Below is my column in the Hill on release of the final report of the Special Purpose Grand Jury in Georgia. The recommendation for sweeping indictments involving 39 people, including current and former senators, only magnifies fears over political prosecutions. For many of us, the inclusion of figures like the senators reflects a rogue grand jury. However, Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) insisted that Sen. Lindsey Graham was “lucky” not to be indicted. According to Schiff, Graham calling Georgia officials about the counting or discarding of votes was enough to justify a criminal charge. Presumably, since Graham could be indicted with Trump, Schiff would also consider him eligible to be barred from ever running again for office under the 14th Amendment, as discussed below. It is the “why not” approach to criminal and constitutional law.
Here is my column:
With the release of the special grand jury final report in Georgia, the nation finally was able to see what foreperson Emily Kohrs last February was giggling about in interviews.
Call it the “Why not?” report.
Back then, when Kohrs was asked if there were recommended charges, she chuckled and said, “Can you imagine doing this for eight months and not coming out with a whole list of recommended indictments? It’s not a short list. It’s not.’”
In addition to nodding at an expected Trump indictment, she added, “There may be some names on that list that you wouldn’t expect.” After all, why not?
The final product did not disappoint. The members recommended 39 people for prosecution, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and former Sens. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.). They also included lawyers who argued for recounts or investigations into alleged election fraud.
While the report expressly claims that the Fulton County District Attorney’s office did not create the list, it was the office of Fani Willis that presented the law, the evidence and potential targets to the special grand jury. During that process, these members concluded that politicians voicing support for the former president and his allegations could be criminally charged for doing so.
The news that Willis did not indict Graham and others infuriated many on the left. Liberal websites were inundated with comments like “I want all the enablers charged, tried, and given long sentences as traitors to our country” and asking why the list did not include Senators Grassley, Cruz, Lee and “147 current and former members of the House, just to name a few.”
The disappointment of the special grand jury members and commentators is understandable. When one reads the indictment of the 19 defendants, it is surprising that all of the other 20 were dropped. While the indictment does contain serious charges against some individuals, Willis used a sweeping racketeering theory to indict in gross.
One possible reason Willis dropped some of these targets is that she knew the indictment of these senators would have been quickly and firmly rejected by the courts as the criminalization of political speech.
However, the 160 individual acts detailed in Willis’s report include speeches and social media postings by Trump and others claiming evidence of widespread voting fraud.
I disagree with those claims, but many citizens held the same suspicions of the election. Many still do.
It is understandable why the grand jurors thought that anyone pushing these claims was committing a crime, given the 160 acts cited by Willis. Graham, for example, called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger after the November 2020 election to ask about absentee ballots and whether groups of ballots could be rejected.
That call was not ultimately deemed worthy of an indictment. However, Willis launched her investigation based on Trump’s continued demands that Raffensperger investigate the vote tally in two other calls. Once again, I agreed then and now with Raffensperger in his refusal. But the question is whether such requests are evidence of a crime.
I have long criticized the misrepresentation of the two Georgia calls by the Washington Post, which later issued a correction in its reporting. Although it recently made a startling contradictory statement on the truth of its original claims, the transcript of the calls shows that Trump did not tell officials to simply add more than 11,000 votes.
I still disagree with his claims, but I have maintained that Trump was making a predictable argument in a settlement negotiation that he only needed that number of votes and that a new recount or continued investigation would find them.
My questioning of the use of the calls as evidence of a crime has given many people the vapors. They insist that it was preposterous to think that Trump was actually asking for continued recounts or investigations instead of demanding that Raffensperger commit fraud. Yet Raffensperger himself recently took the stand and confirmed that the call was a “settlement negotiation” over whether to conduct further recounts or investigations.
The question is when advocacy or inquiries or negotiations become criminal acts. Willis’s first grand jury clearly believed that senators who called for recounts or Raffensperger’s resignation should go to prison. The comparison between their recommendations and the eventual indictment does not clearly answer how such acts are distinguishable as crimes.
The same lack of limiting principle is evident in the new theory being pushed by various experts under the 14th Amendment to bar Trump from ballots on the grounds that he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” Beyond the tendentious claim that the Jan. 6 riot was an actual insurrection, they also maintain that the provision is self-executing, requiring no vote of Congress for secretaries of state to bar Trump from next year’s ballots.
Even though Trump has not been charged, let alone convicted, of insurrection (or even incitement), these advocates believe that he can be removed from the ballot because of his election claims, his inflammatory rhetoric and his delay in calling for supporters to leave the Capitol. This is one of the most dangerous legal theories to arise in decades.
This week, Democratic Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes aptly described the claimed right to disqualify as a “radical” measure that would “encompass every elected office in our government — state, local, federal, and so forth.” Indeed, Democrats have called for barring not just Trump but 120 Republicans in Congress from running for office.
