transcript as well. If you want to tell me at a start that I read a fake transcript, feel free to post one right here.

There is absolutely no way one could read that transcript and reasonably conclude it was part of some "negotiation" or "not only appropriate, but mandatory". Raffensperger participated in the sense that he was on the call, but in spot after spot -- he notes respectfully that Trump is spewing things that are 100% opposite of what he believes to be very clear facts -- which still appear to be the case. Yet you write above that everything Trump said was "true".

This reminds me of your argument that when it comes to valuing property, one can make essentially any assumption one wants and it can never be fraudulent -- such as maybe there is a future discovered diamond mind underneath the foundation. As long as one believes that -- then it is completely reasonable and maybe even factual!

It is perfectly reasonable to argue that this is an aggressive prosecution. But you are miles beyond that -- asserting that calls and behavior like this are both right and good. You still may be laughing about this all day as joy in trolling, but it doesn't appear that way. Goodness


[Post edited by fishhoo at 01/09/2024 5:26PM]