Below is an expanded version of my Hill column on the Georgia call at the center of the recent indictment and the attack in the Washington Post by columnist Philip Bump, someone I have repeatedly criticized in the past for false and misleading stories. The column attacked me for suggesting that the Georgia call was not strong evidence of a crime and that Trump was seeking another recount or investigation. While I disagreed with Trump’s claims and supported the decisions of the Georgia officials (and still do), many campaigns have sought such investigations or launched challenges based on flimsy evidence. I have covered such challenges for years as a legal analyst for CBS, NBC, BBC, and Fox. Unsupported legal claims may be sanctionable in court, but they have not been treated as crimes.
Here is the column:
The processing of former President Donald Trump in the Fulton County jail followed a familiar pattern. First came the mugshot, then the merchandise. Both the left and the right immediately started selling mugs and t-shirts featuring the scowling image of Inmate P01135809.
Snap, scowl, sell and spin. Our legal and political dialogue has now been reduced to the substance of a Benetton catalogue.
Politicians and pundits continue to assure the public that this indictment is not just the criminalization of political speech or election challenges. Much of that spin returns to a familiar point of reference: Trump’s call to Georgia officials. Indeed, I have been criticized for even suggesting that “the call” is not evidence of a crime, even though I continue to support the actions of the Georgia officials who resisted Trump’s requests, including Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.
I previously wrote that the strength of any Georgia indictment could be measured on the weight given to “the call,” a highly debatable claim that Trump expressly called for fraud. But my doubts about this call (which Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis cited as the impetus of her investigation) do not stem from any refusal to accept that Trump could be charged or convicted.
When the Mar-a-Lago indictment came down, I was one of the first to say that I considered it a strong case. I have since noted that the case seems to be strengthening with time. But that is not the case in Georgia.
Although there are strong criminal allegations against some of the defendants on individual acts in the Georgia indictment, the effort to prosecute Trump is based on loose alleged conspiracies and little new evidence involving his own actions.
For that reason, it is telling that pundits have again made “the call” the focus of this sprawling racketeering theory.
First, a brief reminder of what “the call” is. This was not some back-room, smoke-filled political wheel-and-deal call. It was similar to a settlement discussion between largely antagonistic figures and their opposing teams. State officials and the Trump team were seeing if they could resolve their differences without further litigation. The Trump team wanted a new statewide recount. Trump had lost the state by less than 12,000 votes and was making the case that he could still show that he had won the state. He stated, “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”
If you are going to argue for another recount or continued investigation, the obvious argument is that it would not take statistically many votes to make a difference.
I have long disagreed with Trump over his claim of systemic voting fraud. I criticized Trump’s Jan. 6 speech while he was giving it. I supported Vice President Mike Pence and his certification of the election of Joe Biden. I have also regularly criticized Trump when I felt that such criticism was warranted. This does not change my view of whether the call is compelling evidence of a crime.
When the Washington Post first reported this call, I posted a critical tweet based on its initial, erroneous account that Trump had ordered Georgia officials to just “find” the needed votes. I noted that such a demand would be breathtaking and further noted that, even if they did so, it would not stop Biden from winning the presidency.
But a few hours later, the actual transcript of the call was released, showing a strikingly different context for the “find” comment than the Post had reported. Trump was clearly referring to his objective in finding votes and the threshold he needed to meet. That is a predictable argument for a candidate in pushing for a continued investigation.
The Post also ran a misleading story on a separate, related call that left the same false impression. By the initial account, Trump had supposedly told investigator Frances Watson to “find the fraud” and promised that she would be “a national hero.” In fact, Trump had stated that, if the officials did a neutral investigation, “you’re going to find things” including “dishonesty.” The Post had to issue a correction at the top of this second story after the Wall Street Journal found a recording of the call. “The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source,” the paper acknowledged.
Philip Bump’s recent Washington Post column continues to cite the paper’s original, skewed account of that call in order to criticize my commentary on it. Yet even in doing so, Bump inadvertently demonstrates the danger of using this call to prosecute Trump.
As a threshold matter, Bump suggests (and many have repeated) that Trump was not seeking another recount because the recount had already occurred and Trump never uses the word “recount” in the first call. The argument shows the lack of good faith in the criticism. Obviously, Trump was seeking another recount or investigation. We all know that Georgia completed the recount. I wrote about it at the time and considered that recount to end reasonable doubts over the election. Trump, however, was making the case for another investigation or recount. That was the subject of the call. He wanted the state to take another look. That is further born out in the second call when he again asks them to take another look.
Trump’s demand is as simple and obvious as it was wrong. He wanted to maintain a challenge to the election in the courts and in Congress. Just a couple days after the election, I wrote a column predicting this strategy based on what the Democrats had done in prior years. I called it the Death Star strategy. To make it work, Trump needed to find evidence of fraud and delay or undermine state certifications. A new recount or continued investigation would achieve that purpose.
So, yes, Trump was seeking a recounting or continued investigation. Bump and others continue to push the original flawed account that Trump was ordering them to simply declare the existence of the votes as the only possible interpretation despite the fact that these were antagonistic parties and Trump was pushing them to look at various areas for possible votes. The call can clearly be read different ways by different people. The question is whether it is a crime.
Bump maintains that the call was criminal because Trump had already been assured that another recount would not produce the votes and that there was no evidence of widespread fraud. “Trump’s entreaties” are deemed criminal because he had refused to accept “the truth” over the arguments of his advisers. Bump argues further that it does not matter if Trump actually intended to engage in fraud in the call, because the meeting was part of a general pattern of spreading “false statements and writings.”
There is no self-awareness at all in Bump’s argument. Bump has repeatedly spread false stories and then refused to accept the falsity of his own earlier claims, even after most of the media have admitted the errors. But more importantly, the standard that Bump sets forth for prosecution — imputing criminality to a politician’s refusal to accept inconvenient facts — could just as easily be used to prosecute any number of others, such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who baselessly sought to block certification of Trump’s 2016 victory by disenfranchising the voters of Florida.