As with the Georgia special grand jury, the question is “Why not?” If the standard is “giving aid or comfort” to insurrectionists, then why not throw hundreds of other Republicans who supported the challenge to certification on Jan. 6 off the ballot? And while we’re at it, why not bar every lawyer who helped file claims of voting fraud from ever running for office? They all gave aid or comfort with their actions.
By this reasoning, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and other Democrats could have been barred from ballots for opposing Trump’s certification in 2016 without any basis, along with leaders such as Hillary Clinton, who continued to call the election “stolen” for years. In 2016, there were also violent riots in Washington opposing Trump’s inauguration, thanks in no small part to such rhetoric. We can then have different candidates of both parties removed from ballots in every state.
This “Why not?” philosophy is all part of our impulse-buy politics, where there is little thought to the implications of actions beyond immediate vengeance and satisfaction. It is a criminal and political system based on the giddy philosophy of Emily Kohrs.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
JT says “these members concluded that politicians voicing support for the former president and his allegations could be criminally charged for doing so.”
It was way more than that and you know it. Stop it JT, there was a conspiracy to keep trump in office after loosing the election. Yes they talked as do bank robbers and most people that commit crimes. It did not stop with talk, it was action. Pressuring people to delete votes or make up new votes with the express purpose of keeping trump in power after he lost the election.
JT, you, and anyone else on this site that thinks otherwise is just being willfully blind to the facts.
“Pressuring people to delete votes or make up new votes with the express purpose of keeping trump in power after he lost the election.”
You still haven’t bothered to read the transcript that was spoon fed to you a short while back. Do you always talk before finding out what happened? Apparently the answer is yes. Yet you are blind to what is going on elsewhere.
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/11/the-why-not-culture-why-the-georgia-final-report-should-worry-us-all/comment-page-2/#comment-2321399
Margot Cleveland has two articles in today’s Federalist that are worth reading. One highlights the legitimacy of the claims brought in Georgia, and discussed on the call with Raffensberger, and the other is an interview with Cleta Mitchell. If I knew how to link to them I would. Perhaps someone else can.
Thank you Daniel for the referral. Margot is one of the best.
I don’t know what your problem is. If you explain it, perhaps I can help.
One address is: https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/georgia-grand-jury-report-exposes-fulton-county-prosecutor-as-an-election-integrity-denier/
When reading the article, the address is on the address bar which can be copied and pasted onto the blog. Rarely there are various types of problems, but one can mail the article to oneself and pull the data off including the address. If you can’t get the address, a sentence or the headline quoted on your response will make it easy to google to the site. If the site places garbage on top of the article, sometimes you can read it easier by emailing the article that might exclude the garbage. If the site is tightly locked you can take the headline and google it looking for a mirrored site or another article by the author that mimics the original site. After a few days most of the stuff can be obtained elsewhere even when tightly protected. I have even gone to the website of the author and found almost the same article reprinted.
I have loads of subscriptions, but there are too many and who wants to pay for one article.
I haven’t looked for the second article yet.
The Bob’s and Bill’s on this blog are trolls always asking the same questions which are answered only to be asked again.
The transcript of the GA call shows that it is not a “settlement negotiation” because no where in there do they actually negotiate a settlement.
Sammy you are such a dummy. You don’t even know what settlement negotiation means.
I posted the relevant portion of the transcript. Read it and report back. Trump said nothing wrong. The initial news reports were wrong as to what was said, but Sammy, you are too dumb to read the corrections.
That sounds like a BlueAnon conspiracy theory.
Bob
Listen to yourself. Can you honestly say that with a straight face? With all those lawyers on the line and knowing the phone call was being recorded, they were pressuring the SOS to break the law in a way that would send them all to prison for a very long time??? In your mind they were seriously asking him to just make up votes out of nowhere?? Just push a button and votes would appear???
Do you people ever say this crap out loud???
Except that is exactly what Trump was doing.
Welp, that shows how deluded you are, truly. You’re saying Trump and his lawyers decided, hey, lets give Brad a call and threaten him to go fill out some fake ballots and suddenly “find” them under a table somewhere.
If it werent so sad it would be hilarious.
the disingenuous ridiculousness of this is that early on, we are taught that context matters. Trump didn’t just tell Brad to go find some votes, he told him where he honestly thought they could be found.
And if I say, “I am going to kill Brad Raffensberger next week”, I guess I just threatened his life, right? Unless, of course, you consider the fact that I was answering a question about the outcome of our upcoming chess match.
It’s the same crap they are pulling with “fight like hell”.
Tom, after detailing the hundreds of thousands of votes where illegality existed and shown, Trump said that among all those votes: ” I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”
On a submarine, all Sammy is good for is ballast first to be ejected in a ballast blow.
Biden & Company – Lets get dow-to the Nitty Gritty:
Delaware has PERSONAL INCOME TAX
Title 30 §Chapter 11 – PERSONAL INCOME TAX (§§ 1101 — 1205-1209)
§Chapter 14 – GIFT TAX (§ 1401-1409)
https://delcode.delaware.gov/title30/index.html
Certainly we can find a Prosecutor in Dover, Delaware Man enough to bring indictments against the Biden ‘Organized Crime Family’ (The Dem Admin and All those whom are accessory to the fact).
