Posted on 10/24/2023 2:28:27 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Former President Donald Trump's final chief of staff in the White House, Mark Meadows, has spoken with special counsel Jack Smith's team at least three times this year, including once before a federal grand jury, which came only after Smith granted Meadows immunity to testify under oath, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The sources said Meadows informed Smith's team that he repeatedly told Trump in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election that the allegations of significant voting fraud coming to them were baseless, a striking break from Trump's prolific rhetoric regarding the election.
According to the sources, Meadows also told the federal investigators Trump was being "dishonest" with the public when he first claimed to have won the election only hours after polls closed on Nov. 3, 2020, before final results were in.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
they are going after Trump for spreading a “lie” that the election was stolen to benefit himself..Trump believed the election was stolen from him..he has a right to that opinion, heck I knew on election night the election was stolen I didnt need Trump to confirm it I already knew something fishy was going on
That was my first thought, so what, everyone has an opinion.
The story is about testimony Meadows allegedly gave to the D.C. Grand Jury, not in Georgia. This story has not been verified, but President Trump’s attorneys will get to cross-examine any witnesses who testify against him at his trials, including Meadows.
Not only is he wrong about the lack of widespread election fraud, but stealing the election only required enough fraud to flip the result in three of the following 5 states - PA, MI, WI, GA and AZ. Each one of those states went to Biden by the slimmest of margins. Election fraud didn’t have to be widespread. It only had to be wide enough.
I believe you. It was well thought out how they planned it without any leaks.
Why must it come from Trump? I would think all the evidence would have to come from elsewhere, because Trump was busy being president at the time, he couldn't dig through events going on in Fulton County Georgia, or Detroit, or Philadelphia.
The evidence of corruption had to be gathered, and lots of people have been doing this. Here is one site that has collected a lot of evidence of a rigged stolen election.
https://hereistheevidence.com/
Trump would have had a presidential address to the country laying out the assault on our democracy....he didn’t.
The evidence required to prove such a thing was not discovered soon enough to do this. Some of the things we have learned have taken us years to discover, and I still keep seeing new discoveries of evidence of the corrupt 2020 election every week or so.
I think I saw one a few weeks ago about 10,000 fraudulent ballots in Michigan. The case was initially investigated by State police, and then turned over to the FBI who have simply covered it up.
So how was Trump gonna prove stuff when the proof didn't come out till later? Hmmmm???
What do you expect Meadows to do if he told Trump he lost?
Quit being a d*ck, and go look at the evidence that the election was rigged. There was sufficient proof in November of 2020 to believe it was a fraudulent election, and Meadows and Barr should have looked for it.
Because he's a liar, or an idiot, or both? Just another backstabbing little traitor in a government full of them.
You are an idiot. Some of us have actually bothered to keep up with the various evidence of election fraud, and i've seen sufficient of it to have absolutely no doubts at all that the election was stolen in the major cities of swing states, mainly through fraudulent ballots being stuffed into the ballot boxes.
Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada were the places where the election was rigged in the most populous big city counties. We now have pretty good ideas about what they did, and we have the evidence to back it up. Hell, we even have *VIDEO* of them stealing it in Fulton County Georgia.
Are you working for the other side, or are you just intentionally ignorant of a subject you are discussing?
Biden won Michigan by more than 150,000 votes, Pennsylvania by more than 80,000. Neither of those are slim margins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election#Results
"Mark Meadows has testified that he told Trump several times that there was no basis to any claims of widespread [??? emphasis added] election fraud"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Contrast the deceptive imo, politically correct denial of widespread election fraud with the zero-tolerance triggers of the 14th Amendment's (14A) Section 2, that section a penalty for states where election fraud has occurred.
"is denied to any"
"or in any way abridged,"
Excerpted from 14A:
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced [emphases added] in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Apportionment of Representatives]
Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
In addition to probably ignoring Section 2 on J6, note that Pence and Congress also probably ignored widespread state non-compliance with 12th Amendment electoral vote rules imo.
In fact, not only did the states surrender their power to make state winner-take-all laws for electoral votes when they ratified that amendment imo, but Justice Joseph Story had explained that when political parties divide a state's electoral votes, the state's electoral votes supporting a particular candidate are effectively neutralized, comparable to when a state's federal senators vote yes and no on a given issue.
"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote [emphasis added], while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833."
Finally, as a side note to this post, consider that probably the main reason that we hear media complaints about the electoral college is the following.
The electoral college is now the only thing stopping the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties that have pirated control of state and federal governments from permanently establishing a puppet presidency that will unquestioningly sign unconstitutional taxing and spending bills into law.
Are you working for the other side, or are you just intentionally ignorant of a subject you are discussing?
They're all Republicans and therefore inherently F'd up.
And he knew this how? I have read that it will take a million dollars per defendant in legal fees, not counting appeals.
None of them have that kind of money.
Saying he warned Trump, even if it is true, is meaningless. Just means he is in CYA mode.
Good point.
Who cares???
Last time I looked at that pesky constitution thingy, I failed to see where believing you have been cheated was illegal.
I failed to see where telling people that you believe that you have been cheated was illegal.
I failed to see where a judge can tell you not to talk about it. That would be illegal.
President Trump has been stripped of his constitutional rights.
Period.
End of discussion.
Right after we bury them first.
Mark Meadows testimony is his opinion, which means who cares!?
Trump’s words on Meadows. Not mine. Take it up with him.
RE: Meadows was fed lines to spout under duress.
One of the cop shows had the lines
“He giving you anything?”
“After a few more minutes in that room he’ll confess to the Lindbergh kidnapping.”
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.