Testimony Exposes the Lies About Donald Trump’s Call to Raffensperger


During testimony in a hearing to determine if Mark Meadows should have his case transferred to federal court, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger testified that the call by Donald Trump was “extraordinary” but was a “settlement negotiation” in an argument over whether or not to pursue another recount. It was NOT a demand to create votes.

The media and others repeatedly lied about this conversation. Donald Trump was indicted based on a lie.

Brad Raffensperger
Turley wrote that he was particularly interested in Raffensperger’s description of the call with Donald Trump. He supported Raffensperger on his position but questioned any criminality.

Despite the recent attack in the Washington Post, it is not the merits of Trump’s claims but the use of the call as a criminal act that drew my criticism. The call was misrepresented by the Post, and the transcript later showed that Trump was not simply demanding that votes be added to the count but rather asking for another recount or continued investigation. ..

Raffensperger described the call in the same terms. He correctly described the call as “extraordinary” in a president personally seeking such an investigation, particularly after the completion of the earlier recount. That is manifestly true. However, he also acknowledged that this was a “settlement negotiation.”

So what was the subject of the settlement talks? Another recount or further investigation. ..Trump’s participation in the call was extraordinary, and his demands were equally so. However, the reference to the vote deficit in demanding continued investigation was a predictable argument in such a settlement negotiation…

Turley has never seen anything like this treated as a crime. He was very polite in saying the Post “misrepresented” the call. They blatantly lied.

How do you criminalize an “extraordinary,” perhaps inappropriate, and annoying phone call? Democrats have done it before and gotten away with it in the Ukraine impeachment.

As for Mark Meadows, it’s hard to see a crime.

Turley continues:

The question is whether engaging in such arguments in a settlement discussion is a criminal act. This was a settlement call with lawyers on why officials should reexamine the votes and allegations of wrongdoing. While pundits continue to bizarrely stress that the word “recount” was not used, the transcript shows that Trump was still arguing for an additional recount or investigation as these officials explained that it would not help or produce any different outcome.  They were right.

This is typical of the Biden justice system. They criminalize non-criminal acts by their political opponents or elevate misdemeanors to felonies.

Roger Stone Already Discussed the Testimony

In early August, Stone predicted that former President Donald Trump will be charged with witness tampering by Fulton County prosecutors in Georgia. Stone explains, “They base this, totally, on a recorded phone call that has six lawyers on the line, and this idea that Trump told the Secretary of State, ‘go find 11,870 votes’.

“I have listened to the entire recording, Stone said, “I’ve also read the transcript, it’s very long and tedious, but what he actually says is, ‘you have already inadvertently counted 11,870 illegal votes.’ 5,500 of them were convicted felons, another 1,100 were people who were no longer alive, and so on. He breaks it down, and ‘when you throw those out, I would win,’ that’s what he’s saying. There’s nothing illegal there; there’s nothing improper there!”


5 3 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments