House Judiciary Committee has released the video of special prosecutor Jack Smith’s deposition

[otto105]

He's dirt like most Democrats,

Hilarious


Now drop and give us 50 Heil Shitlers!!

 

[Nostra]

Transcripts aren’t “reality”.

 

[ThisIsMe]

We can find it by listening to the call. Also, that the call was part of a pressure campaign to change the expressed will of the GA voters.

Ok, if you have it, point it out to me in the text of the phone call. I sat down and spend 30 or 40 minutes reading the entire thing, at no point did trump even hint at “change the votes and create new votes for me”. So if you have it, point it out.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Transcripts aren’t “reality”. The tape of the phone call is reality. Transcripts aren’t as reliable as listening to the REAL conversation.

There have been numerous instances where Trump has issued edited transcripts.

Trump's new Ukraine transcript doesn't match its original readout. The White House blames Lt. Col. Vindman.

The latest Speed Read,/speed-reads,,speed-reads, breaking news, comment, reviews and features from the experts at The Week

theweek.com

How Trump Masks His Incoherence

Many of the president’s statements are difficult to decode—so why doesn’t that concern his supporters?

www.theatlantic.com

The transcript is a written record of the call, it’s their words in printed form. It’s the same thing. However, I’ll play it your way. Tell me at what point in the call trump tells Raffensperger to change votes. Give me a time stamp.

 

[Marener]

The transcript is a written record of the call, it’s their words in printed form. It’s the same thing. However, I’ll play it your way. Tell me at what point in the call trump tells Raffensperger to change votes. Give me a time stamp.

He’s telling him to do it throughout the call. From the very start when he tells Raffensperger that he won the election.

It’s not one line. It’s the entire call.

You claim he’s just asking him to “investigate” but anytime they say they have investigated, Trump says they’re still wrong. Obviously he doesn’t want an investigation, he wants an outcome. If all he wanted was an investigation, then he would have accepted Raffebsperger when he said they investigated.

 

[ThisIsMe]

He’s telling him to do it throughout the call. From the very start when he tells Raffensperger that he won the election.

It’s not one line. It’s the entire call.

You claim he’s just asking him to “investigate” but anytime they say they have investigated, Trump says they’re still wrong. Obviously he doesn’t want an investigation, he wants an outcome. If all he wanted was an investigation, then he would have accepted Raffebsperger when he said they investigated.

Ok, then you can point to it in the call. Where does he tell them to “give” him the election, or asking him to overturn the election. Throughout the entire call, they asked about having them look into the allegations they were presenting. They said that Georgia wasn’t sharing the information they had with the trump team, and they said the courts were stalling on the cases.

Him claiming he won isn’t a crime, him asking them to look into their claims is not a crime. The dems can’t point to any words spoken on that call that indicate trump wasn’t trying to get Georgia to change votes fraudulently.

They even talked about the 300,000 votes that are in question NOW, which means they apparently had this information back then.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript

Here is the transcript of the call, from a left friendly news source. Point to the place where he asked them to fabricate votes, or to overturn votes to “give” him the election

 

[Marener]

Ok, then you can point to it in the call. Where does he tell them to “give” him the election, or asking him to overturn the election. Throughout the entire call, they asked about having them look into the allegations they were presenting. They said that Georgia wasn’t sharing the information they had with the trump team, and they said the courts were stalling on the cases.

Him claiming he won isn’t a crime, him asking them to look into their claims is not a crime. The dems can’t point to any words spoken on that call that indicate trump wasn’t trying to get Georgia to change votes fraudulently.

They even talked about the 300,000 votes that are in question NOW, which means they apparently had this information back then.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript

Here is the transcript of the call, from a left friendly news source. Point to the place where he asked them to fabricate votes, or to overturn votes to “give” him the election

It's all though the call. I doubt you're going to care because you already read it all and don't care. For instance:

We have won this election in Georgia based on all of this. And there’s nothing wrong with saying that, Brad. You know I mean, having the correct — the people of Georgia are angry. And these numbers are going to be repeated on Monday night. Along with others that we’re going to have by that time which are much more substantial even. And the people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry. And there’s nothing wrong with saying, you know, um, that you’ve recalculated.

