Key Takeaways

• A Wisconsin judge ruled there is enough evidence to try a criminal forgery case.
• The case focuses on two former Trump aides tied to the fake electors plan.
• It stands among the last legal battles over the 2020 election.
• A third aide faces a separate hearing on his own statements.
• The aides insist they acted within legal bounds to challenge vote results.

Fake Electors Forgery Case Moves Forward

A Wisconsin judge said the forgery case against two former Trump aides can move ahead. He found probable cause on 11 felony charges. These charges stem from the fake electors plot in 2020. In that scheme, alternate electors claimed to represent the state’s true choice. They hoped to push Congress to accept their paperwork. Now, the court must weigh evidence and hear witnesses.

What the Judge Decided

Judge John Hyland reviewed testimony and documents from prosecutors. He noted messages from the defendants showed intent to present a false certificate. The certificate claimed Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes went to Trump. Importantly, the judge pointed out the document was not just a backup plan. Instead, it aimed to look like an official and final record. Therefore, he said, it met the legal bar for forgery charges.

Key Players in the Fake Electors Plot

Jim Troupis served as Trump’s campaign attorney in Wisconsin. He helped organize legal strategies on Election Day. Mike Roman led Election Day operations for Trump’s team. He coordinated polling day logistics in the state. Both now face 11 felony counts each. They deny any crime. They say they acted under good faith legal advice.

Meanwhile, former attorney Ken Chesebro awaits his fate in a separate hearing. He advised how to create and submit fake elector certificates. Chesebro already pleaded guilty in Georgia for related actions. In June, New York disbarred him for his role in the scheme. Now Wisconsin courts will decide if his recorded statements can be used at trial.

Why the Fake Electors Matter

The fake electors plan aimed to overturn a clear election result. It tried to set a confusing record of who won Wisconsin. Had Congress accepted the false documents, it could have changed the presidency. Therefore, this case tests the line between legal challenge and criminal forgery. Moreover, it shows how far political operatives may go to sway results.

Reactions From the Defendants

Troupis and Roman both insist they did nothing illegal. They claim they only prepared for a possible legal battle. They argue they sought any lawful steps to challenge disputed votes. However, prosecutors counter that they crossed the legal line. They say the scheme was never meant for court approval. Instead, it was designed to deceive state and federal officials.

Chesebro’s lawyer asked the court to limit how his statements appear at trial. The judge agreed to a separate hearing on that issue. Therefore, the path for his case now splits from Troupis and Roman’s trial.

Next Steps in the Forgery Case

First, the court will hold preliminary hearings on evidence and witness lists. Then, both sides will debate what documents can appear at trial. As a result, the trial date may slip as legal questions unfold. Still, this case marks one of the last major legal fights from the 2020 election. Meanwhile, another similar case in Nevada also advances through court.

Eventually, if the trial proceeds, jurors will decide if Troupis and Roman committed forgery. They could face serious prison time if convicted. However, both defendants plan to fight the charges fully. They maintain they acted under legal advice and within the law.

In the bigger picture, this case may shape how future election disputes occur. It may deter teams from launching schemes that skirt legal boundaries. Conversely, it might spark debates over what counts as protected legal strategy.

Overall, the fake electors case shows the ongoing fallout from the 2020 election. It reminds the public that legal accountability can reach high-level political actors. Moreover, it highlights the tension between aggressive election tactics and criminal law.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the judge allow the forgery case to proceed?

The judge found enough evidence showing the defendants intended to present false electoral certificates as real.

What is the fake electors scheme about?

It involved submitting alternate elector certificates to claim Trump won Wisconsin, despite certified results showing the opposite.

Who are the main people charged in this case?

Jim Troupis, the campaign attorney, and Mike Roman, the election operations director, face charges. Ken Chesebro awaits a separate hearing.

Could this case change the outcome of the 2020 election?

No. It aims to hold people accountable for their actions, not to alter past official results.

What happens next in the trial?

The court will decide which evidence and statements can appear. Then, if the case goes to trial, jurors will weigh the charges.