Was Hillary Clinton guilty of criminal “false statements” when she claimed that her defeat was the result of a “stolen” election and called Trump an “illegitimate president”? How about Stacey Abrams in Georgia, who refused to accept her own defeat for governor in 2018? Then there are Democratic lawyers such as Marc Elias, who filed challenges to overturn a New York election of a Republican on the basis of machines changing the outcome. Elias has been sanctioned in other litigation on different grounds and was behind the hiding of the funding of the Steele Dossier by the Clinton campaign, but no one suggested that he or others challenging elections were criminal actors. Despite my long criticism of Elias’ record and practices, I would be the first to oppose similar charges for the same reason.
Mediaite (a site founded by ABC legal analyst Dan Abrams) has called it “crazy” to make any comparison between what Trump did and Democrats challenging prior certifications. This convenient dismissal is based on the fact that, “by the time Trump unsuccessfully leaned on” Raffensperger, recounts had already been carried out. He must have known that it was false, the argument goes, and as I (and many others) stated at the time, a further investigation was unlikely to produce enough votes. However, there was never any credible evidence to support Democratic challenges such as those brought by Raskin and others in 2016. Nor was there ever any evidence that the election was “stolen” as Clinton claimed, nor that Abrams was robbed.
Critics have long denounced Trump as a megalomaniac who could not accept that he lost. Ironically, their criticism could now prove a defense for Trump. There is a vast difference between making unfounded election claims and committing a crime. This call, in my view, cannot be viewed as a crime beyond a reasonable doubt any more than the Democratic challenge to machines in New York or the 2016 certification challenge were criminal acts due to the lack of supporting evidence.
What is clear is that this is a dangerous path for the country to take in criminalizing election challenges. For many, this looks like a Democratic prosecutor seeking prison sentences for those who challenged a Democratic victory. It could just as easily be replicated by Republican prosecutors.
Just as Trump was blind to the realities of the election, these prosecutors and pundits are blind to the implications of this indictment.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.
Would any of the partisan hack leftists that visit this site care to explain why Devon Archer, Hunter’s buddy and co-board member of Burisma, had a meeting with John Kerry when Kerry was SECRETARY OF STATE?
Try to imagine Henry Kissinger meeting with VP Gerry Ford’s son’s corrupt and soon to be imprisoned partner.
Try to imagine Dean Acheson meeting with Alben Barkley’s corrupt son’s corrupt friend.
How about John Jay? Thomas Jefferson? John Marshall? George Marshall? Colin Powell or Condi Rice? Madison? Monroe? John Quincy Adams? Cordell Hull?
This is what the Biden’s have done to our government. We have people like Mayorkas, at HOMELAND SECURITY, Granholm, a corrupt sec of Energy, Mayor Pete, probably not corrupt just incompetent, Garland, corrupt, Lloyd Austin, incompetent, Yellen, probably corrupt and incompetent, Blinken, a FRIEND of Hunter and the force behind the 51 lying intelligence agents and the lying paper.
Devin Archer has a meeting at state with the Secretary of State a few weeks before the Sec goes to Ukraine?!??!?!?
But of course the lying fools will say that there is zero evidence that Joe Biden did anything wrong.
PS. This might be another good question for Obama!
Sorry, I forgot to mention Rachel Levine, the first openly trans four star officer in the public health corp, and Sam Brinton, the bald guy with a mustache wearing a gown and red lipstick who steals luggage at airports. Someone hired that guy to be in charge of nuclear waste for our country. How come we don’t know who hired this guy?
Of course KJP is another bright light shining for the Biden team too.
Oh yes, let’s not forget Kamala Harris, maybe the dumbest woman to ever hold such a high office.
Rachel Levine….cuz I’d rather be the fugliest “woman” on the planet than an average looking guy.
HullBobby,
And people cannot understand why the world is laughing at the US.
We demonstrate to the world just how immature we are. Corruption within destroyed Rome and it is killing us.
Hillary conspired and spent a fortune to destroy Trump without regard for truth/accuracy. That was criminal.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
I know practically nothing about anything, but even I could tell that Trump was not demanding any illegal action be taken. (No one committed a crime after listening to him.) Doesn’t anyone here have a powerful father? My dad would give people hell over stuff much less consequential than this.
How do you think pro football coaches handle referees? Or my mother who would blast repairmen in person for doing a lousy job.
This affirms my opinion that the courts are not on the level and that seeking justice in the U.S. is a pathetic and dangerous joke.
The secret Biden collusion and influence not so secret:
“A Saturday report from the New York Post has ignited debates surrounding the potential political influence of President Joe Biden in the prosecution of former President Donald Trump, his leading opponent for the 2024 election.
The report disclosed that high-ranking officials from the White House counsel’s office engaged in meetings with counterparts from Special Counsel Jack Smith‘s team in the weeks leading up to the DOJ charges against Trump for his alleged mishandling of classified documents.
According to the Post‘s report, “Jay Bratt, who joined the special counsel team in November 2022, shortly after it was formed, took a meeting in the White House on March 31, 2023, with Caroline Saba, deputy chief of staff for the White House counsel’s office, White House visitor logs show.”
https://headlineusa.com/biden-officials-met-w-special-counsel-ahead-of-trump-charges-report/
Jay Bratt is DoJ Counterintelligence Chief, and he interviewed a witness who is a career White House employee. Nothing nefarious there.
𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥 𝐑𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭 𝐇𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐨𝐜𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰
WASHINGTON — President Biden on Friday 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐝 a report that 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥 𝐑𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭 𝐇𝐮𝐫 is seeking to interview him as part of an investigation into Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified documents.
“𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐨 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭,” Biden told reporters after emerging from a Pilates class in South Lake Tahoe, Calif., near where he is vacationing at billionaire Tom Steyer’s lakefront home.
