Trump Indicted in Georgia

[ClydeR]

Here is the full text of the 98-page indictment in Georgia..

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...indictment.pdf

[ClydeR]

Trump is again alleging that there was election fraud in Georgia in 2020. He plans to present proof on Monday..

“A Large, Complex, Detailed but Irrefutable REPORT on the Presidential Election Fraud which took place in Georgia is almost complete & will be presented by me at a major News Conference at 11:00 A.M. on Monday of next week in Bedminster, New Jersey,” he said.

“Based on the results of this CONCLUSIVE Report, all charges should be dropped against me & others — There will be a complete EXONERATION! They never went after those that Rigged the Election,” Trump continued. “They only went after those that fought to find the RIGGERS!”

Trump’s claims that he has “election fraud” proof come after he and 19 co-defendants were charged Monday night over their efforts to conspire to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia, where President Biden narrowly won the popular vote.

More...

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Republican's should start rioting and burning down urban areas.

[Seran]

Trump is again alleging that there was election fraud in Georgia in 2020. He plans to present proof on Monday..

Funny enough, the indictment points out that Trump and the co-defendants conspired to become the riggers themselves. Amazing how that worked out, using fictitious claims about vote rigging to camouflage your own attempts to actual rig the vote.

[Methais]

Republican's should start rioting and burning down urban areas.

Mostly peacefully.

[Methais]

Funny enough, the indictment points out that Trump and the co-defendants conspired to become the riggers themselves. Amazing how that worked out, using fictitious claims about vote rigging to camouflage your own attempts to actual rig the vote.

[Shaps]

Hope people actually read this indictment... You know what the first evidence they provide?

Act 1.
-----
"On or about the 4th day of November 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP made nationally televised speech falsely declaring victory in the 2020 presidential election. Approximately four days earlier, on or about October 31, 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP discussed draft speech with unindicted coconspirator Individual l, whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, that falsely declared victory and falsely claimed voter fraud. The speech was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

If that is true... then trials for Clinton and every other politician that claimed "they won"... starting with Georgia's own Stacy Abrams who for years said the "election was stolen" from her in Georgia.

Another fun one...

Act 22.
-------
"On or about the 3rd day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account @RealDonaldTrump, "Georgia hearings now on @OANN. Amazing!" This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

Tweeting about a news report is "an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

Get that? Tweeting about a news report is "furtherance of a conspiracy" now....

Act 28.
-------
"On or about the 3rd day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP met with Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Bryan Cutler in the Oval Office at the White House and discussed holding special session of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

So asking States to call an assembly and exam the results is now "furtherance of a conspiracy". I guess all those Democrats, in all those States, in all those previous elections should be tried now when they called for assemblies to be held and votes nullified.

Damn... as you read through what constitutes a "furtherance of a conspiracy" surrounding actions taken... we need to try each and every Politician out there.

Oh shit!! I found the smoking gun!!!!!

Act 32.
"On or about the 6th day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account @RealDonaldTrump, "Gee, what surprise. Has anyone informed the so-called (says he has no power to do anything!) Governor @BrianKempGA his puppet Lt. Governor @GeoffDuncanGA, that they could easily solve this mess, WIN. Signature verification call Special Session. So easy! 'https://t.co/5cb4QdepU." This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

He asked for a recount and... get this!!!!!! SIGNATURE VERIFICATION!... the absolute HORROR of it all!

Jesus fucking hell...

OHHH... and get this one!

"Act 36.
On or about the 6th day 0f December 2020, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY sent an e- mail to unindicted co-conspirator
Individual 2, whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, that stated he had been speaking with JOHN CHARLES EASTMAN and was attempting
to set up call with Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives David Ralston and President Pro Tempore of the Georgia Senate Butch Miller to encourage them to call special session of the Georgia General Assembly. In the email, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY stated, "Professor Eastman told me tonight that it is critical that the 16 Electors for President Trump meet next Monday and vote in accordance with U.S.C. 7." In the e-mail, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY further stated, "I assume you can make sure this happens." This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

You know what 3 U.S.C. 7 is?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/7

"The electors of President and Vice President of each State shall meet and give their votes on the first Tuesday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment at such place in each State in accordance with the laws of the State enacted prior to election day."

So their accusation of "furtherance of a conspiracy"... is.... citing an e-mail saying it's CRITICAL that they ADHERE to the LAW???

What fucking clown world are we in right now.

So.... apparently it's all a "furtherance of a conspiracy" if any coordination takes place what so ever to challenge an election.

This is going to be great for the country moving forward. Be nice to have some clarity on how it's all supposed to work.

Clown world.

[Seran]

OHHH... and get this one!

"Act 36.
On or about the 6th day 0f December 2020, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY sent an e- mail to unindicted co-conspirator
Individual 2, whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, that stated he had been speaking with JOHN CHARLES EASTMAN and was attempting
to set up call with Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives David Ralston and President Pro Tempore of the Georgia Senate Butch Miller to encourage them to call special session of the Georgia General Assembly. In the email, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY stated, "Professor Eastman told me tonight that it is critical that the 16 Electors for President Trump meet next Monday and vote in accordance with U.S.C. 7." In the e-mail, ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY further stated, "I assume you can make sure this happens." This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

You know what 3 U.S.C. 7 is?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/7

"The electors of President and Vice President of each State shall meet and give their votes on the first Tuesday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment at such place in each State in accordance with the laws of the State enacted prior to election day."

