My first amendment right to speech

I have a right to say what I want.

This afternoon I went to a bank and said to the teller, "Give me all the
money in your cash drawer or I'll blow your head off."

That's fair, right?

I don't know why the guard was chasing me.

On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 10:43:18 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
> My first amendment right to speech
>
> I have a right to say what I want.
>
> This afternoon I went to a bank and said to the teller, "Give me all the
> money in your cash drawer or I'll blow your head off."
>
> That's fair, right?
>
> I don't know why the guard was chasing me.

That's one of the Trumpers defense arguments, it was all just free speech.
Of course the problem there is that it wasn't just speech, it was well documented
actions, like trying to coerce his AG into notifying the states that they had found
real, significant election fraud when DOJ had found none. And when the AG told
Trump there was no fraud and they would not do that, Trump told them one of the
most damning statements that will be used at his trial. He said you can just say
the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republicans in Congress.
Ouch!

Then we have the orchestrated conspiracy to put in place fake electors. Some
that were recruited expressed concern about this being illegal. Trump's minions
including Rudy told them not to worry, that after they met and signed their fake
documents, team Trump would only used them if court cases over the election
were won by Trump. Rudy even messaged some state officials where there was
no pending case to just go create one, anything, at the last minute so that they
could claim that the election was still in dispute for their fake elector plot.
And then they used the fake electors anyway, without any lawsuits being won,
so they had lied to them.

Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not
declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.

In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 3 Aug 2023 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 10:43:18?PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
>> My first amendment right to speech
>>
>> I have a right to say what I want.
>>
>> This afternoon I went to a bank and said to the teller, "Give me all the
>> money in your cash drawer or I'll blow your head off."
>>
>> That's fair, right?
>>
>> I don't know why the guard was chasing me.
>
>That's one of the Trumpers defense arguments, it was all just free speech.
>Of course the problem there is that it wasn't just speech, it was well documented
>actions, like trying to coerce his AG into notifying the states that they had found
>real, significant election fraud when DOJ had found none. And when the AG told
>Trump there was no fraud and they would not do that, Trump told them one of the
>most damning statements that will be used at his trial. He said you can just say
>the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republicans in Congress.
>Ouch!
>
>Then we have the orchestrated conspiracy to put in place fake electors. Some
>that were recruited expressed concern about this being illegal. Trump's minions
>including Rudy told them not to worry, that after they met and signed their fake
>documents, team Trump would only used them if court cases over the election
>were won by Trump. Rudy even messaged some state officials where there was
>no pending case to just go create one, anything, at the last minute so that they
>could claim that the election was still in dispute for their fake elector plot.
>And then they used the fake electors anyway, without any lawsuits being won,
>so they had lied to them.
>
>Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
>that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not

He can bring that up during the trial. I don't think the jurors ever
see the indictment unless they looked before they were at their voir
dir.

>declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
>was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
>more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
>all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
>be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
>by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
>had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
>well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.

Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)

Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a liberal, but he is an honest man.

He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.

Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
indictement an attack on free speech.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/law-professor-jonathan-turley-dismantles-trump-indictment-american/

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
> Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
> ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
>
> Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a liberal, but he is an honest man.

From wikipedia:
"Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar, writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism.[3]"

Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on the radio a bit
yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having been exposed and having
to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's not stupid, she knows
there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the table that Hannity told people
about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of Rudy's big lies, you know,
the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any challenge in his court case
to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's lives was untrue. He's the
one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie. It was a the Georgia State
Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed a video clip of workers
removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at around 2AM, when counting
was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy claimed they didn't know
where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election worker arriving at 6AM that
day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video tape that Rudy had, go back
from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest, credible person would do that
was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He knew what was on the tape
much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier at midnight? And when you look
at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for the night, you see election
workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes, which are the ones used to
store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When ordered to stop for the night,
they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put them under the table. That's
what happened, that's where they came from.

Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy had put forth, I too thought
it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The rest of the story quickly
emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that Rudy didn't show. There was
no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious goings on.
Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all agreed that's what happened, there
was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative committee and the Georgia
legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So did the Republican Georgia governor
and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth yesterday. The woman who
called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies. And Hannity is a despicable scum
bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the grave damage to our democracy.
I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for one again, unless they
come to their senses and reform.

>
> He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
>
> Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
> indictement an attack on free speech.
>

The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to pull a coup.
Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a conspiracy to disregard
the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling them that their fake
votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using them anyway,
isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that point.. Rudy is cited
in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute, telling them to go file
a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the election results in
that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid court cases, then the
procedure would be to have the court determine that there was significant fraud and
for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to create fake electors
on their own.

On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

>Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
>that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not
>declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
>was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
>more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
>all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
>be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
>by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
>had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
>well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.

As troubling as Trump's words were that night, I'm not aware that anyone took
action to stop the counting, did they? If so, it's just "speech", and protected
under the first amendment. Jack Smith says, in the indictment, that Trump is
freely able to speak about the election and he can even lie about the election,
but when words cross over to actions, then we have a problem.

