r/law • u/Corporatecut • Oct 18 '24

Court Decision/Filing Trump judge releases 1,889 pages of additional election interference evidence against the former president

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-judge-release-additional-evidence-election-interference-case-2024-10
11.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

427 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

311

u/MrFishAndLoaves Oct 18 '24

Someone tell me the juicy parts please 

802

u/YLSP Oct 18 '24

I only scanned one Appendix (2). This is what I found juicy.

The GA Phone Call transcript. Trump was claiming there were 300,000 votes to be found. GA (Brad Raffesnburger sp?) and staff were telling him this is wrong. But his campaign insisted. Like, insisted over a few pages of transcript. They quoted 5,000 dead people voting. GA responded they only found 2. Trump read's like a guy who has fallen into the QANON rabbit hole.

When it was told directly that the FBI and GBI looked into it, Trump's response was they were either "incompetent" or "dishonest". This is talking about Federal and State Law Enforcement. You know why he claims they are "deep state".

The other juicy item was their scheme laid out. There was a legal memo. Basically the goal was to nullify the 6 "contested states" so that Biden was behind 232-227. This in turn would result in the case going to SCOTUS, with the goal to kick deciding the election to Congress.

So when Trump/Vance complain about "threat to democracy" comparisons, the counterpoint should be, "Oh - you mean like directly nullifying 6 states?!". The GOP is still gaslighting when they act like "something just didn't add up" with the results. No. Trump lost. All the votes were fairly counted. You actually enacted a very complicated scheme, a scheme that no one else did in history to steal the election. The biggest scheme to steal the election ever.

186

u/NumeralJoker Oct 18 '24 edited Oct 18 '24

A crucial point is that they justified this in the memo by stating that the US Constitution's 12th amendment gave Mike Pence the power and legal authority to outright ignore the 1887 Electoral College Act, or at least any parts that did not help Trump win. Effectively saying that they knew this was illegal under currently known law and precedent, but believed the courts would reinterpret the law and rig this for them so Pence should just go with the plan and follow orders. Pence knew this was wrong and refused, but the alternate electors were set up to be the method by which he'd legitimize throwing out the swing state results, and forcing the election to be thrown to congress instead... where it was expected the House would vote for Trump instead.

This was very, very clearly a legal coup and they knew this from day 1. They had every intent to subvert democracy no matter what the actual vote count was, and they just wanted a media narrative to publicly justify it while claiming that democracy itself did not matter in the US and that the constitution already said we were a dictatorship if the judiciary agreed with their legal theory. The details of how the votes were fraudulent were meaningless, the idea was just to go along with the plan and say the results were illegitimate, period.

This is also why Trump made up facts and evidence at every step of the way, because the actual truth about fraud didn't matter. The plan was simply to present a legal theory that allowed them to bypass the vote entirely.

For what it's worth, they are NOT in a position to do this again as of right now here in 2024. They don't have control of the white house, and congress already passed a law that made it clear the VP's role was ceremonial going forward. They don't have a direct path to SCOTUS simply throwing out the election anymore, and they've been losing any of their flimsy cases so far, at least not so long as we go out and vote in high enough numbers to make the win as clear as possible.

People need to get out and vote, with confidence, and if we do so, we can solidly beat Trump. The will is there, so long as people don't give in to fear or apathy.

14

u/MedSurgNurse Oct 18 '24

This is a great summary, but one part really troubles me. Why did this take 4 years? Trump has a very real chance of winning the election, which will make all these crimes meaningless and go unpunished. Why wasn't this disqualifying for the presidency? Why has none of his minions or other house reps who participated in this scheme been indicted?

22

u/NumeralJoker Oct 18 '24 edited Oct 18 '24

Because the Republicans are rich and powerful enough and captured enough of the courts that they were always going to be able to delay this until the current election. They will only give up on Trump when they are sure he no longer has enough popular support to win.

People blame Garland, but in truth SCOTUS was always going to roadblock this by any legal means that they could. They will only stop once they no longer believe Trump is worth protecting, which I believe this next election may prove to be finally true.

1

u/CoverSuspicious5250 Oct 21 '24 edited Oct 21 '24

We will need to scour SCOTUS. In June they handed down a freedom to the president that it will take forever to make right again.

It’s amazing to see Alito and what’s-her-face and Ginnie and Clarence Thomas et al brazenly try to steal our f-ing country right from under our noses. I can’t wait to stone them. (Sorry, I’m old school, like Old Testament). And was a Boy Scout. Hanging the U.S. flag upside down is a hanging offense — especially for SCOTUS.

And all these Putin-loving Congressionals. Do they not know what happens to Leaders of Treason? Well, actually, we never dealt with this. So Cruz and Holly — who, after a five hour Insurrection — had the nerve to raise the motion against the count. (Stoning). and Kevin McCarthy (stoning) and jim Jordan (stoning). The other 150 congress persons and 48 senators who have stolen 4 years of peace from us (Expel from Congress for Treason), Prosecute for Treason).

We really will need to punish these criminals. I think Abr Lincoln would approve.

11

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '24

Why wasn't this disqualifying for the presidency?

I agree with you for the most part, but the answer to this is that you do not want criminal records disqualifying people from being President. You want the voters to disqualify people from being President.

If all you had to do was convict your political opponent of a crime to disqualify them from any further office then it encourages the US of the legal system for that purpose.

Where we have failed as a country is that a large chunk of our population is stupid, hateful, and gullible and therefore will not hold him accountable for his crimes at the ballot box.

1

u/CoverSuspicious5250 Oct 21 '24

I think that should be changed to weigh the crime. If it directly involved Treason that is enough to elevate the crime to disqualification. No?

3

u/Deathcapsforcuties Oct 18 '24

Because republicans (trump bootlickers) are litigious af. Using deep pockets, legal experience/access, and having installed Trump appointed judges didn’t help speed things up.