…are you having trouble reading too, then? I don’t exactly know what you’re talking about, your post is word salad, but I’ll gather what I can before I finish the conversation with you. If you listened to the phone call then you wouldn’t be saying what you’re saying now, unless you have severe memory issues or trouble with comprehension skills. For the record, here’s the transcript:
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/01/03/...affensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html
Now, this is a big ask since the conversation took an hour, so I don’t expect you to read it, but I’m posting it for context. The conversation touches on several issues Trump had with the process, most of which have been resolved since (late night ballot drops, multiple scanning, dead voters etc. - various assorted concerns that were on the news at the time) - those did not affect the final tally, but Trump doesn’t know that since he’s not a vote tabulator. He asks Raffenspberger to “get to the bottom of this” because he doesn’t believe the final count is accurate. He mentions the number of votes he lost by and, in the same breath, specifies that he believes he’ll find more fraudulent votes than that. Y’know. Like *I said the conversation went*. At no point in the entire exchange does Trump threaten Raffenspberger with any physical or political repercussions for not auditing the result again. He does not request any fraudulent votes to be added to the tally either. He specifically requests inspection of existing votes, via signature verification, because he’s under the impression that some of the existing ballots are fraudulent. That’s the exact opposite of what the statute states. The *only* request Trump insists on throughout the phone call is signature verification in Fulton County. The votes he purports to “find” there are just that. That, in the wording of the Georgia statute, is the exonerating factor, and he’s unlikely to be hit with a charge that sticks over the phone call. There’s really no point in continuously groaning about this if you have selective memory, or can’t recall the actual conversation that took place. There’s nothing more to discuss here - you can keep accusing him of things he did not request, but I don’t have to comment on it.
Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to congress, not “a sex thing”. Nobody cares about his scepter getting polished by interns, that wasn’t the issue. He was indeed caught in a cleverly constructed trap, but ultimately he’s the one who lied under oath. Shame, considering I quite liked the guy as a president.