By Steven Nelson ~ August 25, 2023
https://nypost.com/2023/08/25/biden-denies-special-counsel-robert-hur-seeking-classified-docs-interview/
𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐨𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲 — 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞
House Republicans are barreling toward an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, with some saying the conference should pull the trigger as soon as next month when Congress reconvenes.
By: Emily Brooks and Mychael Schnell – 08/27/23
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4172166-house-republicans-biden-impeachment-inquiry/
𝐇𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐢 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐰𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐚 𝐂𝐨𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐁𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐇𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐬
Hunter Biden and his South African filmmaker wife Melissa Cohen were spotted over the weekend in celeb-obsessed Beverly Hills, where they mingled with pals at a trendy and upscale eatery.
By: Ryan King ~ August 27, 2023
[Link://] nypost.com/2023/08/27/hunter-biden-spotted-with-melissa-cohen-in-beverly-hills/
Jonathan, I respect you and really enjoy reading your column. I disagree with you on your belief the 2020 election was not stolen. I base this on the over 2000 affidavits that were filed, the video evidence of trucks pulling into the Detroit voting center at 3AM, the suitcase video in Atlanta voting center, believable stories like the UPS driver in eastern PA, and much more. Did you watch 2000 Mules? If so, how could you not see this as anything but massive election fraud.
That is a simple question that even I can answer. Turley is a Democrat. Facts only matter when his side is prosecuting.
Not only is he a Democrat, he is a never Trumper. Turley feels that a POTUS should have an above the fray disposition, much like himself and that certainly isn’t President Trump than God.
2000 affidavits? There were 7000 affidavits sworn out in Michigan alone.
https://www.yahoo.com/video/over-7-000-affidavits-delivered-230000597.html
Watch Biden laugh and joke about the arrest and mugshot of his chief political rival, just as despots and tyrants do in banana republics.
No one should feel safe in Biden’s America. No one.
Recount = counting the same illegal ballots again. Duh.
A presidential election must, by law, occur on a “day,” one 24-hour period; no vote-by-mail can occur on a day, one 24-hour period, ergo, vote-by-mail is unconstitutional.
Where is the judicial branch, emphasis on the Supreme Court?
Electors must be chosen by identification; voters must be chosen by identification.
Voters cannot vote in the absence of proper identification.
______________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
That refers to the day for the Electors to vote, which was Dec 12 in 2020.
Democrats in Georgia would NEVER engage in election chicanery. Oh, except perhaps for the father of Sen. Herman Talmadge. Here is a snippet of a NYT story from Januarty 1979 about the Talmadge manchine.
‘I Stole for You’
Mr. Talmadge’s father, Eugene, the legendary “wild man from Sugar Creek,” was a Depression‐era Governor who turned back accusations of thievery by assuring his wool‐hat followers, “Sure, I stole, but I stole for you.” The son inherited both the governorship and “the Talmadge machine” from his dying father in 1947 on the strength of disputed write‐in votes from the Talmadges’ native county.
Secretary of State Ben W. Fortson, then as now the supervisor of Georgia elections, recalled being belatedly told of the origin of those votes in this fashion: “Ben, did you know that in Telfair County people rose from the dead and marched in alphabetical order to the polls and voted for Herman and then turned and marched back to their last repose?”
Such was the power of the Talmadges. But Herman Talmadge, now 65 years old and facing re‐election in 1980, has been battered by a messy divorce and months of ugly charges that he laundered almost $40,000 in campaign and Senate expense account funds through a secret, personal bank account. Later this month those charges will be explored in the trial‐like atmosphere of a formal hearing of the Senate ethics committee. Not even Mr. Talmadge’s recent decision to hitch up his trousers with the red, fighting galluses popularized by “Ol’ Gene” stopped the whispers of weakness.”
https://www.nytimes.com/1979/01/15/archives/georgia-politicians-in-quandary-about-backing-talmadge-i-stole-for.html
Whenever there is a one-party state, or city, or county, there is always reason to question the integrity of an election, esp when that party is the Democratic Party.
The real problem here is that all of you are arguing over details of a transcript of the call. You are assuming the transcript is accurate. If fact the call was recorded 1) illegally, as it was secretly made in Florida and not in Georgia. Florida law requires both parties recording approval and that was not done and, 2) the actual original recording is NOT AVAILABLE for inspection
If effect, you have a non-verifiable statement in the form of a transcript of what supposedly was said. Worse, it was made by a person whos history is in opposition to Trump. The whole thing is a travesty of justice.
@Frederick,
The call was from Trump in FL to GA. GA is a one party consent, so the call was legal.
They supposedly recovered the call from the deleted folder.
So the real transcript is out there and it was used to refute the BS in the press.
Trump’s mugshot is iconic. It already has a mural in Atlanta:
https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1695812365722198075
Hey Dennis
Check out ol’ Dick Head and what he has to say this morning. He’s got your back on that whole 14th amendment thing, man!
Jonathan: Well, yes, as predicted one person has filed a challenge to keep DJT off the ballot based based on the clear language of the 14th Amendment, Section 3. It’s Palm Beach lawyer Lawrence Caplan. He has filed the first challenge in federal court in the Southern District of Florida to force DJT off the ballot. Caplan’s challenge, and many will likely follow, does not require conviction of DJT in any of his criminal indictments. Sufficient grounds are provided in the over 800 page report of the Jan. 6 Special House Committee.
Now I know what you are thinking. There will be lots of litigation over the automatic disqualification clause under Section 3–that will no doubt end up in the laps of the SC. The Q is how the SC will likely rule? Since this is the first case to address the issue it’s anyone’s guess. There is no case precedent except for the Griffin case in New Mexico which is a lower court ruling.