If you take Millions in Bribes-N-Graft and don’t pay your Taxes on the Horde – In Delaware it is Income Tax evasion.
This, aside the ‘on-the-job’ embezzlement from the Federal Government.
Title 18, Section 641 of the US Code
Embezzlement of Public Money, Property, or Records – 18 U.S.C. § 641
18 U.S.C. 641 says, “Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to their use or the use of another, knowing it was embezzled, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or something of to the United States or any department, any property made or being made under contract, will be fined and imprisoned up to ten years, or both.”
Down-N-Dirty – Hey! It’s Politics MAN.
Where the beef.
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/11/the-why-not-culture-why-the-georgia-final-report-should-worry-us-all/comment-page-2/#comment-2321399
𝙒𝙀 forget what launched this mishegoss. ‘Draining The Swamp’ is what started it all.
[𝑰𝒕’𝒔 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒅𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒘𝒂𝒎𝒑 (𝐒𝐭𝐮𝐩𝐢𝐝)]
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, his accessory to the fact(s) are Swamp Monsters.
They knowingly have engaged in Criminal Activities and have knowingly orchestrated a Cover-up of the Criminal Activities.
Republicans need to get on the ball and 𝐃𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐰𝐚𝐦𝐩.
Ms Kohrs personifies the average democrat and gives one insight into why there’s a president Biden, who at a recent presser rambled and told reporters he was tired and wanted to go to bed, then walked off.
God please Bless and keep what’s left of our founding fathers America and Americans.
Rambled on, you mean like TFG?
Did you watch the Biden press conference in Hanoi?
Of course he didnt. He doesnt want to be reminded that the best his party can offer is a demented old man who sounds like a drunk when he is speaking. The drugs they are giving the manchurian are having a deleterious effect on his speech, and we’re not talking stutters. His speech is noticeably slurred. I keep waiting for the words “thuffering thucotath” to come out of his mouth.
The Dems are setting it up so that if they win in 2024, half the country will not view the winner as legitimate. They are fomenting civil war. Perhaps they know this and that is their plan: tear it all down so they can rebuild it in their (collectivist) image.
oldmanfromkansas: They’re banking on winning that civil war. I wouldn’t take that bet.
Old man, you hit the nail on the head. And no, I wouldn’t take that bet as it is a certainty as much as the Left screaming “climate change” the next time there is a natural disaster.
So in your mind the Rs have spent the last 3 years attacking elections and making up lies about voter fraud, and somehow it is the Ds who are setting up the country to disbelieve 2024? For Rs and MAGAs, every accusation is a confession.
We have already seen the Democrats subvert the 2020 election by suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop. Polls show had people known more about the laptop they would of voted differently which could of lead to a much different outcome in the election.
We know Zuckerbucks had an effect on the election.
As late as May 2019, Clinton was still saying the election was stolen from her.
Democrats have spent seven years attacking the 2016 election.
OldManFromKS,
Would not put it past them.
The Bolsheviks have brought the Romanov family into the basement for execution and Professor Turley writes that while he agrees with some of the points of the Bolsheviks, he disagrees with the method of execution.
“The members recommended 39 people for prosecution . . .”
When you cannot beat them on the field of ideas and policies, when you’re not sure voters will do your bidding — Purge the opposition.
See in particular the third of the Moscow show trials. Same power-lusting urges. Same tyrannical tactics. And the identical end game:
Make “people so fearful of reprisals that mass arrests [are] no longer necessary.”
What was the Republican platform in 2202? There wasn’t one.
so when you say when you cannot beat them on the field of ideas you must be talking about republicans. Even today. what do Republicans stand for?
Bob: Maybe you’ve been living under a rock, but Republicans certainly do have a platform, and it includes: safe borders, safe cities, safe schools, and safe children. Yes, hard for a Democrat to understand the concept of “safe” when your street hordes are burning the border and our cities, and using children to push a gruesome mutilation regime and deny parental rights.
“What was the Republican platform in 2202? There wasn’t one.”
“The Republican National Committee’s Executive Committee voted on June 10, 2020, to adopt the same platform the party used in 2016. ”
You can read it in its entirety, but it followed the leader DJT.
You are pretending to care, but you don’t. That is why you make foolish statements while remaining ignorant of the facts which are easily googled.
