Trump's Jan 2, 2021 Georgia phone call

[Mega Hertz]

Wait... do you think BMW is actually Donald Trump?

Now that would be interesting, wouldn't it? If a President maintained a pre-existing anonymous persona on some small internet forum such as this one?

You mean a politician answering directly to the people of this country? A novel idea, but I like it.

[Honeyman]

This is kinda interesting only because it was in the NY Post which has sucked Trumps dick for years:
https://pagesix.com/2023/08/22/donald-t ... iders-say/

[Matt]

This is kinda interesting only because it was in the NY Post which has sucked Trumps dick for years:
https://pagesix.com/2023/08/22/donald-t ... iders-say/

Certainly interesting if true, but I think the post has been off FIRED President Trump's (tinyyyyy, soooo smallllll, soooo incrediblyyyyy smallllll) nuts for awhile.

[TC Talks]

If only his blind fools would indulge in a reality check.

[km1125]

I said I would give my full thoughts on this later today, and Matt's and RT's trolling aside, here goes:
....

Good write-up and summary, and it seems like accurate conclusions.

All the responses here though - as predicted - indicate that he's guilty only because they hate him or they think he's a POS, not because of any kind of evidence presented in that call.

Nothing wrong with hating him, thinking he's a POS, or that he's totally unfit for any office. But to think there's anything in that call that rises to any kind of crime is laughable and further demonstrates what a joke our "justice" system has become. Maybe they have some other evidence somewhere, but the best (and most frequently referred) is that call.

[Rate This]

I said I would give my full thoughts on this later today, and Matt's and RT's trolling aside, here goes:
....

Good write-up and summary, and it seems like accurate conclusions.

All the responses here though - as predicted - indicate that he's guilty only because they hate him or they think he's a POS, not because of any kind of evidence presented in that call.

Nothing wrong with hating him, thinking he's a POS, or that he's totally unfit for any office. But to think there's anything in that call that rises to any kind of crime is laughable and further demonstrates what a joke our "justice" system has become. Maybe they have some other evidence somewhere, but the best (and most frequently referred) is that call.

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

[km1125]

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

NOWHERE in that call, that I could see, did he imply or say to "create them" or "make them up" or "change some votes", any of which could indicate an illegal action. Whenever they recount votes they NEVER come up with the same number, so there ALWAYS some errors that occur just in the normal, legitimate counting of votes. Recounting to eliminate enough of those errors that would result in an ~11k difference would NOT be illegal in any form.

[Honeyman]

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

NOWHERE in that call, that I could see, did he imply or say to "create them" or "make them up" or "change some votes", any of which could indicate an illegal action. Whenever they recount votes they NEVER come up with the same number, so there ALWAYS some errors that occur just in the normal, legitimate counting of votes. Recounting to eliminate enough of those errors that would result in an ~11k difference would NOT be illegal in any form.

I guess if you are so naive and ignore the behavior we have seen from this man the past few years, completely disregard the charachter of this disgrace of a person, you could come to that conclusion. See the cult thread.

Those of us living in the real world would come to a different conclusion.

[Rate This]

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

NOWHERE in that call, that I could see, did he imply or say to "create them" or "make them up" or "change some votes", any of which could indicate an illegal action. Whenever they recount votes they NEVER come up with the same number, so there ALWAYS some errors that occur just in the normal, legitimate counting of votes. Recounting to eliminate enough of those errors that would result in an ~11k difference would NOT be illegal in any form.

It also isn’t physically possible… they are NEVER off by more than a few hundred at most. Recounts don’t change the outcome often. But he is talking about finding them not recounting them. By the end of the call he is pathetically begging them to change the outcome. The hand you’ve been dealt to defend might as well be 4 2’s… good luck.

[Honeyman]

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

NOWHERE in that call, that I could see, did he imply or say to "create them" or "make them up" or "change some votes", any of which could indicate an illegal action. Whenever they recount votes they NEVER come up with the same number, so there ALWAYS some errors that occur just in the normal, legitimate counting of votes. Recounting to eliminate enough of those errors that would result in an ~11k difference would NOT be illegal in any form.

It also isn’t physically possible… they are NEVER off by more than a few hundred at most. Recounts don’t change the outcome often. But he is talking about finding them not recounting them. By the end of the call he is pathetically begging them to change the outcome. The hand you’ve been dealt to defend might as well be 4 2’s… good luck.

