Full audio of call with Georgia SOS - Kotaku In Action 2

▲ 18 ▼

– Booker 18 points 5 years ago +18 / -0

Okay, I'm 30 minutes into this, and I'm done. I don't hear anything incriminating from Trump, and even if you were to assume he's corrupt he's not fucking retarded enough to demand Georgia find extra votes for himself on a call where nobody is willing to back him up to start with. If he says what the media claims he says, I haven't heard it.

However, I'm completely unimpressed with the case he's making on this call for voter fraud in Georgia. Before everybody jumps on my ass, I'm not saying it didn't happen, but he's just failing to make a case here, no one is backing him up, he's all alone when he should have an army of lawyers on every call he makes. Trump's biggest flaw is his inability to build strong teams, and he needs a strong coalition here.

permalink save report block reply

▲ 4 ▼

– DomitiusOfMassilia 4 points 5 years ago +4 / -0

I suspect he's also not breaking the law in front of his own legal team, since they are there to literally prevent that or anything close to it.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 18 ▼

– Kumatei 18 points 5 years ago +18 / -0

This feels like the same litmus test that the Ukrainian call was. If you listen to it with the bias of Trump being malicious you will read into it threats and coercion. If you listen to it under the bias that Trump isn't evil you will read into it a man pleading with another man to come clean and be honest.

permalink save report block reply

▲ 9 ▼

– Killroyomega 9 points 5 years ago +9 / -0

Best part of the call is when he says Raffensperger must be a great lawyer because of his last name.

Made me laugh for a good minute.

Here's it clipped, about he says it about halfway through.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1345938566594113537

permalink save report block reply

▲ 5 ▼

– MarquisBoniface 5 points 5 years ago +5 / -0

Transcript

https://archive.is/6XjnI

permalink save report block reply

▲ 6 ▼

– MarquisBoniface 6 points 5 years ago +6 / -0

... "But an accurate number will be given, but it’s in the fifties of thousands, and that’s people that went to vote and they were told they can’t vote because they’ve already been voted for. And it’s a very sad thing. They walked out complaining. But the number is large. We’ll have it for you, but it’s very – it’s much more than the number of 11,779 that’s – the current margin is only 11,779. Brad, I think – I think you agree with that, right?

That’s something I think everyone – (laughs) – at least that’s a number that everyone agrees on. But that’s the difference in the votes. But we’ve had hundreds of thousands of ballots that we’re able to, actually – we’ll get you a pretty accurate number. You don’t need much of a number because the number that in theory I lost by, the margin would be 11,779. But you also have substantial numbers of people, thousands and thousands, who went to the voting place on November 3rd, were told they couldn’t vote – were told they couldn’t vote because a ballot had been put in on their name. And you know, that’s very, very…very, very sad.

We had I believe it’s about 4,502 voters who voted but who weren’t on the voter registration list. So it’s 4,502 who voted but they were not on the voter registration roll, which they had to be. You had 18,325 vacant address voters. They had no – the address was vacant. And they’re not allowed to be counted. That’s 18,325.

A smaller number, you had 904 who only voted where they had just a PO, a post office box number. And they had a post office box number, and that’s not allowed.

We had at least 18,000 that’s on tape – we had them counted very painstakingly – 18,000 voters having to do with Ruby Freeman..."

This is the first part where that number comes up, so yea, msm is lying as usual.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 5 ▼

– Booker 5 points 5 years ago +5 / -0

Trying to get through this but I'm short on time. Anyone have a summary of the offending quotes or a timestamp?

permalink save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– SargentSlate 1 point 5 years ago +1 / -0

How is it legal to publish a private telephone conversation?

permalink save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– DomitiusOfMassilia 3 points 5 years ago +3 / -0

It's legal in most 1 party consent states in the US. The difference here is that this may be considered a legal conversation that is protected from such rules, making it illegal. Legally publishing the conversation would actually be the norm in many states.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– deleted 1 point 5 years ago +1 / -0