‘The Illegality of the Plan Was Obvious’
-
After months of investigation by a congressional committee, a federal judge has found that President Donald J. Trump and his allies most likely engaged in illegal activity in the wake of the 2020 election.
How did the committee achieve that ruling?
Guest: Luke Broadwater, a congressional reporter for The New York Times.
Have you lost a loved one during the pandemic? The Daily is working on a special episode memorializing those we have lost to the coronavirus. If you would like to share their name on the episode, please RECORD A VOICE MEMO and send it to us at thedaily@nytimes.com. You can find more information and specific instructions here.
Background reading:
- The judge’s comments in the civil case of a lawyer, John Eastman, who advised Mr. Trump, marked a significant breakthrough for the House committee.
- The ruling does not necessarily mean that a prosecution would arrive at the same conclusion. Here’s an explanation.
Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
-
undefined Raven moved this topic from News on
-
this hurts to read in 2026

-
-
@Yanderemenhera Hat
-
After months of investigation by a congressional committee, a federal judge has found that President Donald J. Trump and his allies most likely engaged in illegal activity in the wake of the 2020 election.
How did the committee achieve that ruling?
Guest: Luke Broadwater, a congressional reporter for The New York Times.
Have you lost a loved one during the pandemic? The Daily is working on a special episode memorializing those we have lost to the coronavirus. If you would like to share their name on the episode, please RECORD A VOICE MEMO and send it to us at thedaily@nytimes.com. You can find more information and specific instructions here.
Background reading:
- The judge’s comments in the civil case of a lawyer, John Eastman, who advised Mr. Trump, marked a significant breakthrough for the House committee.
- The ruling does not necessarily mean that a prosecution would arrive at the same conclusion. Here’s an explanation.
Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
-
This thread is from back when Genesect was reporting news via RSS integrations. For the latest on the subject, this Wikipedia article on 2020 election disputes and outcomes goes into much more detail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempts_to_overturn_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
There are some pretty obvious bad actions in there. No matter where you land politically, we need to be able to trust our elections and peacefully transfer power. These election interference charges were dropped after the 2024 election, as the plurality of US citizens re-elected President Trump.
From an NPR article on from November 11, 2024, on dismissing the charges:
Monday's filing is in line with longstanding Justice Department policy that says a sitting president cannot be indicted or tried on criminal charges because it would violate the Constitution and interfere with the working of the executive branch.
A sitting President can only be held liable if they are impeached and removed from office first, which involves a simple majority (>50%) in the house (218 votes out of 435) and 2/3 of the senate (67 votes out of 100). This is unlikely to happen, even with a large voter turnout.
These kinds of election questions are ones that will be relevant again soon, with the midterms coming up. If you're a US citizen and are going to be 18 or older by November 3, 2026, learn how to register to vote here: https://vote.gov/guide-to-voting/preparing-age-18-and-under
