this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
219 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10180 readers
486 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump announced plans to hold a press conference next week to present a "conclusive report" proving that the 2020 election in Georgia was rigged. This comes after Trump was recently indicted by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for attempting to overturn the election results in Georgia. Trump claims the report will show election fraud and lead to "a complete exoneration" of all charges against him. However, critics argue it has been over two years since the election and Trump has not previously provided evidence of widespread fraud. The announcement also comes just hours after Trump lashed out at Willis for indicting him now rather than earlier. It remains to be seen whether Trump's promised report will actually contain new evidence that could substantively challenge the prior investigations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The proof in court wouldn't exonerate him. Even if the election was rigged against him, he can't do illegal things the take it back.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Very true. Ok updated sentiment

So he couldn't present the evidence after the election and needed to break the law instead, but it magically appears after the fact for a press conference when he goes to trial

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Exactly. Assuming that he actually has proof (big reach), then he would have had to know it before he started doing illegal stuff in 2020. Even then, the obvious question would be why didn't he go through the courts to fight it? Of course, he did and lost every time. This means that even if he does have proof now, he didn't have it when he was trying to steal the election "back" or he would have presented his proof then.

I'm not expecting any real evidence to be shown in this press conference. It will be an obvious attempt to induce rage in his base to distract from the facts presented in court.