Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
Also today at DC courthouse - sentencing hearing for 6 Oath Keepers convicted of obstruction and conspiracy to obstruct (same 2 charges in Trump's indictment)
DOJ also seeking terrorism enhancement and up to 10 years in prison for 4 defendants.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/six-additional-oath-keepers-members-and-affiliates-found-guilty-charges-related-capitol
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1696521333335875802
Didn't see anyone cover the Monday hearing against Meadows in GA - Federal court hearing about moving venue
https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1696517678964306225
The hearing yesterday on the motion of former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to remove his case to federal court from Georgia state court had a number of notable moments. The testimony of both Meadows and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger offered insights into the case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. While I have said that the sweeping indictment contains some serious allegations of criminal conduct against individual defendants, I have been critical of its broad scope and its implications for free speech in future challenges to election. Unsupported legal claims may be sanctionable in court, but they have not been treated as crimes. What was most striking is that Raffensperger confirmed a key aspect of “the call” with Georgia officials that I previously raised about the purpose of that call. For his part, Meadows categorically denied key allegations made by Willis in the indictment.
Despite the recent attack in the Washington Post, it is not the merits of Trump’s claims but the use of the call as a criminal act that drew my criticism. The call was misrepresented by the Post and the transcript later showed that Trump was not simply demanding that votes be added to the count but rather asking for another recount or continued investigation. Again, I disagreed with that position but the words about the finding of 11,780 votes was in reference to what he was seeking in a continued investigation. Critics were enraged by the suggestion that Trump was making the case for a recount as opposed to just demanding the addition of votes to the tally or fraudulent findings.
Raffensperger described the call in the same terms. He correctly described the call as “extraordinary” in a president personally seeking such an investigation, particularly after the completion of the earlier recount. That is manifestly true. However, he also acknowledged that this was a “settlement negotiation.”
So what was the subject of the settlement talks? Another recount or further investigation. The very thing that critics this week were apoplectic about in the coverage. That does not mean that Trump had grounds for the demand. Trump participation in the call was extraordinary and his demands were equally so. However, the reference to the vote deficit in demanding continued investigation was a predictable argument in such a settlement negotiation. As I previously stated, I have covered such challenges for years as a legal analyst for CBS, NBC, BBC, and Fox. Unsupported legal claims may be sanctionable in court, but they have not been treated as crimes
The question is whether engaging in such arguments in a settlement discussion is a criminal act. This was a settlement call with lawyers on why officials should reexamine the votes and allegations of wrongdoing
GA 2020 election - forensic audit was not done statewide, only Cobb County and Not Fulton where the fraud actually happened.
After the recounts, the Georgia Secretary of State conducted a forensic audit of about 15,000 mail-in ballots in Cobb County, checking signatures on ballot envelopes to make sure they matched signatures on file with the county. It was during that audit, just before Christmas, that Mr. Trump called Ms. Watson. Mr. Trump said in the call that he contacted Ms. Watson at the request of Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff. The audit found no evidence of fraud.
http://archive.today/2021.03.11-004005/https://www.wsj.com/articles/recording-of-trump-phone-call-to-georgia-lead-investigator-reveals-new-details-11615411561
But according to a newly surfaced recording of the call with Watson, Trump did not in fact use those exact words. He did say she could find “dishonesty” in Fulton County, and that “when the right answer comes out, you’ll be praised.” But the language of the quotes the Post attributed to Trump were not accurate. As a result, the Post had to run a prominent correction. Trump and conservatives are now scorning the paper, and even some mainstream reporters are looking askance and wondering how it happened.
https://www.vox.com/2021/3/16/22333805/washington-post-correction-trump-georgia