—–
Create 10 Million New Jobs in 10 Months
Create 1 Million New Small Businesses
Cut Taxes to Boost Take-Home Pay and Keep Jobs in America
Enact Fair Trade Deals that Protect American Jobs
‘Made in America’ Tax Credits
Expand Opportunity Zones
Continue Deregulatory Agenda for Energy Independence
ERADICATE COVID-19
Develop a Vaccine by The End Of 2020
Return to Normal in 2021
Make All Critical Medicines and Supplies for Healthcare Workers in The United States
Refill Stockpiles and Prepare for Future Pandemics
END OUR RELIANCE ON CHINA
Bring Back 1 Million Manufacturing Jobs from China
Tax Credits for Companies that Bring Back Jobs from China
Allow 100% Expensing Deductions for Essential Industries like Pharmaceuticals and Robotics who Bring *Back their Manufacturing to the United States
No Federal Contracts for Companies who Outsource to China
Hold China Fully Accountable for Allowing the Virus to Spread around the World
HEALTHCARE
Cut Prescription Drug Prices
Put Patients and Doctors Back in Charge of our Healthcare System
Lower Healthcare Insurance Premiums
End Surprise Billing
Cover All Pre-Existing Conditions
Protect Social Security and Medicare
Protect Our Veterans and Provide World-Class Healthcare and Services
EDUCATION
Provide School Choice to Every Child in America
Teach American Exceptionalism
DRAIN THE SWAMP
Pass Congressional Term Limits
End Bureaucratic Government Bullying of U.S. Citizens and Small Businesses
Expose Washington’s Money Trail and Delegate Powers Back to People and States
Drain the Globalist Swamp by Taking on International Organizations That Hurt American Citizens
DEFEND OUR POLICE
Fully Fund and Hire More Police and Law Enforcement Officers
Increase Criminal Penalties for Assaults on Law Enforcement Officers
Prosecute Drive-By Shootings as Acts of Domestic Terrorism
Bring Violent Extremist Groups Like ANTIFA to Justice
End Cashless Bail and Keep Dangerous Criminals Locked Up until Trial
END ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND PROTECT AMERICAN WORKERS
Block Illegal Immigrants from Becoming Eligible for Taxpayer-Funded Welfare, Healthcare, and Free College Tuition
Mandatory Deportation for Non-Citizen Gang Members
Dismantle Human Trafficking Networks
End Sanctuary Cities to Restore our Neighborhoods and Protect our Families
Prohibit American Companies from Replacing United States Citizens with Lower-Cost Foreign Workers
Require New Immigrants to Be Able to Support Themselves Financially
INNOVATE FOR THE FUTURE
Launch Space Force, Establish Permanent Manned Presence on The Moon and Send the First Manned Mission to Mars
Build the World’s Greatest Infrastructure SystemWin the Race to 5G and Establish a National High-Speed Wireless Internet Network
Continue to Lead the World in Access to the Cleanest Drinking Water and Cleanest Air
Partner with Other Nations to Clean Up our Planet’s Oceans
AMERICA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY
Stop Endless Wars and Bring Our Troops Home
Get Allies to Pay their Fair Share
Maintain and Expand America’s Unrivaled Military Strength
Wipe Out Global Terrorists Who Threaten to Harm Americans
Build a Great Cybersecurity Defense System and Missile Defense System
DEFEND AMERICAN VALUES
Continue nominating constitutionalist Supreme Court and lower court judges
Protect unborn life through every means available
Defend the freedoms of religious believers and organizations
Support the exercise of Second Amendment rights[7]
—
If you wish to read its entirety it is easily googled.
“Even today. what do Republicans stand for?”
Sanity.
LOL. Not!!!
I had to laugh. Good one. Alas, Reps are no better than Dems. Young posted yesterday that Trump has to be the next President. As if! Then again he thinks Robert Malone invented mRNA vaccines in the 1980s. Chumps and cultists exist on both sides of the aisle. 1-2 years ago I listed several critiques of Trump’s Presidency, and S. Meyer went kujo on me, calling me a Fidel Castro sympathizer. Ordinarily such an accusation in person would not end well for the person making the accusation, especially if he is 20+ years older than me. But this is the internet: have keyboard will scream and denigrate.
An easier solution would be to place Trump and Biden supporters in one basement, no WiFi access! Glorious….💣
There is no consensus in our nation
The dictatorship of relativism reigns in both liberals and so called conservatives. Post-modernist thinking has permeated the ethos of a large percentage of Americans. Both parties are 2 sides of the same coin. Better to have multiple parties, break the monopoly of the RNC-DNC cartel (RICO!!!), and then the leader of presidential elections has to broker coalitions with the multiple parties.
e.g.
A look at Germany’s political parties
“Here’s a look at Germany’s political parties — CDU, CSU, SPD, AfD, FDP, Left party, Greens — who they are and what they want”
https://www.dw.com/en/spd-green-party-fdp-cdu-left-party-afd/a-38085900
But I digress. Carry on!
Estovir,
When comparing to the woke leftists of the Democrat party and there by Marixsm, socialism eventually communism they embrace, they make Republicans look sane.
That is saying something! 😉
“S. Meyer went kujo on me, calling me a Fidel Castro sympathizer. “
Not so, Estovir. You are not a Castro sympathizer, but some things you say have an overzealous appeal that is narrow so that while it helps some, it hurts many more. We mostly agree on those things you desire, but I do not believe the ends always justify the means.
I assume you are talking about a recent discussion.