So their accusation of "furtherance of a conspiracy"... is.... citing an e-mail saying it's CRITICAL that they ADHERE to the LAW???

What fucking clown world are we in right now.

So I'm sure it's escaped your attention, but the 16 Electors so named in the indictment are the 16 Fake Electors that members of the conspiracy caused to meet Dec. 14, 2020 to sign the fake certificate claiming they were the official electors, when they were not. Surely even you can see the difference between the sixteen officially chosen electoral college members for the State of Georgia who certified Biden and the sixteen fake electors conscripted in the conspiracy indictment who certified Trump?

[Solkern]

So I'm sure it's escaped your attention, but the 16 Electors so named in the indictment are the 16 Fake Electors that members of the conspiracy caused to meet Dec. 14, 2020 to sign the fake certificate claiming they were the official electors, when they were not. Surely even you can see the difference between the sixteen officially chosen electoral college members for the State of Georgia who certified Biden and the sixteen fake electors conscripted in the conspiracy indictment who certified Trump?

No, he can’t.

[Shaps]

No, he can’t.

Actually I can... and the term "fake elector" - even though that term just started being used is a bit misleading.

https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvan...ges-explainer/

"The term “fake electors” arose in the post-2020 election period when, in some states Biden had won, electors for Trump cast electoral votes despite Trump’s loss and then submitted their certificate of votes to Congress as well. Through investigations such as Congress’s select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack, “fake electors,” “false electors,” and “alternate electors” have come to represent the Trump allies who signed their name to those certificates."

So the actual electors for Trump - were the States actual Republican Party electors:

https://www.archives.gov/files/elect...nt-georgia.pdf

Now the document they submitted - the Certificate of the Vote of the 2020 Electors from Georgia (page 7):

https://www.americanoversight.org/am...trump-electors

Would have been valid - had Trump's legal contesting of the votes had overturned any election results.

The document submitted by the winning party in Georgia (Democrats), was counted after State challenges had been ruled upon.

https://www.archives.gov/files/elect...te-georgia.pdf

So before moving on - let's get this straight:

1. The Republican Electors in these States were appointed Electors for their Party - not "fake electors".
2. The Republican Electors signed a Certificate of the Vote of the 2020 Election, and submitted it while State Election results were being contested in numerous legal Proceedings by the Trump campaign all over the country.

So now that we have that clarified - Here's the sticking point that I can agree with you on (I know, I know a surprise that I would actually look at facts and be fair regarding it.)

2 of the 7 States that is at issue added this addendum in their submittal of the Certificate of the Vote:

Pennsylvania’s certificate said the votes they were casting should only be counted if a court found that they were the “duly elected and qualified Electors. The reasoning that we were given for the need to go through with this process was that [the campaign] was concerned that there was a number of court cases that the Trump campaign had not adjudicated yet,” DeMarco said, and the campaign hoped a favorable ruling for Trump in those cases might have changed the outcome of the vote. In that scenario, DeMarco added, the campaign was concerned that if there was no slate of electors submitted under the constitutional process, the court victories would be meaningless. “So I as well as others said ‘Fine, but let’s make the document reflect that,’ ” he said. “So we’re a bit different from the other folks.”

Nevada was the other State to include similar language in submitting the Republican Electors document.

Now the point I can get behind - possibly - is the 5 States that did not include that terminology in their documentation. That seems absurd and extremely stupid not to.

So, can I see where your side might be coming from with this? Sure, potentially.

Can I see where my thinking might be coming from with this? Sure thing.

How it lays out is based on the intent I suppose...

Did Trump really believe certain States had been stolen from him? I'd conjecture yes.
Did Trump contest in the Courts numerous times? Yes.
Is submitting documentation by the "due date" of 14 December to Congress required to certify the Vote by Congress? Yes.

So, laying that out... we've got a real good question moving forward... Officially what should be the process of acquiescence/challenging of the results in the Courts vs. the required date of submittal of appropriate, signed documentation to the Federal level?

Again - The ACTUAL Republican Electors submitted their votes for their Party Candidate, and those Electors votes WOULD HAVE counted had Trumps legal actions been in his favor.

So I suppose you have to determine intent in this case - was it really to "overthrow the election" or "contest the election" due to timeline requirements.

The current indictment in Georgia - and the "evidence" they provide in it really comes down to perspective and intent at this point... at least in my opinion:

ie. Trump is contesting the Election! - the "evidence" seems trivial and common for doing that.
ie. Trump is overthrowing the Election! - the "evidence" seems significant and abnormal for doing that.

Some are going to see it one way, others another.

I'll have to think on it for a few days personally.


As to ensure conflicts like this do not arise again, I really hope some clarification/adjustments are made with regards to periods of contention in the Legal System vs. when the appropriate documents are required to be submitted.

Not going to lie, this point is actually intriguing to me now... from a foundational perspective of our Government.