The problem for the conservative Supremes is that 2 very conservative legal scholars, both member of the Federalist Society, are publishing a law review article indicating that DJT is automatically disqualified from running in 2024 based on the clear language of Section 3. In fact, these two constitutional scholars have based their conclusion on an “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution. This is not based on a liberal “expansive” interpretation of the Section 3. On top of that respective conservative former federal judge, Michael Luttig, has taken the same position. How will the conservatives on the SC, who are all “originalists”, react when some of their respected brethren claim DJT is automatically barred from running for office?
The other question now is what is DJT going to do to fight off these electoral ballot issues? He will have to try to intervene to try to stay on the ballot in Florida–and in other states where similar challenges are brought. That means hiring attorneys with extensive experience in electoral and constitutional law. Hey, you could be one. Besides you, though, who could DJT get to represent him? It’s unlikely, with DJT’s reputation, that many other legal experts would want to take on DJT as a client. Besides, DJT is having a hard time just paying his legal bills for the 4 criminal indictments. His legal defense fund is almost dry. The few million he took in from his “Never Surrender” marketing scam is not going to do the job. And fighting a case or cases all the way up to the SC is an expensive enterprise. What a dilemma!
Finally, we know you like to cite polls that support your positions. This one will not please you. In the latest Political/Ipsos poll between 51% and 52% of those polled think DJT is already guilty in the Mar-a-Lago case, the Georgia criminal indictments and the Jack Smith Jan. 6 case in DC. And this before DJT has even gone to trial! When over half the public thinks you are already guilty you know you have hard sledding ahead!
Lie after lie after lie.
You’ve got to be pretty desperate when you’re relying on the January 6 Special House Confirmation Bias Committee.
Hey Dennis, looks like Dick Head has come to your defense again! Check it out man, he’s on a roll. Are you paying him half of that $850 an hour? If not, you should, cuz he says it way better than you.
Interesting that 51.5% think Trump is guilty .. . here’s a poll that found an average of 59 percent of Americans believed the four cases are an interference in the 2024 election, ‘versus 19 percent who disagreed, while another 22 percent said they didn’t know.’
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrat-voters-think-donald-trump-arrest-is-election-interference/ar-AA1fOtqb?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6b5ecd5a9b6d4ccd826fd8c8b4e10872&ei=29
*A “majority of Democrat voters who backed President Joe Biden in 2020 think the investigations and criminal indictments against Donald Trump constitute “an interference in the 2024 presidential election,” according to a new poll conducted exclusively for Newsweek.” ~ story
Who gives a rats hind end about polls. In 2020 there was an election, trump lost. There was a special election in Georgia about Senators. Both Repubs lost with significant trump support. In 2022 there was another election. There was supposed to be this great red wave as Repubs took over the Senate and had massive gains in the House. Uuum, failure. The Senate remains Demo controlled and the Repubs barely took the House. And most of those whom trump supported failed. So in a little more than a year we will have another election. Let’s see how it goes next time. Keep trump on the ballot along with his sycophants, and the Repubs will loose bigly.
You need to prove that the insurrection occurred.
Considering that the FBI concluded no insurrection occurred that kinda destroys your argument.
Now then consider that Trump wasn’t engaged … you have strike 2.
Consider that Trump didn’t pardon anyone over the Jan 6th protest that turned into a riot… no comfort or aide.
Even that would require those who entered the capitol to be charged w insurrection which they were not. Proud Boys is a different issue.
So the 14th Amendment challenge is a joke.
There is a reason the Democrats and their media stenographers have used the word “insurrection” from day one: it has definite legal meaning and potential punishment involved. January 6 was a demonstration that turned into a riot, no different than the BLM riots the year before. If it had actually been an insurrection, the “insurrectionists” would have been heavily armed, and there would be mass casualties on both sides, including a lot of Democrat and RINO senators and representatives. This has been a naked attempt by Democrats to criminalize political opposition.
Looky…Dennis was “liked” by 3 people. Thats a new record for him, both on this blog and in his personal life. Well done Gigi, Wally, and Fishlips! Keep lickin’ them boots!
Automatic 14A disqualification presents novel legal issues, the biggest of which is – who decides? SCOTUS is likely to rule that in the absence of a federal statute defining how it is to be enforced, it is up to each state to decide, since the states manage presidential elections.
Andrew P: Thx for at least being willing to address the issues involving in applying Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to disqualify DJT. This is a thorny and complicated issue. There is no SC precedent to rely on by the Court. If you are right that the SC will leave it “up to the state to decide” how does that help DJT? If a State Secy. of State takes DJT off the ballot, that decision would the final say. I doubt the conservative members of the Court would want that outcome. No, they will be squarely faced with deciding the issue on a Constitutional analysis. That puts them in a dilemma because 3 respected conservative “originalist” scholars have said the plain language of Section 3 makes DJT disqualified. I think they have the better and more persuasive argument.
Stupid people are funny. They try to make the English language fit their narrative twisting definitions and twisting definitions until they have twisted it into a pretzel. The 14th amendment is quite clear and President Trump is eligible for election. There was no insurrection or rebellion on Jan 6 and the mere suggestion there was, is abject stupidity in action. It would be intentionally dishonest to suggest a rebellion or insurrection against the US by a handful of unarmed people was even possible, let alone attempted. Never let your abject stupidity prevent your posting drivel. It is the dishonest people like you that opens others eyes and thank you for that. I grew up a JFK Democrat, worked Patty Murray’s Senate campaign and gave the party tens of thousands over the decades. I watched the party of the working man evolve into the party of freaks and geeks with every single issue looked at through a racist or sexual lens. Drag Queen Story Hour has been called art. Since when did a man dressed as a woman twerking his pelvis inches from a 7-year-olds face become art? It is grooming children to normalize sexual behavior in the child’s mind. Commercial retailers have developed Pride clothing lines and other similar products specifically for very young children that have gender or sex as a common factor in their store displays and advertising. Elements in our society are normalizing the exposure of sexually immature children to adult sexual behavior. Target selling tuck swimwear to a 4 year old 30 years ago, would have been a major issue, but not today. Pride month and LGBTIQQ issues are for sexually mature humans that are well beyond puberty. Puberty was confusing enough to me without thinking about different genders. The power of suggestion is strong in young people and easy to demonstrate regarding transgender children. The CDC in 2017 and again in 2020 surveyed Americans with “are you transgender” being one question. The number of people who identified as transgender doubled in those under 24 years old and they accounted for 47% of the total in three short years. How can that be? The only reasonable answer is societal influence and for that reason alone, children should be protected. We have seen disgusting examples of children being sexually abused, and wreckage they carry into adulthood. The abused often become abusers continuing the cycle of destruction.
