(11-01-2023, 01:13 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(10-31-2023, 05:50 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Here's an idea. If you think I've misinterpreted you, why don't you try to explain yourself? I'm sorry you seem to be struggling with how language works.

LOL

I've explained this multiple times when we've gone on about this subject.

What Trump believed to be true or not doesn't matter in the end. You keep trying to inject that and it is pointless. 

The steps he took are going to be proven to have been illegal - and it does not matter if he believed his own trash "reasons" for taking those steps or not. 

I realize that my post a page and a half ago said that the election fraud was a lie manufactured by a loser who couldn't accept defeat.  
And Mike said something about everyone knew there weren't 11,000 votes from dead ppl ready to flip the GA election for Trump. 

When Trump lost in Georgia on November 19 officially - FORTY days passed before that phone call you've posted. 
At this point - they'd had lots of time to scramble for anything to save their skin in GA. 
The best they could come up with was the crap in that phone call, of which they had no proof, and of which they had no real numbers. 

If YOU believe that those people, including Trump, really thought that these stories of fraud were true. That's your bad judgement to bear. I think they'd had AMPLE time in forty days to figure out they'd lost legitimately - which they did. And I believe they knew they were full of it when they called Raffensberger. 

Furthermore - back to the topic we were on before the "who believed what and when" diversion - I think that the testimony coming from some of these plea deal co-defendants is going to illustrate exactly what I've stated about who believed what. 

There is already a ton of testimony from the Jan6 hearings wherein multiple witnesses go on and on about Trump being informed repeatedly he was telling lies about fraud. 

He knew.

The bolded illustrates my point, and I'm glad we are having a real discussion now. I have no problems with you believing that about Trump. My only qualm is taking that belief and making if fact. Moreover, expecting others to unquestionably believe the same notion. Furthermore, when we are talking about law, I think it's wise to use the law to determine guilt, and intent has to be proved to ignore free speech rights. 

From the context of that phone call, it is clear that Trump laid the groundwork that he doesn't believe the agencies are doing an adequate job of investigating the matter and lists several areas where he things their numbers are off. It's obvious that Trump said that if they were to investigate further, they would find the numbers are not accurate, which would give him the votes to win. That's not a crime, and it's wholly different than asking a person to manufacture votes. Context matters. Building a legal case around one line taken out of context and a belief that Trump is a con artist is not sufficient for prosecution. 

I believe the election was stolen. I don't believe the information that is being presented as truth. I don't think the authorities thoroughly investigated this issue. I have a right to repeat that. I have a right to challenge authority. Can I go to jail for stating that? If I had millions of followers, could I go to jail? 

I also await testimony from people who are going on record against Trump and reserve the right to change my mind depending on what information comes forth. I doubt it will be any different than anything else we've been promised since Trump was in office. Just lots of lies, plastered across the airways to win the trial of public opinion before any facts come out. But, hey, maybe these corrupt DAs will surprise me.

---