The problem with that defense is that prosecutors do not need to necessarily prove that Trump knew he lost the election, only that he knew he was using possibly unlawful means to reach the end he believed was right. So if, for example, he signed (or had someone sign) a false document, or submitted a slate or electors he knew were invalid, even if he did it for just purpose, he may still be subject to conviction.
“ or submitted a slate or electors he knew were invalid”
No alternate electors were ever submitted.
Why don’t you go work for Fati Willis. You seem to think getting Trump put away is going to make a win for the dullard GOPe Meatball.
“..prosecutors do not need to necessarily prove that Trump knew he lost the election, only that he knew he was using possibly unlawful means…”
That’s true - if he did something unlawful - but if he did I’m not aware of it - all I’ve heard so far is these BS thought crimes.
This is all political lawfare and everyone on both sides knows it. This is the swamp eliminating a threat to its existence.
The proof is the fact that all politicians do the exact same things that Trump is accused of, but only he is getting indicted for them. Why? Because he’s immensely popular, and he vowed to drain the swamp and return the power to the people.
The swamp doesn’t want to be drained - it’s that simple.