Did Trump ever use the word “recount” in his call to Raffensberger? Did he have ANY basis to believe that the 3 recounts that had already been done were done improperly or incorrectly? Did he list any faults with the 3 recounts? Of course not. Trump could not have been demanding a fourth “recount”–because that’s NOT what he wanted–he demanded that Raffensberger “find” him a way to defeat the will of Georgia voters and to award Georgia to him. No reasonable person could listen to the call, in the context of a lost court challenge and 3 recounts already (one of which was a hand recount) and believe this particular Turley spin on the facts.
“Did Trump ever use the word “recount” in his call to Raffensberger?”
It is hard to believe that such a nincompoop exists on this blog, but she does. That is why she got rid of the name Natacha and now goes under the name Gigi. Different name same ignorance.
How does a recount help if people were denied a vote and false ones placed instead. Gigi is cranking up a reply… Duh, duh, duh, duh, duh, duh, duh, duh, duh,……. oh , oh, I am starting to smell smoke.
WHAT people were denied a vote? Names and proof, please. How many were there, and if they were denied a vote, why didn’t they avail themselves of the right to cast a provisional ballot pending a court ruling? What are the names of the “fake” voters, how many are there and how did they manage to cast votes fraudulently when the polls and vote tabulation centers were watched by both Republicans and Democrats? All polling locations had both Republicans and Democrats checking identification and voter registration, so HOW could this have happened?
Oh my! Hysteria and incoherence much?
Let’s compare that persistent beneficiary of public assistance and affirmative action, NUTCHACHACHA’s, slavering, overzealous, maniacal, feminazi, communist prevarications with the facts and truth of Merriam-Webster.
Merriam-Webster
find
verb
ˈfīnd
found ˈfau̇nd
; finding
transitive verb
1a: to come upon often accidentally : encounter – found a $10 bill on the ground
1b: to meet with (a particular reception) – hoped to find favor
2a: to come upon by searching or effort – must find a suitable person for the job
2b: to discover by study or experiment – find an answer
2c: to obtain by effort or management – find the time to study
2d: attain, reach – the bullet found its mark
3a: to discover by the intellect or the feelings : experience – find much pleasure in your company
3b: to perceive (oneself) to be in a certain place or condition – found himself in prison awaiting deportation – found himself on the verge of bankruptcy
3c: to gain or regain the use or power of – trying to find his tongue
3d: to bring (oneself) to a realization of one’s powers or of one’s proper sphere of activity – must help the student to find himself as an individual—N. M. Pusey
Oops! Sorry NUTCHACHACHA, we find no gun to anyone’s head or otherwise irresistible force or coercion brought to bear by a person conducting a phone inquiry regarding results.
It’s simply not there NUTTA! You might try ditching the coveting and stealing of other people’s money NUTTA, they’re sins. Freedom and Self-Reliance can be so fulfilling and rewarding.
Hysterical George displays his hysteria daily, along with his daily copypasta.
Thanks for reading, comrade; whatever would I be without your patronage?
“I could actually be the dumbest person on the planet. I cant seem to comprehend that a hand recount of illegal ballots will return the same results as the original count. So i’ll play stupid and act like Trumps complaint is that those dumb rednecks dont know how to count in Jawja. And i’ll put “find” in quotation marks, so everyone with am IQ below 80 will see an alternative meaning to the word, as i do.”
——-Gigi the liar
“Key Findings From The Durham Report”
Washington, June 21, 2023
The FBI did not have an adequate predicate to launch Crossfire Hurricane.
Fact: As Durham wrote on page eight of the report, “neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”
Takeaway: The report is a direct indictment of FBI leadership who conspired to undermine a presidential candidate and then delegitimize a duly elected president.
Big Picture: The FBI failed to examine exculpatory evidence and interview key witnesses.
Fact: Durham wrote on page 305 of the report: “The FBI discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.” He also wrote that Crossfire Hurricane “was opened . . . without [the FBI] ever having spoken to the persons who provided” the key allegations.
Takeaway: The FBI turned a blind eye to equal justice. Instead of an objective and honest assessment of evidence, the FBI manipulated the predication to open Crossfire Hurricane as a full FBI investigation for political purposes.
Big Picture: The FBI abused its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorities.
Fact: The applications to surveil Carter Page, an American citizen working for the Trump campaign, relied on multiple levels of sub-source reporting and omitted key exculpatory evidence. An FBI lawyer even manufactured evidence to support an application. The errors, misstatements, and omissions were consistent across the applications and renewals, even after the FBI became aware of these issues. Without these misstatements, the Page FISA applications would not have been approved.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
There’s an elephant in the room: the case can be transferred to federal court, and there’s a very high likelihood that it would be dismissed there on free-speech grounds. This was–and will be–a federal-election issue, and we have a local prosecutor trying to make a name for her fat, useless self by overreaching with a constitutionally-dubious case.
So why doesn’t Trump have it transferred to federal court now? Because the drama serves Trump in the primaries and might actually serve him in the general. He can switch it to federal whenever he wants and time the dismissal for maximum effect.
