I see posters here repeating the same lie…
“Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).
Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the state. He believed the proof was out there; he didn’t need to make anything up.”
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/08/18/blue-state-blues-the-georgia-indictment-was-triggered-by-fake-news/
@mott-the-hoople saidIf you and your buddies at breitbart would stop cherry picking, and listen to the entire phone call, you folks would be singing a very different tune.
I see posters here repeating the same lie…
“Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).
Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the st ...[text shortened]... eitbart.com/the-media/2023/08/18/blue-state-blues-the-georgia-indictment-was-triggered-by-fake-news/
Leave this to the professionals.
@mott-the-hoople saidActually, he threatened Raffensberger:
I see posters here repeating the same lie…
“Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).
Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the st ...[text shortened]... eitbart.com/the-media/2023/08/18/blue-state-blues-the-georgia-indictment-was-triggered-by-fake-news/
"And you are going to find that they are — which is totally illegal, it is more illegal for you than it is for them because, you know what they did and you’re not reporting it. That’s a criminal, that’s a criminal offense. And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. And that’s a big risk. "
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html
Trump was repeatedly told by everyone that counted (courts, Georgia election officials, his own advisors) that he had lost Georgia. His insistence that he won it by "hundreds of thousands of votes" was either a deliberate lie or a delusion. Neither provides a legal defense to a conspiracy to overturn already certified election results (possibly he should try an insanity defense).
@mchill saidIf we leave it to the professionals,, we will be relegated to just playing chess. Hearing Sonhouse's tomes is better than no debating!
If you and your buddies at breitbart would stop cherry picking, and listen to the entire phone call, you folks would be singing a very different tune.
Leave this to the professionals.
2 edits
Although the Federal indictment specifically says Trump knew he lost the election, that is not really necessary for a conviction under either the Federal or Georgia charges. An example I saw on the web illustrates this point:
Suppose Person T says bank 1 has "stolen" his money. He tells you, his trusted colleague, that you should go into the bank, demand the "stolen" money and if they refuse to give it, point a gun at the teller.
Person T is guilty of conspiracy to rob a bank regardless of whether he honestly believes Bank 1 stole his money or not.
@mott-the-hoople saidEven out of context, this quote is very telling. The assertion precedes the proof. The start of all logical arguments in trump land was "the election was stolen". Everything after that is potential proof that they're right. No one can prove the assertion is false.
I see posters here repeating the same lie…
“Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).
Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the st ...[text shortened]... eitbart.com/the-media/2023/08/18/blue-state-blues-the-georgia-indictment-was-triggered-by-fake-news/
In context, the transcript of this phone call is moch much worse than this quote suggests.
@no1marauder saidMarauder, all due respects, if it were that cut-and-dry, black and white, why do you think a court would waste its time with a slam-dunk case. Trump guilty, next case on the docket?
Although the Federal indictment specifically says Trump knew he lost the election, that is not really necessary for a conviction under either the Federal or Georgia charges. An example I saw on the web illustrates this point:
Suppose Person T says bank 1 has "stolen" his money. He tells you, his trusted colleague, that you should go into the bank, demand the "stolen" m ...[text shortened]... f conspiracy to rob a bank regardless of whether he honestly believes Bank 1 stole his money or not.
3 edits
@mott-the-hoople saidOh, please!
I see posters here repeating the same lie…
“Actually, what Trump said was: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state” (emphasis added).
Trump was not giving an order. He was talking about his own feelings. And as Scott Adams noted this week, Trump was speaking in the context of believing he had already won the st ...[text shortened]... eitbart.com/the-media/2023/08/18/blue-state-blues-the-georgia-indictment-was-triggered-by-fake-news/
Are you that stupid?
Furthermore, do you think we're that stupid?
Trump is a rich man. Rich men get used to speaking something, then it happens, because they have influence over people who aren't rich. They expect what they say to happen. Because there are always lesser humans around who will do what they want. He's even gone as far as seeking retribution against those who don't fall all over themselves satisfying him.
If you'd stop fanboi-ing all over him for one minute, you'd see that.
@averagejoe1 saidThe law doesn't work that way; every defendant has a right to face a jury that decides whether they are guilty or not.
Marauder, all due respects, if it were that cut-and-dry, black and white, why do you think a court would waste its time with a slam-dunk case. Trump guilty, next case on the docket?
@no1marauder saidoh, so there really is not need for the media to misrepresent what was actually said?
Actually, he threatened Raffensberger:
"And you are going to find that they are — which is totally illegal, it is more illegal for you than it is for them because, you know what they did and you’re not reporting it. That’s a criminal, that’s a criminal offense. And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. And that’s a big ris ...[text shortened]... spiracy to overturn already certified election results (possibly he should try an insanity defense).
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidIf we leave it to the professionals,, we will be relegated to just playing chess.
If we leave it to the professionals,, we will be relegated to just playing chess. Hearing Sonhouse's tomes is better than no debating!
In your case that wouldn't be a bad idea and add some study too.....considering your won - loss record is far from golden. 😏
@mott-the-hoople saidNo, there isn't. It was immediately clear what he said.
oh, so there really is not need for the media to misrepresent what was actually said?