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 7:46:54 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
> > Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
> > ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
> >
> > Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a liberal, but he is an honest man.
> From wikipedia:
> "Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar, writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism.[3]"
>
> Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on the radio a bit
> yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having been exposed and having
> to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's not stupid, she knows
> there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the table that Hannity told people
> about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of Rudy's big lies, you know,
> the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any challenge in his court case
> to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's lives was untrue. He's the
> one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie. It was a the Georgia State
> Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed a video clip of workers
> removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at around 2AM, when counting
> was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy claimed they didn't know
> where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election worker arriving at 6AM that
> day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video tape that Rudy had, go back
> from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest, credible person would do that
> was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He knew what was on the tape
> much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier at midnight? And when you look
> at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for the night, you see election
> workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes, which are the ones used to
> store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When ordered to stop for the night,
> they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put them under the table. That's
> what happened, that's where they came from.
>
> Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy had put forth, I too thought
> it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The rest of the story quickly
> emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that Rudy didn't show. There was
> no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious goings on.
> Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all agreed that's what happened, there
> was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative committee and the Georgia
> legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So did the Republican Georgia governor
> and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth yesterday. The woman who
> called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies. And Hannity is a despicable scum
> bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the grave damage to our democracy.
> I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for one again, unless they
> come to their senses and reform.
> >
> > He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
> >
> > Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
> > indictement an attack on free speech.
> >
> The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to pull a coup.
> Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a conspiracy to disregard
> the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling them that their fake
> votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using them anyway,
> isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that point.. Rudy is cited
> in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute, telling them to go file
> a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the election results in
> that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid court cases, then the
> procedure would be to have the court determine that there was significant fraud and
> for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to create fake electors
> on their own.

Alan Dershowitz is saying prosecutor Jack Smith could be indicted for fraud. He left out
parts of Trump's January 6 speech.
<https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/04/dershowitz-jack-smith-could-be-indicted-for-fraud-for-omitting-trumps-peaceful-statement/>

On 8/4/23 13:50, Dean Hoffman wrote:
> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 7:46:54 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
>> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
>>> Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
>>> ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
>>>
>>> Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a liberal, but he is an honest man.
>> From wikipedia:
>> "Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar, writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism.[3]"
>>
>> Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on the radio a bit
>> yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having been exposed and having
>> to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's not stupid, she knows
>> there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the table that Hannity told people
>> about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of Rudy's big lies, you know,
>> the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any challenge in his court case
>> to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's lives was untrue. He's the
>> one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie. It was a the Georgia State
>> Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed a video clip of workers
>> removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at around 2AM, when counting
>> was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy claimed they didn't know
>> where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election worker arriving at 6AM that
>> day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video tape that Rudy had, go back
>> from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest, credible person would do that
>> was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He knew what was on the tape
>> much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier at midnight? And when you look
>> at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for the night, you see election
>> workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes, which are the ones used to
>> store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When ordered to stop for the night,
>> they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put them under the table. That's
>> what happened, that's where they came from.
>>
>> Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy had put forth, I too thought
>> it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The rest of the story quickly
>> emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that Rudy didn't show. There was
>> no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious goings on.
>> Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all agreed that's what happened, there
>> was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative committee and the Georgia
>> legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So did the Republican Georgia governor
>> and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth yesterday. The woman who
>> called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies. And Hannity is a despicable scum
>> bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the grave damage to our democracy.
>> I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for one again, unless they
>> come to their senses and reform.
>>>
>>> He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
>>>
>>> Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
>>> indictement an attack on free speech.
>>>
>> The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to pull a coup.
>> Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a conspiracy to disregard
>> the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling them that their fake
>> votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using them anyway,
>> isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that point. Rudy is cited
>> in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute, telling them to go file
>> a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the election results in
>> that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid court cases, then the
>> procedure would be to have the court determine that there was significant fraud and
>> for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to create fake electors
>> on their own.
>
> Alan Dershowitz is saying prosecutor Jack Smith could be indicted for fraud. He left out
> parts of Trump's January 6 speech.
> <https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/04/dershowitz-jack-smith-could-be-indicted-for-fraud-for-omitting-trumps-peaceful-statement/>

He left out several instances of "Exculpatory Evidence"

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 04 Aug 2023 14:33:08 -0500, Jim Joyce
<none@none.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
>>that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not
>>declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
>>was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
>>more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
>>all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
>>be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
>>by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
>>had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
>>well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.
>
>As troubling as Trump's words were that night, I'm not aware that anyone took
>action to stop the counting, did they? If so, it's just "speech", and protected
>under the first amendment. Jack Smith says, in the indictment, that Trump is
>freely able to speak about the election and he can even lie about the election,
>but when words cross over to actions, then we have a problem.

Right after this last indictment, a trump lawyer was beilng interviewed,
I think by Savannah Guthrie (a morning tv show?) and the lawyer said,
The government is criminalizing speech. But speech is allowed.

And she said that speech IS allowed, it even says so in the indictment,
it even says in the indictment that lying is allowed, but not action,
[and it's action the are prosecuting him for.]