That's not calling for an investigation. That's calling for the outcome to be changed.

 

[otto105]

Ok, if you have it, point it out to me in the text of the phone call. I sat down and spend 30 or 40 minutes reading the entire thing, at no point did trump even hint at “change the votes and create new votes for me”. So if you have it, point it out.

You have the definition of find, right.

Is this just another "introduce disinfectants into the body" moment for you fuckups.

 

[otto105]

The transcript is a written record of the call, it’s their words in printed form. It’s the same thing. However, I’ll play it your way. Tell me at what point in the call trump tells Raffensperger to change votes. Give me a time stamp.

H was told by Shitler! to find the votes and declare Shitler! winner of the state.

Why deny reality fuckup.

 

[Nostra]

You have the definition of find, right.

Is this just another "introduce disinfectants into the body" moment for you fuckups.

So you have nothing.

 

[otto105]

So you have nothing.

Hilarious nostril.

How's the morning warm milk and oatmeal?

 

[Nostra]

Hilarious nostril.

How's the morning warm milk and oatmeal?

Still nothing.

Sux to be you.

 

[otto105]

Still nothing.

Sux to be you.

Nostril will have the white bread with mayo today.

 

[ThisIsMe]

It's all though the call. I doubt you're going to care because you already read it all and don't care. For instance:

We have won this election in Georgia based on all of this. And there’s nothing wrong with saying that, Brad. You know I mean, having the correct — the people of Georgia are angry. And these numbers are going to be repeated on Monday night. Along with others that we’re going to have by that time which are much more substantial even. And the people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry. And there’s nothing wrong with saying, you know, um, that you’ve recalculated.

That's not calling for an investigation. That's calling for the outcome to be changed.

No, you’re taking one paragraph out of an entire conversation that sets the tone for the call. You have to look at the entire conversation between all the people on the call.

If I thought trump was actually trying to ask them to commit fraud and alter votes based on nothing more than he wanted the state, if have no problem saying that, but that’s not what happened here. The media is spinning this to people hoping they won’t actually do their own due diligence.

In the paragraph you mentioned, trump lays out the problem with the absentee ballots and when he says “there’s nothing wrong with saying you’ve recalculated” he’s referring to, after they investigate and if they find what trump says they found, there’s nothing wrong with admitting there was a mistake.

If trump had said “look, we need this and I want you do do whatever it takes, to change the election”, I’d say ok, that’s not right, but the whole phone call was “hey, by our account, we won the state, and here’s our evidence. It doesn’t match up with yours, so please, let’s share information and I want you all to look into these things, and the courts are dragging their feet on this”.

That’s the whole call in a nutshell.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You have the definition of find, right.

Is this just another "introduce disinfectants into the body" moment for you fuckups.

Yes, the definition of “find” is “to discover”, it doesn’t mean to create, it means to acquire something that was lost.

lol, you cannot find any place where trump tells anyone to inject disinfectants. Not at any moment did he ever suggest people do any such thing. Just like you all won’t read the transcript of the phone call to see the truth, you won’t look at the truth of that press conference to see what he actually said.

All I’m saying, read the transcript. I’ve posted it here, if you want the truth.

 

[ThisIsMe]

H was told by Shitler! to find the votes and declare Shitler! winner of the state.

Why deny reality fuckup.

You are the one denying reality. You cannot point to any place in that conversation where he told anyone to fabricate, fraudulently alter, create votes or change votes illegally. It’s just not there.

If you see it, point it out, page number, time stamp, whatever. It does not exist.

 

[otto105]

Yes, the definition of “find” is “to discover”, it doesn’t mean to create, it means to acquire something that was lost.

lol, you cannot find any place where trump tells anyone to inject disinfectants. Not at any moment did he ever suggest people do any such thing. Just like you all won’t read the transcript of the phone call to see the truth, you won’t look at the truth of that press conference to see what he actually said.

All I’m saying, read the transcript. I’ve posted it here, if you want the truth.

Hilarious

 

[ThisIsMe]

Hilarious

Ok, easily debunked.

