There it is, plain as day. He literally just admitted to his crimes.

  • @twistypencil
    link
    16
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Did anyone watch the clip, or just reacting to the headline? Immediately after he said that, they return to the commentator who says there isn’t much in that statement that can be used by prosecutors

    • @kescusayOP
      link
      431 year ago

      I’ll leave that decision up to the prosecutors.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. The exchange is:

      “Were you calling the shots?”
      “As to whether or not I thought the election was rigged, yeah it was my decision.”

      Trump is being charged with conspiracy to prevent the election results from being certified. He’s not being charged with lying about election rigging. He can flat out say “yeah I knew I lost I just wanted to lie to people”. He’s not obligated to tell the truth and it’s not why he’s in legal trouble.

      He would need to have said something about creating a plan to delay or prevent the certification and that lying about the election being rigged was part of that. Prosecutors claim they have this evidence anyways.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        It’s already been established that Donnie knew he was lying and that lying about the election was a key part of the plot to overturn the election.

        So now he’s admitted to ordering a key part of the plot and he doesn’t have any legitimate reason to have done so.

        His lawyers have to argue either that he was lying now, or that he was in control of the lies about election, but was somehow unaware of the purpose for lying.

      • WalrusDragonOnABike
        link
        fedilink
        -11 year ago

        twisty never even mentioned that part. The reason the commentator said what they did because Trump didn’t say thing thing the headline said he did. If he did, people would be right to point out that admitting to the crime is probably important in trying to prove he did the crime to a legal standard.

    • @shalafi
      link
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well damn, you’re right. Not much meat on that bone, changes nothing. I was so hoping he really fucked up this time, laid down something the prosecution could bite on.

      “Did you decide the election was rigged? Ultimately, were you the sole arbiter of that decision?”

      “Yes.”

      And like the man said, if Trump was dumb enough to blame his lawyers, he’d open up a 50-gallon drum of evidence against him.

      Cannot wrap my head around how obviously stupid this man is, yet slick as hell with his non-statements. Only thing I can figure is that he’s so well practiced in legal trouble that it just rolls off the tongue.

    • @dragonflyteaparty
      link
      -1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      He goes onto say the prosecution can’t do much with it because we’ve already proved Trump’s centrality to January 6th and people referred to him as the boss. It’s another piece of evidence that they may or may not use but don’t need to prove that Trump was the one pulling the strings and making things happen. This is in direct contradiction to him saying that he just listened to his lawyers, did what they said, and thus didn’t break the law.