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/08/ragefully-wrong-a-response-to-professor-laurence-tribe/comment-page-3/#comment-2320875
What I pointed out in that response was the law of supply and demand. If you disagree, discuss it at the time, not later when the specific item is not sitting in front of us.
If I comment about anything you say, it doesn’t mean I disagree with what you are looking for. It means I think I have a better way of achieving that end based on basic economic principles. We can discuss those principles if you wish.
“Ordinarily such an accusation in person would not end well for the person making the accusation, especially if he is 20+ years older than me. But this is the internet: have keyboard will scream and denigrate.”
Estovir, I want to ensure you understand that what I say here is not much different than what I would say in person. Are you saying you found a physical alternative to using intellect? Is that force, specifically brute force? Is that what you were taught, or is this a meaningless act of machoness meant to pass in the wind? I’m fine no matter your choice.
What I wonder is why at the time you didn’t stand firm instead of walking away. Never underestimate the person you don’’t know.
🙂
“What was the Republican platform in 2202?”
Platforms are a dime a dozen.
In evaluating a political movement, focus on policies passed and actions. Those are the basis for inferring the underlying ideology. For the Left, it’s easy — in essence, nihilism, e.g., gluing your feet to the ground to destroy a tennis tournament.
What do Democrats stand for?
Open borders.
Sexualization of children.
Pornography in elementary schools.
Mutilation of healthy bodies.
There are 97 different sexes.
War on women rights.
Forever proxy wars or WWIII.
Really bad economic policies. Biden even regrets calling the Inflation Reduction Act, the Inflation Reduction Act.
The weaponization of government institutions against political rivals and to a degree, the American people.
Censorship.
Putting illegal immigrants ahead of Americans.
Just to name a few.
Upstate, don’t forget the war on energy, the draining of our strategic reserve of oil AND WEAPONS, the end of female sports, censorship and licenses and voting rights for illegals.
I would like to know why you disavow any idea of any of the 2020 election being fraudulent. There have been findings in at least MI and AZ of fraudulent votes. I understand that much of what was said/done was well overblown, but to say there was nothing questionable, fraudulent, or illegal is a stretch.
The recount in Arizona done by partisan Republican firms showed Biden actually won by more than the official count.
So I am not sure what your source is, but you are misinformed.
It’s not a question of nothing questionable or fraudulent. it is a question of enough fraud to alter the outcome. There has been plenty of fraud in every election. usually a handful of people voting twice as many republicans did in 2020. Are you talking about all the republican voters that voted twice for trump in your fraud allegation? Or perhaps you are talking about the president telling Georgia election officials to find 12,000 votes.
Sounds like a BlueAnon conspiracy theory.
Or perhaps you are talking about the president telling Georgia election officials to find 12,000 votes.
How many times does one have to repeat to you the actual words spoken before you have comprehension. I’ll repeat my answer to Bill a short while ago. Maybe now you will be able to get it through your head. If you don’t deal with the facts when presented and keep bringing up the same comments you demonstrate what you are.
—-
Here are the first couple of minutes when Trump got on the phone with Raffensperger. Your selected sentence showed nothing and the paragraph I provided makes it clearer that there was no threat.
Trump: OK, thank you very much. Hello Brad and Ryan and everybody. We appreciate the time and the call. So we’ve spent a lot of time on this and if we could just go over some of the numbers, I think it’s pretty clear that we won. We won very substantially in Georgia. You even see it by rally size, frankly. We’d be getting 25-30,000 people a rally and the competition would get less than 100 people. And it never made sense.
But we have a number of things. We have at least 2 or 3 — anywhere from 250-300,000 ballots were dropped mysteriously into the rolls. Much of that had to do with Fulton County, which hasn’t been checked. We think that if you check the signatures — a real check of the signatures going back in Fulton County you’ll find at least a couple of hundred thousand of forged signatures of people who have been forged. And we are quite sure that’s going to happen.
Another tremendous number. We’re going to have an accurate number over the next two days with certified accountants. But an accurate number but its in the 50s of thousands— and that’s people that went to vote and they were told they can’t vote because they’ve already been voted for. And it’s a very sad thing. They walked out complaining. But the number’s large. We’ll have it for you. But it’s much more than the number of 11,779 that’s — The current margin is only 11,779. Brad, I think you agree with that, right? That’s something I think everyone — at least that’s’ a number that everyone agrees on.
But that’s the difference in the votes. But we’ve had hundreds of thousands of ballots that we’re able to actually — we’ll get you a pretty accurate number. You don’t need much of a number because the number that in theory I lost by, the margin would be 11,779. But you also have a substantial numbers of people, thousands and thousands who went to the voting place on November 3, were told they couldn’t vote, were told they couldn’t vote because a ballot had been put on their name. And you know that’s very, very, very, very sad.
We had, I believe it’s about 4,502 voters who voted but who weren’t on the voter registration list, so it’s 4,502 who voted but they weren’t on the voter registration roll which they had to be. You had 18,325 vacant address voters. The address was vacant and they’re not allowed to be counted. That’s 18,325.