The Democrats are on track to have a “Bud Light moment” with these blatantly unconstitutional (and sloppy) tactics. I certainly hope so.
Diogenes,
Great comment!
Diogenes: the case should NOT be transferred to federal court because removal in a criminal matter involving a federal official only applies when the conduct complained of arose from the official duties of that federal official. For example, if an FBI agent shoots a citizen in the line of duty, if a state prosecutor charges the agent with manslaughter, the case would be removable to federal court because the conduct occurred as a part of the agent’s duties. Handling of elections, including tabulating and recounting votes, is a STATE matter, subject to STATE law. Trump’s duties as fake President do not include trying to over-ride the will of the voters of Georgia who voted him out by bullying the SoS by lying about winning despite 3 recounts and a failed court challenge, threatening him with criminal prosecution and getting fake electors to falsify Electoral College documents.
Disagree. Trump didn’t commit a state crime by challenging the results. That’s free speech. Fulton County is engaging in election interference (2024) by violating free speech.
Trump had ALREADY “challeged” the results-a court lawsuit that was dismissed for lack of evidence and THREE recounts already. They proved he was wrong, but he just can’t accept the truth. So, he tried to bully Raffensberger to just “find” him one vote over Biden’s count by lying about winning Georgia. He KNEW he did NOT win Georgia, and that the BS about fraud, dead people voting, etc. had no factual support. How do you explain away the falsified Electoral College documents?
Gigi writes, “He KNEW he did NOT win Georgia, and that the BS about fraud, dead people voting, etc. had no factual support.”
Challenging an election, even if you know you’re wrong, is a free-speech issue, and I doubt you can read Trump’s mind. Many commentors genuinely believe GA was stolen. This is a free-speech issue being artificially twisted into a state felony.
Also, in addition to diogenes insightful observation that you’re not a mind reader – you’re not, are you? – at least one of the three recounts resulted in more votes for Trump.
*Tbh, and honesty is the foundation of every human affair, I really have little sympathy for trials and tribulations of Trump monkey Apostle (Trump still owes friends of mine in NYC $ from the old days) .. . it’s the deranged, seditious, war-mongering psychopaths in the WH that keeps me up at night.
Me, too 🙁
“He KNEW he did NOT win Georgia . . . .”
It is impossible to know something like that. A person’s BELIEF (which is the most that is possible) must be based on mountains of hearsay, which for some reason is generally inadmissible in court except when left-wingers want to impute a state of mind to Trump. Then, hearsay is not only admissible but is also conclusive!
The FBI and Hills KNEW there was no there there in RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, so said Special Counsel John “Dudley Do-Right” Durham, who always gets his man, unless, of course, his man is Deep Deep State “Swamp.”
“I just need you to find 11,780 votes WHICH IS ONE MORE THAN WE HAVE. “. He admitted that he HAD 11,780 fewer votes than Biden. He had already LOST a court challenge for lack of evidence.
And the word find still means what it always did Gigi. No amount of your screeching will ever change that.
And so he wouldnt have asked raff to find them if he didnt believe they were there.
Your case rests on proving that he meant something other than the dictionary definition of find. The context being that he had already mentioned all the places where he believed those votes could be found.
You got nothing.
Enough of Turley’s nonsense. It’s clear he is being PAID as a Fox/RNC mercenary shill. We are asking Dr. Ellen Granberg to open an investigation on the part of GW University where Turley gets his bonafides to spew his garbage.
The man should be fired.
(If you agree call her yourself: 202-994-6500 ext 3)
Cheese and crackers, Tim. I disagree. Who do I call to get you fired?
Thank you so very much, Timmy, for your abject concession as chintzy ad hominem.
As they say, “If you can’t dazzle ’em with brilliance, baffle ’em with bull—-!”
You go, Timmy!
Go tell your mommy!
Typical brutish leftist tactics. Can’t have anyone controverting your opinion, so push to get them fired instead. Your are the worst of the worst.
I believe the case was dismissed due to lack of standing, not lack of evidence. That’s what you guys on the left love to do.
Trump can make that argument in court. But it’s not the slam-dunk you believe.
There you go, you need to be arrested for calling a duly elected president fake as well as spewing the democrat talking points. Were I in charge I would sentence you to 350 years in prison with no possibility of parole.
Diogenes, Well said. ! I agree that he will use the media in this case to his advantage until it does not serve his cause.
There is also strategy. Trump may want to see if a Meadows can get it transferred, which is a clearer case for removal. If Meadows is successful, then Trump may file for removal as well.
79% OF AMERICANS AGREED THAT A TRUTHFUL PRESENTATION OF THE LAPTOP BEFORE THE ELECTION WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN A TRUMP VICTORY
THE FBI ET AL. INTERFERED IN 2020
________________________________
“Trump demands ‘rightful’ 2020 winner declared or new vote after FBI-Facebook Biden laptop cover-up”
The Hunter Biden laptop’s hard drive contained a trove of documents and emails that detailed Hunter Biden’s questionable and lucrative overseas business deals in Ukraine and China while his father, Joe Biden, was the vice president in the Obama administration. After The Post’s report, 51 former US intelligence officials — including former CIA Directors Mike Hayden, Leon Panetta and John Brennan — signed a letter claiming the laptop “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
More than a year and a half after The Post’s exclusive about Hunter Biden, the Washington Post and the New York Times admitted that the emails on the laptop were authentic and confirmed that Hunter Biden was being investigated by federal agents for tax fraud. The laptop’s hard drive contained a trove of documents and emails that detailed Hunter Biden’s questionable and lucrative overseas business deals in Ukraine.The laptop’s hard drive contained a trove of documents and emails that detailed Hunter Biden’s questionable and lucrative overseas business deals in Ukraine.
