With fairness and liberty for all. The last six terms of the Pledge of Allegiance are those. However, as Frederick Douglass again said, “liberty is irrelevant when the right to utter person’s thoughts and opinions has vanished.”
And if Special Counsel Jack Smith gets his way, the right to “utter one’s thoughts and opinions” may cease to exist.
On Wednesday, Judge Tanya Chutkan opened Smith’s 165-page short, which claims at its core that Trump “used false claims of election fraud to undermine the democratic process.”
” In the months leading up to the election ,]Trump ] refused to say whether he would accept the election results, insisted that he could lose the election only because of fraud, falsely claimed that mail-in ballots were inherently fraudulent, and asserted that only votes counted by Election Day were valid”, Smith’s pre-election filing claims.
But it’s highly unlikely that any of those things are n’t protected speech. The First Amendment has very limited speech-related prohibitions that can be prosecuted, and for good reason. A completely world requires the right to free speech. And with that freedom comes the right to subject your state. The First Amendment is being violated by prosecuting Americans who question the state. For lawfare prosecutions aim to deter political speech, obstructing just the ruling party’s approved messages.
It’s essentially anti-American, but yet, Smith endures in his mission to heart the First Amendment.
The accused and his co-conspirators frequently altered the numbers in their false fraud allegations on a daily basis, according to Smith’s filing. This also shows how intently the defendant and his co-conspirators viewed the truth and how aware of falsity they are.
Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton should be in prison right now if claiming that an election was stolen or poorly administered is a crime.
When Abrams defeated Brian Kemp in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election by 1.4 percent items, she claimed the results were “tainted” and caused” the disinvestment and marginalization of thousands of voters.” Abrams went so far as to claim that she was n’t giving a concession speech because doing so would “acknowledge an action is right, true, or proper.”
Hillary Clinton, who claimed the 2016 election was “basically stole]n ]” from her, said that had Abrams “had a fair election, she would have already won”.
But of course for a summary is facile. Every legal appropriate is up to Clinton, Abrams, and the tens of other Liberals and liberals who have questioned the results of an election.
Smith also claimed that Trump, for instance, “was informed that Arizona had no proof of widespread election fraud within the month following the election.” Smith argues Trump may be prosecuted for claiming, in piece, that “non-citizens” voted in Arizona’s vote. Importantly, Arizona’s Democrat election authorities recently announced that there are approximately 218,000 registered voters who have been allowed to cast ballots in both state and federal elections, which is against state laws.
More importantly, Smith makes it clear that only the DOJ can decide when it’s appropriate to speak out against false votes, even though some may have been false.
]READ NEXT: No, The Georgia Vote-Counting Video Was Never’ Debunked.’ Not Even Close ]
” The accused, his co-conspirators, and their providers spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative scams in the election and that he had really won”, the filing says. ( PAGE 10 )
The state’s election board in Georgia’s Fulton County received reprimand in May after discovering that the region had broken election law in the state during the 2020 election. During the national tell, the county double-scanned more than 3, 000 votes. The Associated Press acknowledges that the “double counting of ballots” discovered during an audit of the 2020 election, but that the “error were n’t enough to change the election results.”
In fact, a recent poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports found that 17 % of respondents said “yes” when asked whether, during the 2020 election, they” cast a mail-in ballot in a state where you were no longer a permanent resident”. Such discipline is outlawed.
According to The Associated Press, a gentleman from Pennsylvania was charged in August for allegedly casting ballots in both Florida and Pennsylvania during the 2020 presidential election. In addition, a document from the Office of the Auditor General of Michigan discovered that 1, 616 vote were “were attributed to individuals who were dying as of Election Day.” In 20 of those cases,” a person who cast a vote had died more than 40 days before the election”, according to The Detroit News which cited the document. According to The Detroit News, some people” sent in their votes before the poll but passed away before Election Day.”
Even if fraudulent ballots were cast and counted at a level that was n’t “outcome-determinative”, they were still false. Trump had ( and has ) every right to speak out about it, regardless of the scale.
That’s also not to claim that for small amounts of scams had n’t affect various races. ( Lest we forget that Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks narrowly won her 2020 election by only six seats. Imagine Miller-Meeks being prevented from posing a question about whether the vote was fair and free, yet if a small number of the votes cast were defrauded or were cast by deceased people, and the outcome of the race was won.
If Smith’s lawfare efforts are successful, it may harm future elections, making them susceptible to “outcome-determinative” scams. If no one can question the effects or management of an election, there’s little opportunity for sincerity — and no responsibilities means no effects.
The Federalist’s Brianna Lyman is a journalist for elections. With a degree in International Political Economy, Brianna received her diploma from Fordham University. Her job has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Observe Brianna on X: @briannalyman2