Smaller number — you had 904 who only voted where they had just a P.O. — a post office box number — and they had a post office box number and that’s not allowed. We had at least 18,000 — that’s on tape we had them counted very painstakingly — 18,000 voters having to do with [name]. She’s a vote scammer, a professional vote scammer and hustler [name]. That was the tape that’s been shown all over the world that makes everybody look bad, you me and everybody else.
Where they got — number one they said very clearly and it’s been reported they said there was a major water main break. Everybody fled the area. And then they came back, [name] and her daughter and a few people. There were no Republican poll watchers. Actually, there were no Democrat poll watchers, I guess they were them. But there were no Democrats, either and there was no law enforcement. Late in the morning, they went early in the morning they went to the table with the black robe, the black shield and they pulled out the votes. Those votes were put there a number of hours before the table was put there. I think it was, Brad you would know, it was probably eight hours or seven hours before and then it was stuffed with votes.
They weren’t in an official voter box, but they were in what looked to be suitcases or trunks, suitcases but they weren’t in voter boxes. The minimum number it could be because we watched it and they watched it certified in slow motion instant replay if you can believe it but slow motion and it was magnified many times over and the minimum it was 18,000 ballots, all for Biden.
You had out-of-state voters. They voted in Georgia but they were from out of state, of 4,925. You had absentee ballots sent to vacant, they were absentee ballots sent to vacant addresses. They had nothing on them about addresses, that’s 2,326.
And you had drop boxes, which is very bad. You had drop boxes that were picked up. We have photographs and we have affidavits from many people.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/08/25/the-snap-and-the-scowl-the-trump-mugshot-ignites-a-tinderbox-nation/comment-page-4/#comment-2317209
S. Meyer,
Thank you for providing the transcript!
Bob, across 6 swing states, millions of votes have been found to be illegal.
More than enough to change the results of the election.
I think the question you have to ask is -why were Republican Senators calling for Raffensburger’s resignation? It was because he correctly counted the votes, the Republican lost, and they expected a Republican Secretary of State to cheat for their side so that their guy won.
It is really as simple as that. No one had any legitimate concerns with the multiple recounts there, all showing Biden the winner.
There were at least 40 people convicted in the Watergate conspiracy. Sometimes the conspiracies are that large.
They let the top guy off but a lot of others went to prison. This was not viewed as a political prosecution.
Watergate had a break in to the opposing sides headquarters, what crime happened here? Is it the same crime that Raskin and others committed?
Now how about Hilary? Did she commit any crimes? Did Biden have classified documents? You are trying to ruin the country.
HullBobby,
Yeah, trying to compare the two is pretty lame.
But it is all they have. Throw something, anything at the wall and see what sticks.
Things are not going well for the DNC. Recent poll showed 2/3ds of Democrats dont want Biden to run in 2024, and 82% said, “just someone besides Joe Biden.”
Did you see how the WH aides cut him off when he started rambling, ended the press conference and then played music really loud in Hanoi?
Upstate, if we had a legitimate media the people would see how Biden acted in Vietnam and he would be almost thrown out of office. The disgraceful performance, complete with KJP cutting of THE PRESIDENT in mid-sentence told the whole story.
John Adams spoke prophetically when he said: “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Sadly we are seeing that immoral and villainous people can get away with destroying the rule of law and thus the republic itself, and there is nothing anyone who appeals to the Constitution can do about it. This is all playing out right now, and the indictments in Georgia are but one of several examples.
Old man, you’re on a roll. And speaking of rolling, John et al of the Founding Dads must be rolling in their graves. Moral and religious? Just moral would be an improvement at this point for one can be “religious” and not moral as we’ve seen through time.
“. . . one can be “religious” and not moral . . .”
Just as one can be moral and not religious. Contrary to popular myth, religion does not have a monopoly on morality.
. . . religion does not have a monopoly on morality.
Correct, and it’s called common grace. See Romans 2 (For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them).
“. . . it’s called common grace.”
No. It’s called a this-worldly, non-mystical moral code. Consult a good book on the history of ethics.
Good books on the history of ethics are wonderful – and they are yet another example of common grace.
Common grace [refers] to the grace of God that is . . . common to all humankind . . .. It is common because its benefits are experienced by, or intended for, the whole human race without distinction between one person and another.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_grace
“. . . they are yet another example of common grace.”
So a scientific code of ethics that explicitly rejects the existence of a mystical being, is nonetheless an affirmation of the existence of a mystical being.
That’s quite a racket. Heads you win; tails, the opposition loses.
That’s quite a racket.
Yup. Just not my racket.
If not religion being the vehicle, spreading moral behavior, what other source are you thinking of?
“. . . what other source are you thinking of?”
Same “source” (i.e., foundation) as for any science: Reality. In the case of ethics, the facts of reality about man’s nature.
Same “source” (i.e., foundation) as for any science: Reality.