Then the lawyer said, "No it was speech. Trump saw ballot violations and
other violations and he had a right to comment and act politically."

So he said it was speech, and 15 words later, he added "act" which he
had just said it wasn't. So he does think speech includes acts,
which enabled him to argue with her in the first place.

She continued arguing with him but I don't think she caught that one .

I capitalized trump in the quotation above, because one may not change
quotations and i'm sure trump's lawyer was capitalizing it in his mind.

On 8/4/23 15:16, T wrote:
> On 8/4/23 13:50, Dean Hoffman wrote:
>> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 7:46:54 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
>>>> Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
>>>> ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
>>>>
>>>> Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a
>>>> liberal, but he is an honest man.
>>>  From wikipedia:
>>> "Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar,
>>> writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print
>>> journalism.[3]"
>>>
>>> Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on
>>> the radio a bit
>>> yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having
>>> been exposed and having
>>> to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's
>>> not stupid, she knows
>>> there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the
>>> table that Hannity told people
>>> about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of
>>> Rudy's big lies, you know,
>>> the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any
>>> challenge in his court case
>>> to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's
>>> lives was untrue. He's the
>>> one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie.
>>> It was a the Georgia State
>>> Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed
>>> a video clip of workers
>>> removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at
>>> around 2AM, when counting
>>> was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy
>>> claimed they didn't know
>>> where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election
>>> worker arriving at 6AM that
>>> day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video
>>> tape that Rudy had, go back
>>> from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest,
>>> credible person would do that
>>> was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He
>>> knew what was on the tape
>>> much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier
>>> at midnight? And when you look
>>> at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for
>>> the night, you see election
>>> workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes,
>>> which are the ones used to
>>> store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When
>>> ordered to stop for the night,
>>> they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put
>>> them under the table. That's
>>> what happened, that's where they came from.
>>>
>>> Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy
>>> had put forth, I too thought
>>> it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The
>>> rest of the story quickly
>>> emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that
>>> Rudy didn't show. There was
>>> no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious
>>> goings on.
>>> Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all
>>> agreed that's what happened, there
>>> was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative
>>> committee and the Georgia
>>> legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So
>>> did the Republican Georgia governor
>>> and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth
>>> yesterday. The woman who
>>> called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies.
>>> And Hannity is a despicable scum
>>> bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the
>>> grave damage to our democracy.
>>> I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I
>>> vote for one again, unless they
>>> come to their senses and reform.
>>>>
>>>> He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the
>>>> Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
>>>>
>>>> Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American
>>>> people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
>>>> indictement an attack on free speech.
>>>>
>>> The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to
>>> pull a coup.
>>> Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a
>>> conspiracy to disregard
>>> the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling
>>> them that their fake
>>> votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using
>>> them anyway,
>>> isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that
>>> point. Rudy is cited
>>> in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute,
>>> telling them to go file
>>> a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the
>>> election results in
>>> that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid
>>> court cases, then the
>>> procedure would be to have the court determine that there was
>>> significant fraud and
>>> for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to
>>> create fake electors
>>> on their own.
>>
>>       Alan Dershowitz is saying prosecutor Jack Smith could be
>> indicted for fraud.   He left out
>> parts of Trump's January 6 speech.
>> <https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/04/dershowitz-jack-smith-could-be-indicted-for-fraud-for-omitting-trumps-peaceful-statement/>
>
>
> He left out several instances of "Exculpatory Evidence"

https://republicbrief.com/big-jack-smith-could-be-indicted/
“The statute says the following, two or more persons
conspire to injure and deny somebody the free exercise
or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured him by
the constitution.
“What if a court ultimately rules that Donald Trump
had a right under the First Amendment to make his
Jan. 6 speech and to do what he did? Then Jack Smith
will have conspired to deny him of that right. That’s
how serious this is,” Dershowitz said.

micky wrote:
> And she said that speech IS allowed, it even says so in the indictment,
> it even says in the indictment that lying is allowed, but not action,
> [and it's action the are prosecuting him for.]

Rep. Maxine Waters:
"If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd
and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere"

Later, we had riots. Was Maxine indicted?

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 3:33:16 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
> >that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not
> >declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
> >was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
> >more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
> >all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
> >be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
> >by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
> >had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
> >well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.
> As troubling as Trump's words were that night, I'm not aware that anyone took
> action to stop the counting, did they? If so, it's just "speech", and protected
> under the first amendment.

I didn't say that he should be charged with that, only that it's evidence of his corrupt
intent. He already wanted the counting of legitimate votes halted because he was
riding the predicted red wave and he wanted to disregard any more voting so he
would be the winner. It's like any criminal case, they can use whatever they have said
that helps prove their intent and the crimes.

Jack Smith says, in the indictment, that Trump is
> freely able to speak about the election and he can even lie about the election,
> but when words cross over to actions, then we have a problem.

