—
As you have likely heard the J6 Indictment has been issued. It involves charges against the former president related to January 6th events to block and overturn the 2020 Presidential Election results.
Here are some clearly stated rationales that show Trump was told there was no Election Fraud. Yet Defendant Trump proceeded with his interference and conspiracy plan, despite of being told “there was no there, there” multiple times — regarding the Big Lies he was promoting …
pg 3
DONALD J. TRUMP,
did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government.
Purpose of the Conspiracy
7. 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.
Many people in his own Administration informed him that there was no Election Fraud:
pg 6 - 8
The Defendant’s Knowledge of the Falsity of His Election Fraud Claims
11. The Defendant, his co-conspirators, and their agents made knowingly false claims that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the 2020 presidential election. These prolific lies about election fraud included dozens of specific claims that there had been substantial fraud in certain states, such as that large numbers of dead, non-resident, non-citizen, or otherwise ineligible voters had cast ballots, or that voting machines had changed votes for the Defendant to votes for Biden. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. In fact, the Defendant was notified repeatedly that his claims were untrue — often by the people on whom he relied for candid advice on important matters, and who were best positioned to know the facts — and he deliberately disregarded the truth. For instance:
a. The Defendant’s Vice President — who personally stood to gain by remaining in office as part of the Defendant’s ticket and whom the Defendant asked to study fraud allegations—told the Defendant that he had seen no evidence of outcome-determinative fraud.
b. The senior leaders of the Justice Department — appointed by the Defendant and responsible for investigating credible allegations of election crimes — told the Defendant on multiple occasions that various allegations of fraudwere unsupported.
c. The Director of National Intelligence — the Defendant’s principal advisor on intelligence matters related to national security — disabused the Defendant of the notion that the Intelligence Community’s findings regarding foreign interference would change the outcome of the election.
d. The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (“CISA”)—whose existence the Defendant signed into law to protect the nation’s cybersecurity infrastructure from attack—joined an official multi-agency statement that there was no evidence any voting system had been compromised and that declared the 2020 election “the most secure in American history.” Days later, after the CISA Director—whom the Defendant had appointed—announced publicly that election security experts were in agreement that claims of computer-based election fraud were unsubstantiated, the Defendant fired him.
e. Senior White House attorneys — elected by the Defendant to provide him candid advice—informed the Defendant that there was no evidence of outcome-determinative election fraud, and told him that his presidency would end on Inauguration Day in 2021.
f. Senior staffers on the Defendant’s 2020 re-election campaign (“Defendant’s Campaign” or “Campaign”) — whose sole mission was the Defendant’s re-election — told the Defendant on November 7, 2020, that he had only a five to ten percent chance of prevailing in the election, and that success was contingent on the Defendant winning ongoing vote counts or litigation in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. Within a week of that assessment, the Defendant lost in Arizona—meaning he had lost the election.
g. State legislators and officials — many of whom were the Defendant’s political allies, had voted for him, and wanted him to be re-elected — repeatedly informed the Defendant that his claims of fraud in their states were unsubstantiated or false and resisted his pressure to act based upon them.
h. State and federal courts — the neutral arbiters responsible for ensuring the fair and even-handed administration of election laws—rejected every outcome-determinative post-election lawsuit filed by the Defendant, his co-conspirators, and allies, providing the Defendant real-time notice that his allegations were meritless.
12. The Defendant widely disseminated his false claims of election fraud for months, despite the fact that he knew, and in many cases had been informed directly, that they were not true. The Defendant’s knowingly false statements were integral to his criminal plans to defeat the federal government function, obstruct the certification, and interfere with others’ right to vote and have their votes counted. He made these knowingly false claims throughout the post-election time period, [...]
[bold emphasis added]
Trump was lying, and most certainly knew he was lying. Or at least should have known this, given all the fact-based information he received.
I’m sure there will be many more startling revelations in this latest J6 Indictment, but these were the first things that jump out at me. Like Special Counsel Jack Smith said in his press announcement:
The charges and evidence are spelled out in the Indictment — I would recommend everyone read it.
Legal experts on MSNBC have conjectured that Trump was the only one charged in this Indictment — so far — because Jack Smith wants to get this Trial started, with the fewest possible delays.
They also expect that other co-conspirators will be charged later — especially if they refuse to co-operate and give further evidence of the charges being brought.
Here’s to seeing Justice being brought as fast as is competently feasible. America and democracy deserve no less.
— —