Fani’s Fifteen Minutes of Fame - American Thinker ..."In the end, however, Fani may be happy to let the feds conduct the trial because some of the 161 “Acts of Racketeering” (ACTs) in the indictment involve dangerous criminals doing dangerous things. For example, here is ACT 6 (in its entirety):
On or about the 21st day of November 2020, MARK RANDALL MEADOWS sent a text message to United States Representative Scott Perry from Pennsylvania and stated, “Can you send me the number for the speaker and the leader of PA legislature. POTUS wants to chat with them.” This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy." . . .
This May Be the Darkest and Most Ridiculous Part of the Biden DOJ's Latest Trump Indictment - Revolver News "Last week, Biden’s corrupt and weaponized DOJ just issued Trump’s third and most serious criminal indictment. The formal charges of “conspiracy to defraud the United States” do an underwhelmingly half-hearted job of disguising the obvious purpose of the indictment, which is to codify the “disinformation” scam into criminal law generally, and specifically, to criminalize what we might call “election denial”.
"Indeed, there’s a reason the indictment begins with the false, absurd and legally irrelevant claim that Trump made “knowingly false claims” about the 2020 election that “created an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger” and eroded “public faith in the administration of the election.”
Despite having lost, the defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the defendant knew that they were false. But the defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway—to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election”
Nevermind for a moment that questioning the legitimacy of an election is First Amendment-protected speech. Let’s focus for now on the ridiculous insistence that Trump “knowingly lied” in his statements concerning the election. To say that Trump “knowingly lied” is to not only dispute his objective (and in our view entirely justified) questions concerning the election, it is to state that subjectively, privately in his own mind, Trump actually thought the election was legitimate — that he legitimately lost, but he lied anyway.. . .
No comments:
Post a Comment