Absolute revelation in favor of Trump.
According to the statements and testimony of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, former President Donald Trump did not ask him to participate in illegal activities during the 2020 presidential election.
The denial of the claim that Trump instructed Raffensperger to illegally “find votes” substantially undercuts Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ racketeering case against Trump and 18 of his associates.
In response to George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley’s statement, Raffensperger’s testimony indicated that the phone contact, despite being deemed “extraordinary,” was described as a “settlement negotiation.” This discussion occurred in the context of a debate regarding the pursuit of a second vote recount, not a request to create new ballots.
According to Turley, “The call was misrepresented by the [Washington] Post and the transcript later showed that Trump was not simply demanding that votes be added to the count but rather asking for another recount or continued investigation. Again, I disagreed with that position but the words about the finding of 11,780 votes was in reference to what he was seeking in a continued investigation. Critics were enraged by the suggestion that Trump was making the case for a recount as opposed to just demanding the addition of votes to the tally or fraudulent findings.”
“Raffensperger described the call in the same terms,” he added. “He correctly described the call as ‘extraordinary’ in a president personally seeking such an investigation, particularly after the completion of the earlier recount. That is manifestly true. However, he also acknowledged that this was a ‘settlement negotiation’.”
“So what was the subject of the settlement talks?” Turley questioned. “Another recount or further investigation. The very thing that critics this week were apoplectic about in the coverage. That does not mean that Trump had grounds for the demand. Trump’s participation in the call was extraordinary and his demands were equally so. However, the reference to the vote deficit in demanding continued investigation was a predictable argument in such a settlement negotiation. As I previously stated, I have covered such challenges for years as a legal analyst for CBS, NBC, BBC, and Fox. Unsupported legal claims may be sanctionable in court, but they have not been treated as crimes.”
However, Fani Willis considers the phone call between Donald Trump and Brad Raffensperger to be an essential component of her “racketeering” litigation, which attempts to portray the legal process of contesting elections as a criminal enterprise. Former President Donald Trump utilized legal channels to address concerns regarding the outcome of the 2020 election, with the intention of pursuing a legal resolution as opposed to engaging in any illegal attempts to invalidate the election results.
It appears that there are no viable criminal charges in this case, as the story appears to have been concocted by Trump’s political opponents in order to prevent him from running for president and deny voters the chance to elect him.
According to a recent survey commissioned by a local media outlet, the majority of Georgian respondents oppose the notion of former President Donald Trump accepting a plea bargain from District Attorney Fani Willis.
More on this story via The Republic Brief:
According to a study conducted exclusively by 11Alive in Atlanta, the majority of respondents, accounting for 55 percent, expressed a preference for President Trump to undergo a trial. Meanwhile, 21 percent of participants indicated that he should consider accepting a deal, while 24 percent either remained uncertain or refrained from expressing an opinion.
According to an unidentified individual, referred to as Eros, who leans towards the Republican party and resides in Cobb County, “I would rather him do a plea agreement.” CONTINUE READING…