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 4:50:53 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 7:46:54 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
> > On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
> > > Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
> > > ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
> > >
> > > Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a liberal, but he is an honest man.
> > From wikipedia:
> > "Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar, writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism.[3]"
> >
> > Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on the radio a bit
> > yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having been exposed and having
> > to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's not stupid, she knows
> > there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the table that Hannity told people
> > about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of Rudy's big lies, you know,
> > the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any challenge in his court case
> > to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's lives was untrue. He's the
> > one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie. It was a the Georgia State
> > Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed a video clip of workers
> > removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at around 2AM, when counting
> > was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy claimed they didn't know
> > where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election worker arriving at 6AM that
> > day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video tape that Rudy had, go back
> > from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest, credible person would do that
> > was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He knew what was on the tape
> > much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier at midnight? And when you look
> > at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for the night, you see election
> > workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes, which are the ones used to
> > store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When ordered to stop for the night,
> > they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put them under the table. That's
> > what happened, that's where they came from.
> >
> > Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy had put forth, I too thought
> > it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The rest of the story quickly
> > emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that Rudy didn't show. There was
> > no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious goings on.
> > Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all agreed that's what happened, there
> > was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative committee and the Georgia
> > legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So did the Republican Georgia governor
> > and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth yesterday. The woman who
> > called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies. And Hannity is a despicable scum
> > bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the grave damage to our democracy.
> > I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for one again, unless they
> > come to their senses and reform.
> > >
> > > He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
> > >
> > > Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
> > > indictement an attack on free speech.
> > >
> > The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to pull a coup.
> > Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a conspiracy to disregard
> > the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling them that their fake
> > votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using them anyway,
> > isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that point. Rudy is cited
> > in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute, telling them to go file
> > a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the election results in
> > that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid court cases, then the
> > procedure would be to have the court determine that there was significant fraud and
> > for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to create fake electors
> > on their own.
> Alan Dershowitz is saying prosecutor Jack Smith could be indicted for fraud. He left out
> parts of Trump's January 6 speech.
> <https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/04/dershowitz-jack-smith-could-be-indicted-for-fraud-for-omitting-trumps-peaceful-statement/>

Seems to me that's the job of the defense, not the prosecution. And this is what Trump
typically does, drop in a little bit of something that he can point back to and try to claim
that was all he said or did. So he spends two months and a morning filling his mob with
hate and lies, he has others there helping him, like Rudy saying to go engage in "trial by
combat", Trump tells them they have to "fight like hell or they won't have a country anymore",
then before sending them off to the Capitol he tosses in one "go peacefully" knowing no one
will pay it much attention, but it could point to it to try to escape blame and his minions will
believe him. We'll see what a jury thinks.

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 6:18:45 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
> In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 04 Aug 2023 14:33:08 -0500, Jim Joyce
> <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Jack Smith apparently overlooked one really key piece of damning evidence,
> >>that being Trump's statement at 1AM on election night. With most states not
> >>declared, with most of the mail-in ballots not counted in key states, Trump
> >>was in the lead. So he said that all ballot counting must stop right not, any
> >>more counting is fraud, I won. That showed he wasn't interested in counting
> >>all the votes, it wasn't about fraud, it was with one purpose, so that he would
> >>be the winner. And Trump knew that there would be an initial red wave, followed
> >>by a blue wave as the mail-in ballots were counted. His top campaign advisors
> >>had told him that was coming, it was all over the news prior to the election as
> >>well. Trump decided to try to pull his coup using that, on election night.
> >
> >As troubling as Trump's words were that night, I'm not aware that anyone took
> >action to stop the counting, did they? If so, it's just "speech", and protected
> >under the first amendment. Jack Smith says, in the indictment, that Trump is
> >freely able to speak about the election and he can even lie about the election,
> >but when words cross over to actions, then we have a problem.
> Right after this last indictment, a trump lawyer was beilng interviewed,
> I think by Savannah Guthrie (a morning tv show?) and the lawyer said,
> The government is criminalizing speech. But speech is allowed.
>
> And she said that speech IS allowed, it even says so in the indictment,
> it even says in the indictment that lying is allowed, but not action,
> [and it's action the are prosecuting him for.]
>
> Then the lawyer said, "No it was speech. Trump saw ballot violations and
> other violations and he had a right to comment and act politically."
>
> So he said it was speech, and 15 words later, he added "act" which he
> had just said it wasn't. So he does think speech includes acts,
> which enabled him to argue with her in the first place.
>
> She continued arguing with him but I don't think she caught that one .
>
> I capitalized trump in the quotation above, because one may not change
> quotations and i'm sure trump's lawyer was capitalizing it in his mind.

This is the new gutter that the Republicans have fallen into. The lame nonsense
that what Trump did was just free speech. It was a whole lot more than just
speech. And suppose for just a second that it was just speech. That by itself,
coming from any candidate for president, let alone a sitting US president would
be despicable. It was lie after lie about a "stolen election" that ripped at the core
of our democracy and made the US look like a banana republic. And as the
indictment showed, Trump was told again and again that what he and his minions
were saying wasn't true, it had no truth at all. Yet he kept going, he's still doing it.

