Five 2020 election irregularities, illegalities that collide with Jack Smith's Trump indictment

Former President Donald Trump has been arraigned on four felony counts alleging he conspired to spread claims of 2020 election fraud that he knew to be untrue to stop certification of the vote.

Federal prosecutors bringing the case, however, will have to contend with at least five high-profile cases of confirmed irregularities or illegalities from the 2020 contest ranging from Iranian interference to unlawful voting procedures.

Trump was indicted by a grand jury led by Special Counsel Jack Smith on Tuesday and arraigned Thursday in a federal courtroom on four charges, including Conspiracy to Defraud the United States; Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding; Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding; and Conspiracy Against Rights.

The indictment alleges that “The purpose of the conspiracy was to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election by using knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the federal government function by which those results are collected, counted, and certified.

And for that reason, (plus the fact that dems used the COVID scare to destroy evidence of cheating) it is going to be difficult to convince the public of actual 2020 election skullduggery.

It can be done with hard evidence. Trump supporters may only need theories and prospects of how it could be stolen, but it will take something more solid for others to be convinced. I was on fire with just the prospects of how 2020 could have been stolen back in early 2021, but by 2022 I was wondering where's the beef myself. Hopefully they have a great list of proven fraud, they have been keeping secret just for the court case, which would make some sense from a legal perspective, but since Trump rarely follows typical legal protocol, and instead just focuses on the political approach, I guess we'll have to see.

Possibly, but my hopes for signs of intelligence among US voters have taken more than one beating. Biden and Fetterman.

ROFL. You have a well deserved reputation as possibly the greatest narcissist on this site, which does NOT come easy. Sadly, we're seeing that same level of ignorance spread into the Republican side at this point. There's probably lots of reasons, starting with our educational system, but now the leaders of both parties have to speak at a 6th grade level for most voters to keep up, ensuring the best and brightest have no chance of being relatable, much less being elected.

All I can say to that is, don't give in. Maintain the dialogue of debate at a high level. Don't fall prey to only offering easy insults, and trash talk, or just glossing over things with rhetoric. That only hastens our demise. Republicans, especially conservatives, have to be better. We have to set the example. Else it all just becomes a race to the bottom.

Problem is: most of, if not all of the evidence has been destroyed by now. There were many articles posted here on FR about exactly that - audit trails being deleted, records cleared on the tabulation machines, etc. There were lawsuits presented trying to force preservation of the information for ongoing litigation, which ultimately failed as well.

Just look at how hard the media and dems are hammering on anyone who dares speak anything counter to the narrative. Look at what they project onto their political rivals. That tells you all you need to know.

Sure, you may not be able to prove it, but that’s because the evidence you need to “prove it” has been destroyed or confounded.

Because if it’s determined by the judges and juries that there was more evidence that it was NOT actually "fraudulently stolen" and he admitted privately he knew that, he may have an issue on that obstructing a proceeding charge.

I can tell you from personal experience that this is a bullsh!t charge -- even if it can be proven without any shadow of a doubt that Trump knew he had "lost" the election.

I worked for a client some years ago who was the defendant in a civil lawsuit (in a business setting). As is usually the case, the defendant filed a countersuit against the plaintiff. Usually this is done just to muddy the waters and (as his attorney told him) "make the plaintiff's life miserable while they work hard to win the case." Every attorney who knew the facts of the case advised the defendant that the BEST result would be a dismissal of all claims and counterclaims.

In this case, however, the real value to the defendant was in the discovery process. He had every right to pursue a vigorous defense, and that's exactly what he did.

After six months of discovery and legal wrangling, the plaintiff knew the case was so weak that the company filed a motion to withdraw the claim and dismiss the case. In a remarkable turn of events, the defendant filed a response objecting to the motion for dismissal of the case against him. Everyone involved in the case was astonished, but -- in a landmark decision that made it to the pages of law journals in that state -- the judge ruled that the defendant had every right to contest a dismissal of the case and continue with the discovery process.

After another six months, the information that came out in the document production process and depositions was so damaging to the plaintiff that the defendant found himself in a much more powerful position than anyone envisioned. Suddenly, the countersuit became the main event and the original plaintiff effectively became the defendant.

By the time all was said and done, the plaintiff-turned-defendant was in such a bad position that the company ended up filing a third-party malpractice claim against their own attorneys in the original case. The defendant-turned-plaintiff ended up winning a far bigger settlement than the plaintiff was seeking when the original lawsuit was filed.

The bottom line is this ...

Nobody should EVER be exposed to criminal prosecution for availing himself of perfectly legal processes under the law to remedy a real or perceived wrong.

That’s an interesting story, thanks for the details. Reminds me of this story I read recently:

Trump sued Michael Cohen for $500 million. Now he’s worried he’s at “risk of self-incrimination”

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-sued-michael-cohen-500-181619974.html

But back to J6. If it’s true that Trump expected several hundred thousand people to show up, and didn’t secure the National Guard beforehand, but only after the riot broke out, AND worst case had admitted it was all for show, then he’ll have a lot of explaining to do with regard to disrupting the electoral college.

Ideally, he pops out some actual, hard, evidence that the election was stolen, more than just the process/opportunity to steal stuff we’ve seen so far. But if he could finally find some evidence of actual fraudulent votes in the process, he would have a better case to justify what ultimately happened.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.