Some suggest that Chesebro was motivated by loyalty to Donald Trump, a loyalty that now, ironically, seems to have yielded him very little. Others suggest the reward for Chesebro is a job in the Trump administration, or in the realm of right-wing politics and media.
The sentiment that Chesebro was just doing his job, as distasteful as that “job” may have been, also highlights the deep divisions within the country. He helped sow seeds of doubt about the 2020 election, and those doubts persist to this day. It’s a reminder of the power of misinformation and the impact that individuals can have on shaping public perception.
The comments offer some darkly humorous takes on the situation. The suggestion that Chesebro could end up as a Fox News contributor is a jab at the revolving door between right-wing politics and media. The name “Cheesebro” also prompts some humor.
Of course, the question of why this is happening “now” is a valid one. The wheels of justice can grind slowly, and this is especially true when powerful figures are involved. There is a sense that the delay is frustrating, and that the consequences should have been imposed much earlier.
Many comments also point out that the disbarment is a small step in a larger process, or in an even broader effort to hold accountable those who attempted to undermine the 2020 election. In this view, the investigation into those individuals, and the possible consequences, is a critical component to ensuring that the democratic process is preserved.
Ultimately, the disbarment of Kenneth Chesebro serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the rule of law, even when the temptation to bend or break it is strong. It’s a warning to attorneys and others in positions of power that the oath they swear to uphold the Constitution is not a hollow promise, and that consequences will follow when it is broken.