Yesterday I listened to Sean Hannity on radio a bit. A woman called in saying that
she's not stupid, she saw the ballot boxes under the table in GA that Hannity told
them about. That's a huge lie, the videotape that shows the ballot boxes, backed up
just a couple of hours, shows where they came from. The workers were told to stop
counting for the night, they put the ballots they were working on back in those boxes
and put them under the table. Investigated by the GA state police, FBI, GA Election
official who are Republicans and the state legislature, controlled by Republicans.
Hannity is at Fox, they just paid out $750 mil for the lies and defamation done there,
this incident was one of the worst they all did. So, did Hannity correct her? Why no
he just let her spew forth one of the big lies again.

And this lie has ruined the lives of two women that were election workers from that
video that Rudy specifically accused over this lie. Among other things, he said they were
election fraudsters running around with "USB ports" like they were dealing crack cocaine.
They endured had death threats, people demonstrating
outside their homes, threats to relatives, on Jan 6 nuts came to their homes, FBI had
to remove them for their safety. They sued Rudy, One America and The Gateway Pundit.
One America paid up, reached a settlement. Rudy just sent the court notice that he's not
going to challenge that what he said was untrue and defamatory, he wants to move on to
defending himself on the idea that what he did is allowed because it's "free speech". The
GP is headed to trial. Little by little the truth is being set into the historical records.

Another classic was that crazed talk show host Mark Levin. After Trump was indicted on
Thursday, he was on the radio screaming that what Jack Smith and DOJ are doing now is
waging a war on our electoral system. Isn't that a hoot? What Trump did for two months,
all the lies, the conspiracy, creating fake electors and trying to pressure Pence into accepting
them, as even Republican officials in the states told them Trump had lost, ending in the
insurrection on Jan 6, THAT was the war on our electoral system.

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 6:27:25 PM UTC-4, T wrote:
> On 8/4/23 15:16, T wrote:
> > On 8/4/23 13:50, Dean Hoffman wrote:
> >> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 7:46:54 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
> >>> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 5:59:04 AM UTC-4, Slevin wrote:
> >>>> Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment:
> >>>> ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’ (VIDEO)
> >>>>
> >>>> Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University may be a
> >>>> liberal, but he is an honest man.
> >>> From wikipedia:
> >>> "Jonathan Turley is an American conservative attorney, legal scholar,
> >>> writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print
> >>> journalism.[3]"
> >>>
> >>> Which explains why he was on Hannity's show. I listened to Hannity on
> >>> the radio a bit
> >>> yesterday. He's still up to the lying BS, despite Fox News having
> >>> been exposed and having
> >>> to pay out $750 mil for defamation. A woman called up saying she's
> >>> not stupid, she knows
> >>> there was election fraud, like the boxes of ballots from under the
> >>> table that Hannity told people
> >>> about. Hannity didn't say anything to correct her. That was one of
> >>> Rudy's big lies, you know,
> >>> the guy who's been disbarred and who most recently waved any
> >>> challenge in his court case
> >>> to the fact that what he said that destroyed two election worker's
> >>> lives was untrue. He's the
> >>> one who put forth the ballots in suitcases from under the table lie.
> >>> It was a the Georgia State
> >>> Farm Arena. He went before the Georgia legislative committee, showed
> >>> a video clip of workers
> >>> removing plastic storage boxes, not suitcases, from under tables at
> >>> around 2AM, when counting
> >>> was resuming after having been halted about two hours earlier. Rudy
> >>> claimed they didn't know
> >>> where the boxes came from, but showed another video of an election
> >>> worker arriving at 6AM that
> >>> day and implied she did it. All one had to do was back up the video
> >>> tape that Rudy had, go back
> >>> from 2AM and see how the boxes got there. That's what any honest,
> >>> credible person would do that
> >>> was seeking the truth. And surely Rudy's people did that, he knew. He
> >>> knew what was on the tape
> >>> much earlier, at 6AM on election day, but not just two hours earlier
> >>> at midnight? And when you look
> >>> at the video at midnight, when the counting was ordered stopped for
> >>> the night, you see election
> >>> workers busy counting votes. They have the plastic storage boxes,
> >>> which are the ones used to
> >>> store ballots, in front of them, they have been counting them. When
> >>> ordered to stop for the night,
> >>> they put the uncounted ballots back in the storage boxes, then put
> >>> them under the table. That's
> >>> what happened, that's where they came from.
> >>>
> >>> Back when this allegation first came out, when I saw just what Rudy
> >>> had put forth, I too thought
> >>> it looked very unusual and suspicious. I wanted to know more. The
> >>> rest of the story quickly
> >>> emerged, I looked at the video from a couple of hours earlier that
> >>> Rudy didn't show. There was
> >>> no mystery as to where these ballots had come from, no nefarious
> >>> goings on.
> >>> Georgia State Police investigated this, as did the FBI. They all
> >>> agreed that's what happened, there
> >>> was nothing to suggest any fraud. The Georgia state legislative
> >>> committee and the Georgia
> >>> legislature, controlled by Republicans, accepted that conclusion. So
> >>> did the Republican Georgia governor
> >>> and Sec of State. Yet here we have the big lie still being put forth
> >>> yesterday. The woman who
> >>> called Hannity is indeed stupid, she's just listening to his lies.
> >>> And Hannity is a despicable scum
> >>> bag, still lying. The result of this is what we saw on Jan 6 and the
> >>> grave damage to our democracy.
> >>> I was a lifelong Republican, it will be a cold day in hell before I
> >>> vote for one again, unless they
> >>> come to their senses and reform.
> >>>>
> >>>> He recently appeared on the Sean Hannity show and took apart the
> >>>> Trump indictment piece by piece, leaving it in tatters on the floor.
> >>>>
> >>>> Turley said that it was completely understandable why the American
> >>>> people think we have a two-tiered justice system and called the Trump
> >>>> indictement an attack on free speech.
> >>>>
> >>> The real attack on our democracy came from Trump and his attempt to
> >>> pull a coup.
> >>> Trump wasn't indicted for his speech, he was indicted for a
> >>> conspiracy to disregard
> >>> the votes of the American people. Creating fake electors, telling
> >>> them that their fake
> >>> votes will only be used if Trump succeeds in court cases, then using
> >>> them anyway,
> >>> isn't free speech. They didn't even have actual court cases at that
> >>> point. Rudy is cited
> >>> in the indictment, calling up minions in a state at the last minute,
> >>> telling them to go file
> >>> a case, some case, any case, so that they can falsely claim that the
> >>> election results in
> >>> that state are still in dispute. And even if there were real, valid
> >>> court cases, then the
> >>> procedure would be to have the court determine that there was
> >>> significant fraud and
> >>> for them to invalidate the electors, not for a candidate to try to
> >>> create fake electors
> >>> on their own.
> >>
> >> Alan Dershowitz is saying prosecutor Jack Smith could be
> >> indicted for fraud. He left out
> >> parts of Trump's January 6 speech.
> >> <https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/04/dershowitz-jack-smith-could-be-indicted-for-fraud-for-omitting-trumps-peaceful-statement/>
> >
> >
> > He left out several instances of "Exculpatory Evidence"
> https://republicbrief.com/big-jack-smith-could-be-indicted/
>
> “The statute says the following, two or more persons
> conspire to injure and deny somebody the free exercise
> or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured him by
> the constitution.
>
> “What if a court ultimately rules that Donald Trump
> had a right under the First Amendment to make his
> Jan. 6 speech and to do what he did? Then Jack Smith
> will have conspired to deny him of that right. That’s
> how serious this is,” Dershowitz said.