That’s the name of the game, isn’t it: reality. You assert confidently that there’s no “mystical” being or existence. By “mystical” I understand you to mean supernatural. But as I say, you assert it confidently but how do you prove it? That’s the question.
“. . . how do you prove it?”
That onus is on those who assert that a mystical being does exist.
But when you spurn logic, in favor of faith, such a proof is impossible.
And therein lies another great divide. I can prove the foundation of a this-worldly moral code. Mystics cannot.
That onus is on those who assert that a mystical being does exist.
We’ll see about that.
I can prove the foundation of a this-worldly moral code.
I’m all ears.
“I’m all ears.”
If you were, I would.
Cop out.
“Cop out.”
Illustrating, yet again, your habit of passive (“all ears”)-aggressive (“cop out”) behavior. And reconfirming my conclusion that such a discussion with you would be worse than a waste of time.
Not that this will make a dent, but: It’s typically after 3-4 exchanges that your hostility spews to the surface.
One final question:
It’s typically after 3-4 exchanges that your hostility spews to the surface.
Since this is our first exchange, on what basis should I not conclude that that is a canned response?
You’re right it doesn’t make a dent because there’s no truth in it. Just to note, though, I was not referring to you as a cop-out, but to your actions in refusing to support your position. And your reference to my supposed “hostility” is based solely on your subjective perception, which says more about how your conscience must be accusing you than it does about anything I have said. Enjoy your day.
Finally, you asserted that you could “prove the foundation of a this-worldly moral code.” I said, okay, I’m listening. Then you refused to do so. Under what standard would that not be considered a cop-out? IOW, how was I wrong to label your response as such?
“That onus is on those who assert that a mystical being does exist.”
Why shouldn’t you have an equal obligation to prove the opposite?
“Why shouldn’t you have an equal obligation to prove the opposite?”
Same reason the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, not on the defendant to prove innocence.
Bad analogy. How many crimes does a person have to convict before there is enough evidence to convict? Many. If we accept your poor analogy, you have proven yourself wrong.
“And therein lies another great divide. I can prove the foundation of a this-worldly moral code. Mystics cannot.”
Sam, I also waited for your proof, but now that I see it is not forthcoming, I am asking you why not. Did your proof not exist, or was it insufficient?
Watching Emily Kohrs interviews, her strange smile, her giggles, her wild eyes, no wonder it was a “special” grand jury.
This whole thing has become so ridiculous I dont think the Democrats realize how much of a farce they have made America.
Emily Kohrs is the face of Democrat Grand Juries and their contempt for political freedom. They wanted to indict Sen Graham and we have evil men like Schiff saying that they should have indicted a sitting senator for questioning absentee ballots.
When oh when will a red state DA or AG go after some Democrat to show them what they are sowing? I am so sick of seeing leftists burn down cities, destroy police stations and Federal Courthouses and then get no punishment while right wing nuts get 20 years! How is marching into the Capital, SOMETHING THAT I AGREE IS A CRIME, less of of an act of violence than having TWO LAWYERS throw a Molotov cocktail into a cop car? The two lawyers got treated like heroes and babied diring their arraignments while the other nuts got 20 years???
She was also the face of the “special” grand jury.
From now on, when someone makes mention of this “special” grand jury, Kohrs will come to mind and I then will question the rest of the “special” grand jury and their mental capacity if she is the best of the bunch.
We will see if judges strike this down with judicial admonishments this idiocy has earned. Or are the corrupt leftist Judges going to promote the lie, and force SCOTUS to step in?
Maybe we SHOULD criminalize being associated with a political organization that uses alleged chicanery to try to change the outcome of an election.
Strange comment. Does it apply to Republicans or to Democrats? Nevermind. Let’s send to prison the opposition for being associated with a “criminal” organization that doesn’t let us have what we want without complaint. We can start with their politicians, and then start down a list of others we don’t like. Undesireables, deplorable. It’s a lot of people to imprison but if we run out of space we can always commence with the final solution.
All of this rancor was avoidable if the sensible adults in charge (a group I am beginning to think does not exist) would have made real efforts to investigate all the odd observations about the election — not use standing or procedural dodges to avoid the ugly task but get to the bottom of suspicious activities, enormous sums of money made available to aid turnout in specific places but not in other, which makes it look not like the furtherance of voting but more like partisan campaign contributions, drop boxes visited in the wee hours of the morning etc. More evidence continues to dribble out week by week.
There is no sense trying to claim that counting the same compromised ballots over again makes for a true audit — that’s Florida c. 2000 which most Democrats are still angry about. And no use claiming that this has all been adjudicated and cleared-up by courts. It has not. All I hear are claims that an election with opportunities to cheat galore somehow, mysteriously, is the cleanest election in history. Nothing that looks like proof. It’s not credible.
