The Washington Post (Phillip Bump) ran a piece criticizing me for questioning the use of "the call" in Georgia as evidence of criminal fraud. The column, however, makes the case better than I ever could on the dangers of this argument. Bump insists that Trump did not even have to intend any criminal fraud in the call since "Trump is charged with 'false statements and writings'" more generally in failing to accept the truth. It is a standard that could have been used against a host of Democrats in past elections. washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/…
...Bump also cited a column in Mediaite (later changed) that I objected to over the suggestion that I recently changed my view of the call. Within hours of the transcript being released after the initial Post account, I wrote that actual exchange was different from what the Post suggested in claiming that Trump had told Georgia officials simply "find" the votes. I still maintained, as I did in that tweet, that finding such votes would not have changed the outcome of the election.jonathanturley.org/2023/08/15/no-…
...I have not hesitated to criticize Trump when I have felt such criticism was warranted. That includes criticizing his Jan. 6th speech while he was still giving it. It also includes commenting on the strength of the Florida case. However, the Georgia call was misrepresented in the media and continues to be misrepresented in the indictment in my view.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
