Dec.12, 2023
Las
Vegas, NV – Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford gave remarks on the recent
indictment of the six Nevadans who falsely represented themselves as state
electors in the 2020 election. A transcript of his remarks are provided below.
Hello. I am Aaron Ford, and I am your Attorney General. I want to thank all of you here today for coming. We planned to have this press conference last Wednesday, soon after our press statement went out. But our community was hit by a tragedy.
A murderer killed three professors and injured one other at UNLV. Five miles away from where we’re standing, that atrocity happened. And we can’t be numb to it.
We are a community that understands what gun violence is, that understands what a mass shooting is. I wish we didn’t. I wish nobody did. Our hearts and our prayers go out to the families and the friends of these victims. They are part of our Nevada family, part of our Las Vegas family. It is their loved ones, the victims of this tragedy, who will be remembered, not the murderer. We are a community who rallies behind each other, and we will rally here.
(Brief moment of silence)
Thank you.
Last Wednesday, my office announced the indictment of the six so-called “fake electors” on charges related to their attempt to disrupt the results of a free and fair election in 2020. These six Nevadans – Michael McDonald, Jesse Law, James DeGraffenreid, Durward Hames Hindle III, Shawn Meehan and Eileen Rice – have been charged with Offering a False Instrument for Filing and Uttering a Forged Instrument, which are category C and category D felonies, respectively.
These charges are the culmination of a long and careful investigation into these actions taken in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election. I know that there’s been some confusion as to when this investigation actually began, with some saying it only started in November.
That’s inaccurate. We’ve conducted this investigation for years to gather as many facts and as much evidence necessary to pursue justice.
As you all undoubtedly know, I maintain a policy that my office does not confirm or deny the existence of investigations. I do that to protect the integrity of any investigations and to ensure my staff can do their work to the best of their ability.
This policy has meant that I was unable to discuss what our office was working toward and what we knew. It is frustrating sometimes – both to the media and to us, because you can’t report as quickly as you would like, and we can’t correct erroneous facts that sometimes result in the vacuum of the lack of information. But it is the best approach to ensure our investigations and, eventually, our prosecutions, are not tainted.
That work and those precautions have manifested in the indictments we’re announcing today. Although we have successfully obtained these indictments, this investigation remains ongoing. I, therefore, cannot comment further on this investigation.
But let me also address another misconception out there stemming from legislative testimony I gave earlier this year. As stated, this investigation has been open for years now. And it was an open investigation in May of this year, when I testified at the legislature on behalf of Senate Bill 133. That bill would have directly criminalized the actions of the fake electors.
During my testimony, I was purposely precise with my wording because, in my profession, words have meaning and each word must be given intent. So, when I stated that no statute, and I quote, “directly addressed” this issue, that’s precisely what I meant.
This was true then, and it remains true now. There is no statute that directly addresses what SB 133 covered – fake electors. There is no statute that criminalizes attempting to pass yourself off as an elector when you are not one. Nor is there a statute that criminalizes fake-elector schemes.
SB 133 would have directly criminalized these actions. That’s why I testified in support of it – to create a law that directly addressed the conduct in question. SB 133 passed, but it was unfortunately vetoed by the governor. So, we still don’t have a law that directly addresses fake electors.
But having seen the conduct of these individuals, I thought – and still think – it would serve the public interest to have a statute that specifically and directly criminalizes these actions. That’s why I said no law “directly” addressed this situation. Because in my estimation, it did not.
What I did not say was that there were no other generally-applicable state statutes to address what these defendants did. Of course we do. But the fact that we have general laws that apply to conduct has never foreclosed the legislature from passing laws to specifically and directly address that conduct. That’s what I was advocating for.
The fact is, we already had an open investigation into whether the elements of, for example Offering a False Instrument for Filing and Uttering a Forged Instrument, could be met. Based on evidence we already had, combined with our review and consideration of new evidence that continued to come in, we were fortified our belief that, in fact, we could meet those elements. And as you now know, ultimately we proceeded to indict on those theories. So, I hope with this explanation, this particular “misunderstanding” is put to rest.
I’d also like to speak briefly about how long it took us to seek and announce these indictments. Frankly, this issue is a lose/lose proposition for my office. Move quickly and be accused of rushing to judgment for political purposes. Take your time to secure sufficient facts and evidence to prove each and every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt and be accused of delaying for political purposes. That’s why my Office ignores all that noise and focus on seeking justice.
That said, I know that there are those who wish I had acted sooner. But as any good lawyer or investigator knows, you act at the exact pace that you need to act. I do not value speed over thoroughness – especially when it comes to the law and ensuring justice. And especially when it comes to such an important issue as fake electors.
The only time frame of import to us has been the time it took to ensure that we gathered sufficient facts and evidence to support each and every element of the crimes for which we would seek an indictment. Period.
Now, I fully expect partisan attacks as a response to these indictments – just as I received when some thought I would not seek to hold these defendants accountable. But I do not make prosecutorial decisions based on public opinion or political persuasion – neither from those who agree with me nor those who disagree with me.
Our only considerations have been justice and the public interest. Not partisans, politics, opinions, or pundits. In that regard, I want to commend my Office’s investigators and prosecutors on the yeoman’s work they did to seek and obtain this indictment. Some are here with me today, while my Chief Prosecutor is away presenting on the 40 year old cold case that we prosecuted earlier this year. I want to offer her my thanks in her absence.
We all look forward to continuing the pursuit of justice as we prosecute the defendants in this action, as they have perpetrated a grave offense against our state.
I noted during my testimony for Senate Bill 133 that, “as long as I am Attorney General, I will never stop fighting against those seeking to undermine our elections. I will never stop fighting against those that seek to undermine our democracy.” I meant it.
On Dec. 18, the six Nevadans who have been indicted will be arraigned in the Eighth Judicial District Court. They have an opportunity to enter their plea at this time.
I am happy to take some questions, but I need to say beforehand that there are going to be several I will likely be unable to answer. We are now in an active prosecution, and we must follow ethical legal guidelines and avoid trying a case in the media.
However, since I’ve held this so close to the chest for so long, I thought it important to talk to you all as much as I can.
Thank you.
(End of transcript)