First video, what do you see? You see trump talking to the doctors in the room ASKING them about some methods they were going to look into. At no point did he TELL anyone to inject ANYTHING. Just like I said. You’re just repeating what the news echo chambers are telling you.

Second video, despite their best efforts to slice it up and create a narrative, they STILL were not able to capture trump saying he wanted them to do anything illegal. No vote altering, no fabricating votes. Furthermore, he never told Raffensperger to “find 11,000 votes”. He said “WE need to find 11,000 votes”, not directed AT Raffensperger and if you listen to the WHOLE conversation, you’d see he’s talking about that they already had evidence of fraud many times that number (hundreds of thousands) but he was saying they just needed to find 11,000 of those fraudulent votes to give him the win. He never asked Raffensperger to just GIVE him those votes, he lays out all his allegations and asks them to look into the discrepancies they found.

Again, what you all are saying, it’s not there. Stop looking for YouTube audio clips and actually read the transcript for yourself.

 

[otto105]

Ok, easily debunked.

First video, what do you see? You see trump talking to the doctors in the room ASKING them about some methods they were going to look into. At no point did he TELL anyone to inject ANYTHING. Just like I said. You’re just repeating what the news echo chambers are telling you.

Second video, despite their best efforts to slice it up and create a narrative, they STILL were not able to capture trump saying he wanted them to do anything illegal. No vote altering, no fabricating votes. Furthermore, he never told Raffensperger to “find 11,000 votes”. He said “WE need to find 11,000 votes”, not directed AT Raffensperger and if you listen to the WHOLE conversation, you’d see he’s talking about that they already had evidence of fraud many times that number (hundreds of thousands) but he was saying they just needed to find 11,000 of those fraudulent votes to give him the win. He never asked Raffensperger to just GIVE him those votes, he lays out all his allegations and asks them to look into the discrepancies they found.

Again, what you all are saying, it’s not there. Stop looking for YouTube audio clips and actually read the transcript for yourself.

Anything for the cult, right.

 

[Marener]

No, you’re taking one paragraph out of an entire conversation that sets the tone for the call. You have to look at the entire conversation between all the people on the call.

If I thought trump was actually trying to ask them to commit fraud and alter votes based on nothing more than he wanted the state, if have no problem saying that, but that’s not what happened here. The media is spinning this to people hoping they won’t actually do their own due diligence.

In the paragraph you mentioned, trump lays out the problem with the absentee ballots and when he says “there’s nothing wrong with saying you’ve recalculated” he’s referring to, after they investigate and if they find what trump says they found, there’s nothing wrong with admitting there was a mistake.

If trump had said “look, we need this and I want you do do whatever it takes, to change the election”, I’d say ok, that’s not right, but the whole phone call was “hey, by our account, we won the state, and here’s our evidence. It doesn’t match up with yours, so please, let’s share information and I want you all to look into these things, and the courts are dragging their feet on this”.

That’s the whole call in a nutshell.

Yeah, I just don’t see it the same way as you. Trump constantly refused to accept any evidence to the contrary. Trying to paint him as open minded and just wanting an investigation just doesn’t fly.

Take this paragraph. He’s not calling for an investigation. He just wants them to meet tomorrow and change the result:
President Donald Trump: Well, you have to, under law, you’re not allowed to give faulty election results. OK, you’re not allowed to do that. And that’s what you’ve done. This is a faulty election result. And honestly, this should go very fast. You should meet tomorrow because you have a big election, election coming up and because of what you’ve done to the president, you know, the people of Georgia know that this was a scam.

And because of what you’ve done to the president, a lot of people aren’t going out to vote and a lot of Republicans are going to vote negative because they hate what you did to the president. OK. They hate him. And they’re going to vote. And you would be respected if really respected if this thing could be straightened out before the election. You have a big election coming up on Tuesday. And therefore, I think that it really is important that you meet tomorrow and work out on these numbers, because I know, Brad, that if if you think we’re right, I think you’re going to say and I’m not looking to blame anybody. I’m not, I’m just saying that that, you know, you know, under new counts and under new views of the election results, we won the election