Sadly Dershowitz has pretty much joined Rudy in losing his mind
and credibility. The above nonsense shows it. Even Pence has fessed
up, he's acknowledged that they lost the election, there was no wide
spread fraud and that instead of accepting it, Trump turned to "crackpots
that told him what his ears were itching to hear". So now you can add
Pence to ever growing ash heap of Republican no-goodniks because they
will no longer go along with all the stupid and obvious lies. That heap sure
is getting large.

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 5 Aug 2023 05:54:25 -0400, Ben Verified - ?
<ben.verified@fact.checker-org> wrote:

>micky wrote:
>> And she said that speech IS allowed, it even says so in the indictment,
>> it even says in the indictment that lying is allowed, but not action,
>> [and it's action the are prosecuting him for.]
>
>
>Rep. Maxine Waters:
>"If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd
>and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere"
>
>Later, we had riots. Was Maxine indicted?

Later we had hot weather. We had tornadoes. We had the Russian
invasion of Ukraine. Were you indicted?

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 5 Aug 2023 06:40:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

>
>I didn't say that he should be charged with that, only that it's evidence o=
>f his corrupt
>intent. He already wanted the counting of legitimate votes halted because =
>he was
>riding the predicted red wave and he wanted to disregard any more voting so=
> he=20
>would be the winner.

That one really struck me as strange, when he wanted the vote counting
stopped around midnight. There is no place that does that, and no place
was going to do that, even if he said they should. And no place did it.

He looked rather silly, IMO, to suggest something that's not going to
happen.

And even after the fact, the the vast majority of even his supporters
don't think vote counting shoudl be stopped when there are still more
votes to count.

It's like any criminal case, they can use whatever th=
>ey have said
>that helps prove their intent and the crimes.

On 8/5/2023 11:24 AM, micky wrote:
> In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 5 Aug 2023 06:40:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
> <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I didn't say that he should be charged with that, only that it's evidence o=
>> f his corrupt
>> intent. He already wanted the counting of legitimate votes halted because =
>> he was
>> riding the predicted red wave and he wanted to disregard any more voting so=
>> he=20
>> would be the winner.
>
> That one really struck me as strange, when he wanted the vote counting
> stopped around midnight. There is no place that does that, and no place
> was going to do that, even if he said they should. And no place did it.
>
> He looked rather silly, IMO, to suggest something that's not going to
> happen.
>
> And even after the fact, the the vast majority of even his supporters
> don't think vote counting shoudl be stopped when there are still more
> votes to count.
>

A clear display of exactly who and what trump is, that should have told
EVERY patriotic American that trump had no morality and should never
have been President. He has never stopped demonstrating what a
despicable dishonest person he is.