In poker? I'll take 4 dueces any day!

[Turkeytop]

It was a perfect phone call.

[Rate This]

Hey fellas… just find me 11,000 votes ok? The guy is actively trying to get an elected official to violate their oath of office. That’s a crime.

NOWHERE in that call, that I could see, did he imply or say to "create them" or "make them up" or "change some votes", any of which could indicate an illegal action. Whenever they recount votes they NEVER come up with the same number, so there ALWAYS some errors that occur just in the normal, legitimate counting of votes. Recounting to eliminate enough of those errors that would result in an ~11k difference would NOT be illegal in any form.

It also isn’t physically possible… they are NEVER off by more than a few hundred at most. Recounts don’t change the outcome often. But he is talking about finding them not recounting them. By the end of the call he is pathetically begging them to change the outcome. The hand you’ve been dealt to defend might as well be 4 2’s… good luck.

In poker? I'll take 4 dueces any day!

Ok good point… 2, 3, 7 and 9 with no hope except to bluff before you think of some way to Trump something.

[FakeAndyStuart]

I said I would give my full thoughts on this later today, and Matt's and RT's trolling aside, here goes:

Beemer - I appreciate you taking the time to work thru the famous phone call. I apologize for the nastiness and name calling of my fellow posters (highly inappropriate) and beseech you to consider something you've missed by ONLY looking at the contents of the call and not what came before.

1) Every statement made by Trump during the phone call was false, whether he knew it or not. All of them had been litigated 5 ways from Sunday - there were some 8 different lawsuits Georgia between Election Day and Jan 4 attempting to prove that the election was rigged and Zero - zilch - nada - none of them presented the evidence to convince a whole lot of Trump appointed judges that they were even slightly true. (Even Rudy himself admitted lying about Ruby Freeman..)

If Trump knew they were false.. doesn't that change the dynamic of the call?
If Trump was convinced they were true.. that's another story.

HOWEVER

2) It's not just the call, it's all the actions before the call. Compare it to a group of people, perhaps who take a few weeks to rattle a business owner.. maybe breaking a window or showing up with a gun and a mask but not really doing anything. Then, a phone call from "the boss" to discuss how dangerous the neighborhood is and how his "group" can protect you. The call itself may be just as innocent as you believe this call is.. but it's not.

The argument that could win all this is.. did the changes made in many state due to COVID actually affect the results of the election? There is no evidence that any vote was cast illegally (except for the moron in Ohio who voted for Trump twice!!!) Show me that evidence, then we can talk.

[teetoppz28]

I said I would give my full thoughts on this later today, and Matt's and RT's trolling aside, here goes:

Beemer - I appreciate you taking the time to work thru the famous phone call. I apologize for the nastiness and name calling of my fellow posters (highly inappropriate) and beseech you to consider something you've missed by ONLY looking at the contents of the call and not what came before.

1) Every statement made by Trump during the phone call was false, whether he knew it or not. All of them had been litigated 5 ways from Sunday - there were some 8 different lawsuits Georgia between Election Day and Jan 4 attempting to prove that the election was rigged and Zero - zilch - nada - none of them presented the evidence to convince a whole lot of Trump appointed judges that they were even slightly true. (Even Rudy himself admitted lying about Ruby Freeman..)

If Trump knew they were false.. doesn't that change the dynamic of the call?
If Trump was convinced they were true.. that's another story.

HOWEVER

2) It's not just the call, it's all the actions before the call. Compare it to a group of people, perhaps who take a few weeks to rattle a business owner.. maybe breaking a window or showing up with a gun and a mask but not really doing anything. Then, a phone call from "the boss" to discuss how dangerous the neighborhood is and how his "group" can protect you. The call itself may be just as innocent as you believe this call is.. but it's not.

The argument that could win all this is.. did the changes made in many state due to COVID actually affect the results of the election? There is no evidence that any vote was cast illegally (except for the moron in Ohio who voted for Trump twice!!!) Show me that evidence, then we can talk.

It made it easier (and safer) to vote. Because we all know that when the population voting rate rises, Republicans lose more often. And tRump can't handle that fact that more people voted (and voted for Democratic candidates more often).

[Mega Hertz]

I find it mildly ironic that those who defend Trump all the way to the end had George Floyd tried and executed the day he was murdered.