You'd have to be an idiot to think Trump was just innocently asking a state official to investigate fraud, after listening to that call and knowing the overall context of everything he was doing related to trying to overturn the election, like the fake electors, pressuring the DoJ to "just say the election was corrupt," and trying to get Mike Pence to do something he didn't have the constitutional authority to do. Listen to the call itself -- Trump doesn't even make sense when he said "I just want to find 11,780 votes... because we won the state." If he won the state, he wouldn't need more votes! No, this wasn't just a polite request to look into voter fraud -- it was a shotgun blast of claims that voter fraud happened and pressure on Raffensperger to accept that and change the outcome, even implying that Raffensperger was committing a crime if he didn't. It was pressure and it was a threat. Trump supporters who defend this are disingenuous. It's like defending a mob boss who says, "You have a real nice family... It would be a shame if something happened to them..." We all know what that means in a certain context, but the supporter would say, "What? He was just showing concern!"

Trump supporters who defend this are disingenuous. It's like defending a mob boss who says, "You have a real nice family... It would be a shame if something happened to them..." We all know what that means in a certain context, but the supporter would say, "What? He was just showing concern!" — GRWelsh

That's... fucking exactly what it's like. Thank you. What a beautiful analogy. It would be a shame if something happened to it.

"Stand back and standby!" :point: 22 years for Seditious Conspiracy, etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/05/enrique-tarrio-proud-boys-sentenced-jan-6-attack

Jack Smith's coming for you, Seditionist-1. 4March24 – "Be there. Will be wild!". :lol:

It sounds like you are treating John Durham's last efforts as Special Counsel as conclusive proof of a plot to smear the Trump campaign. Years of investigation did point to some unprofessional behavior but not prove or strongly suggest the sort of organized plot as advertised at its inception.

Your language of:

conspiracy theory that Russia stole an election — NOS4A2

does not fit with the conspiracies you promote because Russia did try to influence the election result. This was acknowledged by the Republicans at the time. The question of the Mueller probe was whether the Trump team was coordinating their efforts with Russia to that end.
Mueller concluded he could not prove that happened but could not rule it out because of the obstructions his investigation encountered. At his last congressional hearing, Durham admitted ignorance of many aspects of that case. It was not a good look for your team. Whoever that is.

The problem of proving organized behavior Is one of the interesting aspects of the Georgia charges. Having the indictment be a RICO offense puts all of these questions of 'organized' behavior as the matter needed to be proved.

If the RICO angle is a fabrication, presented in a court of law, your desire to defend Trump should have its best chance here, where the coordination of agents is the case, as such.

I think the intent on the outcome will be another difficult issue to prove since it's not a general intent crime.

I think the interference with State processes and officials by agents outside of the State helps establish intent since other possible reasons are difficult to imagine. Like Meadows happening to be in town to visit the recount efforts. Or local election officials being defamed by Powell and Giuliani.

The situation would be very different in a system not shaped so profoundly by federalism.

It makes no difference whether he meant find votes that can be discarded as illegal. There was not and is not evidence they exist. He was repeatedly told by the Justice Department and Georgia officials that they did not exist.

It is one thing to question results, but quite another to reject the evidence. — Fooloso4

Why would someone trust the DOJ and Georgia officials? — NOS4A2

At the time of these events the DOJ was being run by Trump's own people. At the time of these events the "Georgia officials" were all Republicans and Trump supporters.

Are you saying that people who are life long Republicans and Trump supporters could not be trusted to help Trump?

At the time of these events the DOJ was being run by Trump's own people. — EricH

Anyone who does not show complete and blind "loyalty" is no longer his own people. Their "disloyalty" is evidence that they cannot be trusted.

At the time of these events the DOJ was being run by Trump's own people. At the time of these events the "Georgia officials" were all Republicans and Trump supporters.

Are you saying that people who are life long Republicans and Trump supporters could not be trusted to help Trump?

No, I’m asking “Why would someone trust the DOJ and Georgia officials?”

Not everyone is so enamoured with party as you guys. Trump especially. He’s been thrown under the bus by republicans and Trump supporters at every single turn.

Not everyone is so enamoured with party as you guys. Trump especially. He’s been thrown under the bus by republicans and Trump supporters at every single turn. — NOS4A2

The only reason we still have our constitutional republic is because of Republicans and former Trump supporters who stood up to him when he pressured them to overturn the election results. They're patriots and heroes.

Anyone who does not show complete and blind "loyalty" is no longer his own people. Their "disloyalty" is evidence that they cannot be trusted. — Fooloso4

This is too funny. NOS gave that exact reply.

Not everyone is so enamoured [sic] with party as you guys. Trump especially. He’s been thrown under the bus by republicans and Trump supporters at every single turn. — NOS4A2

Trumpsters have a lot of practice inventing "alternative facts". Trump feeds off their resentment and has convinced them that when he complains that he is not being treated fairly that they too are the victims.

Far more often then not when he accuses others of something it is something that he himself is guilty of. In his wake the roads are paved with both friends and enemies that he has thrown under the bus.

Your comment about "Trump supporters" prompts me to ask you again why you support the man.

What has he done or will do for you and what do you care about?

Trump and his lawyers were pressuring them to look at the fraud and to share their reports and data. The Big Lie™ is the criminalization of these efforts and the propaganda surrounding it. No thinking person can look at the phone call and come away with the exact same outlook as the deep-state dinner theater shoved in your face for years. So no, they’re not heroes, but propaganda-driven knaves.

