Trump Campaign Knew Dominion Fraud Claims Were False, Memo Reportedly Shows

[SimplyMe]

From Forbes: "The Trump campaign debunked election fraud claims involving Dominion Voting Systems’ voting machines days before Trump allies like attorney Rudy Giuliani started widely promoting those same allegations, court documents discovered by the New York Times show, suggesting the campaign knew the fraud claims were false but let them spread anyway."

And before someone states "New York Times" and uses that as an excuse to claim it is fake news, realize that the document in question is publicly available as part of a defamation court case.

 

[Andrewn]

Of course, they did. They are evil, not retarded.

 

[public hermit]

Is this something for which Trump, himself, could be held accountable? Is Slick Rick finally going to go down?

 

[Hank77]

From Forbes: "The Trump campaign debunked election fraud claims involving Dominion Voting Systems’ voting machines days before Trump allies like attorney Rudy Giuliani started widely promoting those same allegations, court documents discovered by the New York Times show, suggesting the campaign knew the fraud claims were false but let them spread anyway."

And before someone states "New York Times" and uses that as an excuse to claim it is fake news, realize that the document in question is publicly available as part of a defamation court case.

Then there are the cases that Dominion Voting Systems has filed against Powell, Newsmax, and others, as well.

 

[hedrick]

Note, this is the Trump campaign, not Trump himself. Even if he heard it from staff (and it’s not clear whether staff would actually tell him bad news), I doubt Trump is able to believe anything that might imply he didn’t win.

 

[perplexed]

Note, this is the Trump campaign, not Trump himself. Even if he heard it from staff (and it’s not clear whether staff would actually tell him bad news), I doubt Trump is able to believe anything that might imply he didn’t win.

He sort of knew how to stop talking about Dominion, how he won the popular vote in 2016, how the 2012 election was rigged and Barack Obama's birth certificate.

 

[NxNW]

NYT: When lawyers asked Sean Dollman, a representative of the Trump campaign, in a deposition if the campaign still believed that the election was fraudulent, he answered, “Yes, sir.”
The lawyers then asked, “What is that opinion based on?”
According to the court documents, Mr. Dollman gave a less than certain answer.
“We have no underlying definite facts that it wasn’t,” he said.

 

[essentialsaltes]

“We have no underlying definite facts that it wasn’t,” he said.

While hilarious, it's a sign of the games the 'new conspiracists' are playing with evidence.

Representative Bryan Zollinger perfectly capture the ethos of true-enoughness in his suggestion that the Democratic Party might very well have brought white nationalists to Charlottesville in 2017 to create a violent clash: “I am not saying it is true, but I am suggesting that it is completely plausible.”2 The new conspiracism sets a low bar: if one cannot be certain that a belief is entirely false, with the emphasis on entirely, then it might be true—and that’s true enough.

You can believe in something as long as you don't have ironclad proof of the opposite. This is invidious.