A poll by conducted by Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics and released last week found that 79% of Americans agreed that it was “very” or “somewhat” likely that “a truthful interpretation of the laptop” before the 2020 election would have resulted in the re-election of Trump instead of former Vice President Biden. Trump pointed to that poll in a posting on Truth Social over the weekend as evidence for his unfounded claims of voter fraud in the election. “8 of 10 voters in major poll say that the ‘Laptop from Hell’ coverup played a major role in the 2020 Presidential Election result,” Trump wrote.
– New York Post
The NY Post statistic you cite only applies to people who rely in pro-Trump media–which is not the majority of the American people. From Yahoo News:
“Despite Republicans’ best efforts to neutralize the political impact of former President Donald Trump’s four criminal indictments by playing up the legal travails of President Biden’s son Hunter, a growing number of Americans say Trump and his family are more “corrupt” than Biden and his family, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll.
The survey of 1,665 U.S. adults, which was conducted from Aug. 17 to 21, found a 10-point gap between those who believe the Trumps are more corrupt (46%) and those who believe the Bidens are more corrupt (36%). The last time the question was asked, in October 2022, the margin between the Trumps (42%) and the Bidens (35%) was 7 points.
Likewise, a majority of Americans (53%) now say Trump and his family are corrupt, compared with just 28% who say they are not. Since October, that gap has increased from 18 to 25 points. It is now more than twice as large as the 11-point difference between those who think the Bidens are corrupt (45%) and those who think they are not (34%).”
Oh, Hell No!
Georgia wasn’t a direct consequence of 2020 being fixed against duly elected President Donald J. Trump!
And 2024 isn’t being fixed as we speak due to the dereliction, negligence, aid and abetment of the co-conspiring judicial branch, which no longer has any excuse for not imposing Judicial Review against egregious and gross weaponization of the Justice Department and pervasive political corruption in America against President Donald J. Trump, merely because he cannot be bought.
_________
Ten months before Trump’s landslide reelection, China releases “China Flu, 2019.”
“‘Lab leak was not an accident’: Chinese virologist who first proved Covid was China’s cover-up operation”
“Dr Li Meng Yan based her argument on evidence that she sourced and studied. She also spoke to a number of people who said that the virus was ‘intentionally brought out of this strict lab and released in the community’”
– Firstpost
_________
“Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship”
Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook restricting a story about Joe Biden’s son during the 2020 election was based on FBI misinformation warnings. The New York Post alleged leaked emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop showed the then vice-president was helping his son’s business dealings in Ukraine. Facebook and Twitter restricted sharing of the article, before reversing course amid allegations of censorship. Zuckerberg said that getting the decision wrong “sucks”. “When we take down something that we’re not supposed to, that’s the worst,” Zuckerberg said in a rare extended media interview on the Joe Rogan podcast. The New York Post story was released just weeks before the presidential election between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, which Mr Biden won. It claimed that a laptop, abandoned in a repair shop by Hunter Biden, contained emails which included details of Hunter introducing a Ukrainian energy tycoon to his father and arranging a meeting…Critically, it fed into long-running…allegations about corruption on Joe Biden’s part to ensure his son’s business success in Ukraine…the New York Post story…was censored by social media outlets.
– BBC
_____
“AG Paxton Sues Battleground States for Unconstitutional Changes to 2020 Election Laws”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today filed a lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the United States Supreme Court. The four states exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to justify ignoring federal and state election laws and unlawfully enacting last-minute changes, thus skewing the results of the 2020 General Election. The battleground states flooded their people with unlawful ballot applications and ballots while ignoring statutory requirements as to how they were received, evaluated and counted.
– Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas
__________________________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
___________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
___________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
_________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
___________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:
Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,
James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,
James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,
Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,
Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,
Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,
Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,
Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,
Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,
Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney, Lisa O. Monaco, Garland, Bragg, Willis et al.
_______________________________________________________________________
Four “fake” political indictments, “fake” political indictments which were never before considered criminal and never before in history brought against a former president and opponent of the current president.
Trump easily one, even without the laptop.
The laptop would have just made his victory ridiculously over the top.
Then how do you explain the fact that all polls predicted he would lose and that Trump set a record for consistently low approval ratings? Don’t forget that he put America into the worst recession since the Great Depression, that schools, restaurants, businesses and stores were closed down and the US set new daily records for COVID deaths and infections. Americans rejected him just like the polls said.
Mentally ill.
Excellent compilation , though it only scratches the surface. Why does Turley continue to ignore this, and the rest of the mountain range of evidence testifying to the monumental fraudulence of Biden’s “victory”?
Mentally ill?
Wrong location of comment should be to Gigi.
Minorities realize that when Trump was in office we had low inflation, low unemployment, and crime relatively under control. They compare that to today, and then think for themselves about which is better for their own lives. More and more such minorities are leaving the Democrat plantation behind and becoming Trump voters, .
https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1695808576466325973
Turley keeps having to scream into the abyss bc he keeps riding the proverbial Fence. He will have to finally (& much more clearly) jump onto a position like the rest of us if he wants to be heard better or make a real difference. Yes, he will be Dershowitz’ed, but that’s a fine camp & the right side of history to be on if you want to make your $ as a public voice.
Anf let’s face it, sadly they’re Dershowitz-ing Turley anyway; so he might as well pick a position & argue clearly for that!
OldMan,
This is where I think things become interesting.
On one hand we have what people think that they should be loyal to the party, either one.
On the other we have people who think when the party no longer represents them, they leave the party or support someone who does represent them.
I think that is what we are seeing with Trump. Some say Trump hijacked the Republican party. Others say they are supporting Trump as the Republican party no longer represents them. He just so happens to be running as a Republican. He and voters just may force the Republican party to change.
Watching the videos of the Trump motorcade through a poor, black neighborhood and blacks cheering Trump on, yelling “Free Trump!” is a possible indicator of that change.
Then, there are our leftist friends. Doubling down on their woke leftist policies. Meanwhile, traditional Democrats like Bill Maher, Elon Musk and the good professor are all asking, WTF happened to the Democrat party? As Bill Maher has said, “I did not leave the party, the party left me.”
