(11-01-2023, 03:27 PM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(11-01-2023, 02:27 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: 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.

Regardless of whether Trump thought he had actually won Georgia or not, if Raffensperger came out and stated that he had found 11,000 votes for Trump, when he had not actually done so, that would be fraud.  So Trump was asking Raffensperger to commit fraud.  He was clearly asking Raffensperger to lie.  

It is not a valid defense to say that Trump believed he had won.  It's fraud to say you had found the votes, when you had not found the votes.

He failed to convince Raffensperger the election was unfair, so he asks him to lie about it.  

“The people of Georgia are angry. The people of the country are angry, and there's nothing wrong with saying that, you know, that you've recalculated,” Trump said on the call. "All I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have... Fellas, I need 11,000 votes, give me a break."

That's one way of interpreting it. That's not how I interpret it. I think he thinks Raffensberger is a coward and is trying to get him a rationale to come forward with the truth. That's another way to interpret it. Imo, my interpretation fits better both with Trump being inarticulate AND the fact that he is incredulous that fraud has not been investigated appropriately. Oh, and obviously if Raffensberger committed fraud, it would be fraud. It's not obvious. This is just another case of people honing in on one part of an inarticulate person's 30 minute conversation and spinning it in ways to discredit him. The media loathes him and has spun and outright LIED about Trump for the last 8 years, but that never seems to factor in the brains of folks like you, Mikey, and NYC. No. Just Trump. Always Trump.

---