Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Yeah, I'm not sure why you'd say that. She has some pretty damning facts, including particularly the recording of Trump and Meadows telling Raffensberger to find the votes to make Trump the winner, after the election had been certified. Why isn't that criminal?
|
That call has never struck me as damning evidence. It sounds bad, but in context (at that time, he was still litigating the vote and had a belief the votes were out there) it's a guy saying, granted, in mafioso-speak, "I know I won... Go find me the votes I know are out there."
My issue with her sprawling indictment is it's too broad. That case will take forever, and as Powell and Chesebro and Meadows have shown already, by demanding a speedy trial or filing any of the myriad motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (and soon, the argument that the allegations don't meet the definition of a crime) individual defendants can take the case apart from endless angles and give Trump a preview of Willis' strategy.
The case is also too ambitious. She's trying to lasso a lot of acts on the parts of lower level operators which are clearly not criminal into a RICO claim. But this isn't a hub and spokes scenario. This is an allegation that all of these people, many of whom never interacted or even met each other, were all engaged in a massive concerted effort to do something they all knew was illegal. That's hard to prove, and I could see trial and appellate courts slapping Willis' hand for being abusive in her scope.