On 8/5/23 02:54, Ben Verified - ✅ wrote:
> micky wrote:
>> And she said that speech IS allowed, it even says so in the indictment,
>> it even says in the indictment that lying is allowed, but not action,
>> [and it's action the are prosecuting him for.]
>
>
> Rep. Maxine Waters:
> "If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a
> department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a
> crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome
> anymore, anywhere"
>
> Later, we had riots. Was Maxine indicted?

How about Kamala Harris
https://twitter.com/i/status/1299013980711784448
"Everyone, beware. [Protestors] are not going to
stop before Election Day in November and they're
not going to stop after Election Day, they should
not we should not."
Any articles of impeachment?

On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 07:07:32 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

>And this lie has ruined the lives of two women that were election workers from that
>video that Rudy specifically accused over this lie. Among other things, he said they were
>election fraudsters running around with "USB ports" like they were dealing crack cocaine.
>They endured had death threats, people demonstrating
>outside their homes, threats to relatives, on Jan 6 nuts came to their homes, FBI had
>to remove them for their safety. They sued Rudy, One America and The Gateway Pundit.
>One America paid up, reached a settlement. Rudy just sent the court notice that he's not
>going to challenge that what he said was untrue and defamatory, he wants to move on to
>defending himself on the idea that what he did is allowed because it's "free speech". The
>GP is headed to trial. Little by little the truth is being set into the historical records.

Yesterday I saw that the judge in that defamation case has formally asked Rudy
to respond and say why his admission that his statements were defamatory should
not result in a default judgment against him. I think he has until Tuesday to
respond. He was previously ordered to pay $90,000 to the two women, but the
judge is apparently revisiting that, as well, with an eye toward increasing the
amount now that Rudy has admitted what he did.

Speaking of poor Rudy, he had a major meltdown when Trump's latest indictment
came out and it became obvious that unnamed unindicted co-conspirator #1 was
Rudy. He screamed the standard talking point about his 1st amendment rights, but
that's not going to fly in the courtroom.

On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 7:14:24 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 07:07:32 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >And this lie has ruined the lives of two women that were election workers from that
> >video that Rudy specifically accused over this lie. Among other things, he said they were
> >election fraudsters running around with "USB ports" like they were dealing crack cocaine.
> >They endured had death threats, people demonstrating
> >outside their homes, threats to relatives, on Jan 6 nuts came to their homes, FBI had
> >to remove them for their safety. They sued Rudy, One America and The Gateway Pundit.
> >One America paid up, reached a settlement. Rudy just sent the court notice that he's not
> >going to challenge that what he said was untrue and defamatory, he wants to move on to
> >defending himself on the idea that what he did is allowed because it's "free speech". The
> >GP is headed to trial. Little by little the truth is being set into the historical records.
> Yesterday I saw that the judge in that defamation case has formally asked Rudy
> to respond and say why his admission that his statements were defamatory should
> not result in a default judgment against him. I think he has until Tuesday to
> respond. He was previously ordered to pay $90,000 to the two women, but the
> judge is apparently revisiting that, as well, with an eye toward increasing the
> amount now that Rudy has admitted what he did.
>
> Speaking of poor Rudy, he had a major meltdown when Trump's latest indictment
> came out and it became obvious that unnamed unindicted co-conspirator #1 was
> Rudy. He screamed the standard talking point about his 1st amendment rights, but
> that's not going to fly in the courtroom.

I don't understand how the right has gone so far off their rockers that they are now
arguing that you can basically lie, defame anyone, like these two totally innocent election
workers and it's not defamation because it's free speech. Those workers were not
candidates, not involved in politics, they were just poll workers that Rudy totally baselessly
accused of committing crimes, election fraud, running around with "usb ports" (which shows
how in touch he is). And it severely harmed them. Even Rudy admits now that it was lies
and defamation, but the right wingers claim it's perfectly fine, there should be no penalty.
Then they get upset when they are called the deplorables. I hope those two get a big fat
judgment against Rudy and that plenty more are to follow.

I do see some signs of hope. Each day, more Republicans are finally admitting the election
was not stolen and Trump is wrong. The latest was DeSantis, which came as a surprise.
While welcome, that's probably the final straw in his floundering campaign, most Republicans
can't stand the truth. We know most of the Republicans in the news know the truth too and
are trying to figure out how and when to finally go public. They are just afraid to do it, because
anyone who hasn't fully supported Trump and the big lie is quickly declared a no-goodnik and
banished from the party. I think at some point we may reach a tipping point where it becomes
acceptable enough to admit the truth and then there is a rush of all those left to come clean.
The upcoming debate should be interesting, I'm sure Trump, stolen election lies and where
they stand on that will come up. But so far, it's not much of a debate. Trump isn't coming,
Pence hasn't qualified. I think it's only DeSantis and Scott at this point?

TDS_4 wrote:
> I do see some signs of hope. Each day, more Republicans are finally admitting the election
> was not stolen and Trump is wrong.

Nope, not true.