They're propaganda driven knaves for NOT overturning an election?

For not looking at the fraud and sharing their reports and data with the concerned party? Yes.

and you're sure all of these propaganda driven knaves, Mike pence in particular, didn't look at the reports and determine with a team of experts that they're not credible? Like every court that has seen them since?

Trump and his lawyers were pressuring them to look at the fraud and to share their reports and data. — NOS4A2

The problem is, multiple investigations had already been carried out and did not find what Trump and Trumpsters wanted. The only finding they would accept is that the election was stolen. And so, Trump pressured them to "find" votes that he could not accept were not there.

If they shared the data and reports maybe none of this would have happened. But they didn’t.

The votes he’s speaking about are the votes people were going to make but couldn’t because someone already voted for them. It’s why he pressured them to examine the signatures.

We’re going to have an accurate number over the next two days with certified accountants, but an accurate number will be given, but it’s 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. That’s something I think everyone -- at least that’s a number that everyone agrees on.

who is they? Mike pence? Share it with whom?

The office of the Secretary of State in Georgia.

And is there any possible world where they share it with that person, that person rejects the evidence for rational reasons, Biden wins the election and you're satisfied that everything was fair?

Once again: multiple investigations had already been carried out and did not find what Trump and Trumpsters wanted. His allegations of fraud have not been substantiated.

But Trump and Trumpsters simply cannot accept that. It is as simple as that. Piling unsubstantiated allegations on top of unsubstantiated allegations does not change the fact that he lost. The hope that he could create enough doubt to postpone or curtail the transfer of power did not pan out either. But Trump would rather burn it all to the ground than concede the election. That goes far beyond looking for nonexistent fraud.

How many of them checked the signatures as per the Trump team's request? Or shared the data? It's ok, you don't know the answer to that. Neither does Trump's team. Neither do I. Just take it from high and repeat what you've been told, I guess.

That's besides the point. The point is Trump is being indicted for lawful activity, and based on a lie even you repeat. Did Trump pressure the secretary of states to "find" votes? Or did he say "I have to find 12,000 votes", and "I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state". "I" doesn't mean "you". "I" doesn't mean "The secretary of State for Georgia". "I" doesn't mean "Brad Raffensperger". What does the word "I" refer to when it comes out of Trump's mouth, and why is this word suspiciously missing from your account every time you repeat it?

"I" doesn't mean "you". "I" doesn't mean "The secretary of State for Georgia". "I" doesn't mean "Brad Raffensperger". — NOS4A2

Yes, that is correct. It is Trump who "had" to and "wanted" to and "needed" to find these votes. Election officials must remain neutral.

Trump switches between "I", "we", "you", and "they".

And why can’t we have professionals do it instead of rank amateurs who will never find anything and don’t want to find anything? They don’t want to find, you know, they don’t want to find anything. Someday you’ll tell me the reason why, because I don’t understand your reasoning, but someday you’ll tell me the reason why. But why don’t you want to find?

And:

So tell me, Brad, what are we going to do?

Who is this we? It is clear:

And I think you have to say that you’re going to re-examine it, and you can re-examine it, but re-examine it with people that want to find answers, not people that don’t want to find answers.

RAFFENSPERGER: Mr. President, you have people that submit information, and we have our people that submit information. And then it comes before the court, and the court then has to make a determination. We have to stand by our numbers. We believe our numbers are right.

He sensibly and impartially suggests that if they can't agree the court can make a determination. But Trump rejects that and brow beats him:

I’ve been watching you, you know, you don’t care about anything.

Yeah, “and we’ll find hundreds of thousands of signatures, if you let us do it”. Who is this we? It’s us, the Trump team

Trump: Okay, whatever, it’s a disaster. It’s a disaster. Look. Here’s the problem. We can go through signature verification, and we’ll find hundreds of thousands of signatures, if you let us do it. And the only way you can do it, as you know, is to go to the past. But you didn’t do that in Cobb County. You just looked at one page compared to another. The only way you can do a signature verification is go from the one that signed it on November whatever, recently, and compare it to two years ago, four years ago, six years ago, you know, or even one. And you’ll find that you have many different signatures. But in Fulton, where they dumped ballots, you will find that you have many that aren’t even signed and you have many that are forgeries.

The notion that Trump is pressuring Reffensperger to “find” votes is just another hoax.

Neither do I. Just take it from high and repeat what you've been told, I guess. — NOS4A2

Do you believe you're not doing this?

The notion that Trump is pressuring Reffensperger to “find” votes is just another hoax. — NOS4A2

Raffensperger said he felt threatened by Trump.

Germany: Well, that’s not the case sir. There are things that you guys are entitled to get. And there’s things that under the law, we are not allowed to give out.

Trump: Well, you have to. Well, under the law you’re not allowed to give faulty election results, OK? You’re not allowed to do that. And that’s what you done. This is a faulty election result. And honestly, this should go very fast. You should meet tomorrow because you have a big election coming up and because of what you’ve done to the president — you know, the people of Georgia know that this was a scam. And because of what you’ve done to the president, a lot of people aren’t going out to vote and a lot of Republicans are going to vote negative because they hate what you did to the president. Okay? They hate it. And they’re going to vote. And you would be respected. Really respected, if this thing could be straightened out before the election. You have a big election coming up on Tuesday. — Phone Call