And how did it end? With a President that has no ability to string a sentence or two together; who is not just “too old,” but who was showing signs of dementia during the campaign, and his family of hangers-on. Let’s not even talk about the war being carried on against broad swaths of the productive economy. Disgusting.
so why aren’t Gore and Hillary and FELLOW in JAIL as they made a MUCH bigger fight? “Jan 2001 WAPO “In each case, Gore, standing behind the speaker’s desk, ruled the objection could not be heard because of an 1877 law that requires any protest of electoral votes to be accompanied by the signature of a senator. No senator had agreed to join in the 20 objections raised by the House Democrats.” any of THOSE 20 GO TO JAIL?
I believe Cleta Mitchell was on the list. She was Trump’s lawyer in the case brought in Georgia that was the subject of the call to Raffensberger. Aside from representing Trump in that case, I am not aware that she did anything else with regard to the election.
The decision to deny Meadows’ motion to remove his trial to Federal court may indicate the kind of thinking involved here. The RICO charge was said not to involve his chief of staff duties because those duties did not encompass joining an enterprise unlawfully seeking to overturn an election. The specific acts he took, and whether they could be said to fall within his chief of staff duties, were irrelevant, because the RICO charge is the association with the criminal enterprise itself not any particular act, and association with a criminal enterprise cannot be part of the duties of a federal officer. Framing the charge in this way allows state criminal allegations to be made against anyone who helped Trump contest the election, regardless of what they themselves actually did.
I imagine the defence of those who did not engage in individual criminal conduct will be that they did not knowingly join a criminal enterprise, because they believed they were lawfully contesting an election.
These indictments highlight the potential for the abuse of RICO statutes when they are applied beyond the scope of the organised crime they were originally designed to fight.
Contesting an election is not a crime.
There are crimes that can be committed to further a campaign to contest an alection, like a campaign paying for an intelligence dossier and then hiding the source of funding, or altering an e-mail presented to a court to obtain a warrant against someone in the opposing political campaign.
Thank you. I mentioned that earlier as it just seems so obvious. But the Left only criminalizes the opposition’s actions. They are exempt.
@Anon
Yes, he did. You are a ridiculous person. Was not difficult to search for, and even *Canada*, are better informed and more honest than you. 😂
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-concedes-1.5865609
Meanwhile, Hillary is still kvetching nearly eight years later. 🙄🙄
“None of what you post would be possible. Both Gore and Hillary conceded.”
You have no idea what you just revealed about what motivates the Left’s (and the MSM’s) hatred of Trump.
The odd part…is virtually NO “Republican” does anything to stop the Democrats criminal crime wave?
Because maybe there is no democratic criminal crime wave? unlike the trump crime family.
Are you really oblivious to The Biden Crime Family?
What crimes did Brandon commit?
There is probable cause he was soliciting bribes from Burisma.
Impeach Brandon!
no…it is pure Fascism! The Rule of Law is dead in America. Where Bidens commit open crimes…and nothing happens. Trump is impeached and investigated for THE RUSSIAN HOAX…..which was a Criminal Conspiracy by Democrats across government and the DNC. RULE OF LAW IS DEAD!
Ah, Fulton County. Such a nice place to live in the 1960’s and 1970’s when so much seemed possible in the world at that time . Atlanta was special with a coalition of white and black plotting the city’s future. Ivan Allen, Julian Bond, Maynard Jackson, Martin Luther King Jr and Sr and many others worked so hard to make it a “city too busy to hate” and it worked for so many despite serious challenges. I planned to returned there after training to practice medicine but by 1979 things were already unsettled and I never seriously considered going back. By 1987 my parents, both sisters and my family were all gone, never to return. I regret the dream going bad but I never regretted the decision to leave. Seems I was right. I wonder what Maynard Jackson and Benjamin Mays would think of their city and county now,
Our Most High God and Father calls this country the harlot in the book of Revelation who is riding her UN beast in these last days for the cup of her spiritual fornication has been drunk by most of the world!:
https://sumofthyword.com/2021/01/07/mystery-babylon-the-great-and-her-beast/
“… Indeed, Democrats have called for barring not just Trump but 120 Republicans in Congress from running for office. …”
SO THER YOU HAVE IT
The Republicans need to call for barring not just Biden but 120 Democrats in Congress from running for office.
Biden definitely committed “crimes” and in addition to the Bribes-N-Graft, you could add War Crimes for instigating the War in the Ukraine.
All of this is BS, it’s another way of keeping America ‘mentally-sick’, while it all goes to Hell in a Hand Basket.
Sooner or later, you get Sick of being Sick. D.C. (et.al.) has blown it.
Why is this allowed to go on? Why should Republicans cooperate at all or try similar tactics?
“. . . try similar tactics?”
And while you’re at it, dig two graves.
Better two graves than one grave only.
Do you remember Maraxus?
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=3857818#p3857818
– Maraxus
Keep in mind that Maraxus was posting to defend the indictment of Rick Perry (which jack had blogged about).
– Maraxus
– Maraxus
– Maraxus
“Maraxus’s” ideals were adopted by the Democratic Party. There is no denying it.
Maraxus must be stopped at any and all costs.