(08-28-2023, 09:36 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(08-28-2023, 07:53 AM)Sneakers Wrote: Where can one find this publicly available "evidence" proving guilt (presumably beyond a reasonable doubt)?

Hard to take this seriously, but...

You can start with the call to the GA SoS Raffensberger. Trump had already been notified by DOJ officials that his claims about GA election results were bull [BLEEP]. - But he made the call anyway and pressured the official to "find" him 11000 votes. A number of key phrases he used in the call can easily be ruled criminal on their own, but along with the evidence gathered in that case that shows the Trump campaign offering MONEY to "speed up" the mail in ballot counts (that they 100% KNEW they'd lose in) and you've got multiple charges easily justified. 

They were not offering money to speed anything, they were trying to bribe an official. The mail in votes uncounted were from a primarily black county and Trump had literally spent MILLIONS of dollars telling his base not to vote by mail. Those uncounted votes were going to be a landslide for Biden, and they knew it, and the memos submitted into evidence prove this as well. 

Just one little quote from Trump's ridiculous begging call to Raffensberger:
Trump said: "There's nothing wrong with saying that, you know, you've recalculated ... even if you cut them in half, cut them in half and cut them in half again, it's more votes than we need."


The false electors scheme is already seeing indictments and more incoming indictments in multiple states. 
The GA and Fed cases are going to easily show that Trump and his lawyers are tied to this. Memos, emails, and texts have all been released tying them together as conspirators. He's not getting out of that cockamamy garbage. 
He tried to convince multiple states and the VP to commit fraud on his behalf. If you haven't seen the evidence being plastered all over the internet you are living under a rock.

You can't find something that doesn't exist, you can only find something that's lost or misplaced.  

"Speed up"?  Where's the crime in speeding up a process?  Was he offering financial assistance to pay for extra workers and/or overtime?

Bribing an official is your interpretation of vague comments.  Maybe it's true, but that's far from proven and it's going to take language far more specific than any presented thus far to prove intent.

There is nothing in the definition of the word "recalculating" to suggest fraud.  Quite the opposite, it suggests verifying previous results to ensure accuracy.  

I'm more than a little skeptical of what I see on the internet, especially when I know how politically charged/driven it is.  Snippets of conversation, especially when presented without context are just that.  Allegations are not evidence and indictments are simply a step in the legal process leading to a trial, where the actual evidence is presented. 

I don't care for the guy, and I wish he would just disappear, but I'll wait for the trial before I convict him in the court of public opinion.

---