martybegan
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2010
- 94,108
- 44,361
- 2,300
He asked her to look at signatures from a prior election to compare with signatures from the 2020 election. Who the fuck do you think you're fooling other than yourself?Dumbfuck, he said if they look at signatures they will find they don't match from prior elections. That would be him saying find the fraud. The WP quoted him saying, "find the fraud." While he didn't use those words, that is what he said.Not really since Trump did say those things. Just not in those exact words.Again, they got the story from Georgia's Republican deputy Secretary of State who got the story directly from the investigator Trump called. Who knows why you think that's not a reliable source?Yes, verifiable. It came from the deputy Secretary of State. Who by the way, is Republican.From verifiable sources. What newspaper doesn't do that?That would only be a lie if they knew what they published wasn't true. They relied on verifiable sources. So prove they lied...The lie is that the post claimed that literally said something he didnt sayExactly. There wasn't a lie, the correction was that Trump didn't literally say one sentence or something -
They heard what they wanted to hear, asked the person to pinky swear it was the truth, and ran with the story.
"verifiable"
They wanted to believe the worst about Trump, and then ran with it. Meanwhile a Dem story would have been held without direct confirmation.
They probably just verified the phone call happened, and didn't get into details because they had their ORANGE MAN BAD story and didn't need anything else.
Evidently it was completely unreliable.
And again, verification was probably only about the people involved, and that a call took place.
"Fake but accurate"
You morons really need to get a better playbook.
His actual words were that he believed there was fraud and that the person should investigate. The false statement implied that he was directing them to "find" fraud, not investigate the potential for it.
The two versions are entirely different in intent.
"But if you go back two years, and if you can get to Fulton, you are going to find things that are going to be unbelievable."
That's a lot different than the fishing expedition "find the fraud" implies.