The question I have along with other minority groups, how will they vote in 2024? Or will they even bother to vote?
Upstate – my prediction is that enough minorities will vote Trump to put him over the top. If the GOP can play the (legal) vote-harvesting game close to as well as the Dems, and prevent the operation of mules, and the vote count isn’t rigged, Trump should easily win in 2024. Here’s a recent poll from this month that has Dems running scared. Trump’s support among Black voters has surged while Biden’s has dwindled:
https://citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/trump-biden-poll.jpeg
As for the GOP, Trump has had the biggest effect on the party of anyone in the last 20 years. He has essentially remade the party, which is why the old guard of neocons and free-foreign-trade hates him so much. Trump tapped into the public mood that felt we were being ripped off by China and our European allies, and remade the party to be that of the working man – factory workers, regular folk who are affected by crime, people who don’t like open borders, unions who felt cheated by NAFTA, and so on. When else has the party out of power, during the primary season leading up to the next presidential election, had a front-runner 40 points above the next-most-popular candidate?
OldMan,
Well said and good analysis.
Blah, blah, blah. Turley’s right and everyone else is wrong. Turley is just retreading the same old argument he previously made by spinning Trump’s call to Raffensberger as similar to a”settlement discussion “ and not COMPELLING evidence of a crime. And, today’s post checks off a couple of other boxes on the Fox assignment sheet: attacking Philip Bump and the Washington Post, plus hedging his bets by saying Trump was wrong—but not a criminal.
When the call was made to Raffensberger, Trump had already lost a court challenge and three recounts had been done—one of which was a hand recount. Trump refused to accept it and kept hammering Raffensberger. Finally, he made clear his command—find just enough votes to award Georgia. And there was a threat of criminal prosecution. Raffensberger demurred, and rightfully so. But Trump didn’t stop there—he got fake electors to falsify Electoral College ballots claiming he won. And he kept on lying about winning Georgia.
Turley has become so predictable— he downplays the Georgia case because no Republican can pardon Trump for any convictions there, but plays up the stolen documents case because Republicans believe that inexperienced judge will help Trump beat the rap—so Turley can crow—“see he wasn’t guilty in the strongest case, so it’s all political persecution.” It stinks, Turley.
BTW, in a recent case that went up on appeal, Trumpy Bear’s favorite judgie wudgie forgot to swear in the jury. Even traffic court judges know better.
Hey Natasha! did you see?
Ugly People Rejoice Over Return Of Mask Mandates
https://babylonbee.com/news/ugly-people-rejoice-over-return-of-mask-mandates
Is that one of you? (wink, wink!)
Jonathan: I have listened to that phone call between DJT and Brad Raffensperger–more times than I wanted. For me it was the smoking gun–as it was for many Americans–that formed the basis for Fani Willis’ spralling RICO indictments. Now that WP’s Philip Bump has called you out you deem it necessary to “correct” the record. So here’s my take on your arguments.
First, the official Georgia 2020 election, confirmed by several recounts, showed DJT lost by 11,780 popular votes. Trump knew the numbers because his campaign officials told him so. That was why DJT called Raffensperger–to try to get him to change the vote count. But you seem to think all DJT was asking for was a statewide recount. DJT never asked for a recount. Raffensperger explained that there had been several recounts and the result was always the same. DJT responded by threatening Raffensper with prosecution and falsely claiming there were over 5,000 dead voters who cast votes. So it is counter intuitive to think DJT was just pursuing legal challenges to the Georgia election results–asking for a statewide recount. DJT was clearly asking Raffensperger to commit election fraud.
Second, what you ignore in your column are all the other acts in furtherance of DJT’s conspiracy to change the vote count. It wasn’t just the phone call. For example, the illegal entry by Sydney Powell’s merry band of forensic experts who were allowed to get access to the election data in the Coffey County election office by Kathy Latham, an election worker and a DJT supporter and named co-conspirator in Willis’ indictments. Then, we have the fake elector scheme where other co-conspirators in the Georgia GOP, with urging by Rudy Giuliani, to put together false DJT electors. This went on not just in Georgia but in other states. That’s the beauty of a RICO conspiracy case. You can bring in evidence of DJT’s conscious attempts to take way the legitimate vote of Americans in other states.
In the debate over what happened in the Georgia election you seem the only “legal scholar” who thinks that what DJT did not involve criminal acts. Conflating what DJT engaged in can’t be compared with the election challenges by March Alias or Jamie Raskin. There have been Democratic challenges to election results but none of the above broke into an election office or tried to put up fake electors. That was only done by DJT. You appear very defensive in you attempt to change the facts. That’s why you attack journalist Philip Bump in his WP article rebutting your bizarre claims. If Trump and any of his co-conspirators are convicted by a jury of their peers, that will be your own moment for “self awareness”. Or, maybe not.
“: I have listened to that phone call between DJT”
Of what value is it when you listen? You don’t get things right. To date you haven’t corrected yourself on a basic Constitutional issue. The President can pardon anyone and the person pardoned need not confess. You thought differently and at one time said you were an attorney.
The main point here is the phone call, by itself, while dubious (so Trump!) would probably only result in hand slapping for the outgoing President. Just another in a long line of how not to operate as leader of the free world.
But it’s the phone call wrapped up with everything else Trump and company were doing – so far outside the norm – that does make a case for conspiracy and fraud.
Does it come to that ultimately……….it will be for a jury to decide.
But there came a point in time after all the lawsuits and certifications that you just had to put your big boy pants on and admit defeat. Trump can’t do that and presumably won’t do that in 2024 either.
The disheartening thing I read on here is so many just don’t feel Trump was criminal (while I disagree, I can see the case) but think he was RIGHT in his election fraud claims. Disheartening and disturbing.