The Mainstream Media continues to promote the lie that the 2020 Presidential Election was the most secure election ever.
This was clearly not the case.  Here are ten examples from the 2020 Presidential Election showing it was stolen.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/ron-desantis-effectively-ends-his-race-president-says/

On 8/6/2023 2:07 PM, Skid Marks wrote:
> TDS_4 wrote:
>> I do see some signs of hope.  Each day, more Republicans are finally
>> admitting the election
>> was not stolen and Trump is wrong.
>
> Nope, not true.
>
> The Mainstream Media continues to promote the lie that the 2020
> Presidential Election was the most secure election ever.
> This was clearly not the case.  Here are ten examples from the 2020
> Presidential Election showing it was stolen.
>
> https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/ron-desantis-effectively-ends-his-race-president-says/

I thought Mr. Pillowhead cleared that up. He had the proof right?
Where is it Mike? Should be no questions and Fox News reported it all.

On Sunday, August 6, 2023 at 2:07:51 PM UTC-4, Skid Marks wrote:
> TDS_4 wrote:
> > I do see some signs of hope. Each day, more Republicans are finally admitting the election
> > was not stolen and Trump is wrong.
> Nope, not true.
>
> The Mainstream Media continues to promote the lie that the 2020 Presidential Election was the most secure election ever.

This is from Chris Krebs, who was one one of Trump's "best people", who he had appointed to
head election security at Dept of Homeland Security, saying that the 2020 election was the most
secure in US history:

WASHINGTON (AP) — It’s hard to put it any more bluntly: “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.”

Rejecting President Donald Trump’s persistent claims and complaints, a broad coalition of top government and industry officials is declaring that the Nov. 3 voting and the following count unfolded smoothly with no more than the usual minor hiccups.

It was, they declare, resorting to Trump’s sort of dramatic language, “the most secure in American history.”

The statement late Thursday by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency amounted to the most direct repudiation to date of Trump’s efforts to undermine the integrity of the contest, and echoed repeated assertions by election experts and state officials.

Thursday’s statement was written for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which spearheaded federal election protection efforts, and was tweeted by its director, Chris Krebs. Hours earlier, he was the subject of a Reuters story that said he had told associates he expected to be fired by Trump. Krebs has been vocal on Twitter in repeatedly reassuring Americans that the election was secure and that their votes would be counted.

Taking a shot at Trump and his supporters, the statement said, “While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too.”

The statement’s authors include the presidents of the National Association of State Election Directors and the National Association of Secretaries of State — who run elections at the state level — and the executive committee of the government-industry coordinating council that includes all the major voting equipment vendors.

Krebs was right, Trump fired him after he told the truth to the American people.

> This was clearly not the case. Here are ten examples from the 2020 Presidential Election showing it was stolen.
>
> https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/ron-desantis-effectively-ends-his-race-president-says/

Right, just like the stories that GP ran with Rudy falsely claiming that those two election workers
in Georgia were criminal fraudsters, running around with "USB ports" (which shows how little Rudy
understands of the technology) like they were vials of cocaine. . The two women's lives were ruined, death threats, protestors outside
their homes, FBI had to take them from their homes on Jan 6 to avoid a mob. They were totally innocent
election workers just serving the public, the story was total lies. They sued One America,
Rudy and GP. One America has already paid up. Rudy is in the middle of his lawsuit and just admitted
to the court in a filing that he's not challenging that what he said was untrue and defamatory. GP has
tried to get their suit dismissed, that failed, it's headed to trial. So that's what "examples" from GP
really are. We also know the history of the "examples" at Fox News, they recently paid $750 mil to
settle their defamation with Dominion.

On Sunday, August 6, 2023 at 4:23:33 PM UTC-4, Ed P wrote:
> On 8/6/2023 2:07 PM, Skid Marks wrote:
> > TDS_4 wrote:
> >> I do see some signs of hope. Each day, more Republicans are finally
> >> admitting the election
> >> was not stolen and Trump is wrong.
> >
> > Nope, not true.
> >
> > The Mainstream Media continues to promote the lie that the 2020
> > Presidential Election was the most secure election ever.
> > This was clearly not the case. Here are ten examples from the 2020
> > Presidential Election showing it was stolen.
> >
> > https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/ron-desantis-effectively-ends-his-race-president-says/
> I thought Mr. Pillowhead cleared that up. He had the proof right?
> Where is it Mike? Should be no questions and Fox News reported it all.

The lawsuit against Pillowhead is moving along, so he's got an excellent opportunity
to put forth his proof too. It's likely going to go like the suits against One America and Fox.
Fox paid $750 mil, good chance Dominion could end up owning a pillow company. Did you
see that the other day Rudy made a court filing in the defamation suit against him by the two
Georgia election workers saying that he will not challenge that what he said about them was
untrue and defamatory? So he admitted it was lies, but he's on with the new Republican
overarching defense, which is you can tell any lie, even engage in a conspiracy, it's all allowed,
it's just free speech. We know how well that's going to be received by the courts. My how
low the Republican Party has sunk. I knew Trump was a shyster con artist with no morals,
but I never expected most Republicans to turn out to be the same.