This article was originally published by the WND News Center.
(WND News Center) — The Georgia prosecutor who created a nearly 100-page indictment against President Donald Trump and more than a dozen others, accusing them of trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in her state, had evidence exonerating multiple defendants at the time she filed the counts, according to a new report.
The case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis essentially complains that there was a criminal conspiracy to change the results. Her agenda includes making telephone calls and meetings illegal, and charging defendants criminally for their First Amendment-protected statements.
In fact, she’s made a massive criminal case based on statements and actions that were identical to Al Gore’s attempt to change the Florida results in 2000, at a time when no one was charged.
Some of the defendants are charged criminally for purportedly representing themselves as “officials,” Republican presidential electors to the Electoral College.
But according to a report at The Federalist, those individuals weren’t representing themselves as “electors,” but only as “Republican nominees for Presidential Elector.”
The report charged that, despite the evidence, Willis is targeting those individuals “in her legal crusade against former President Donald Trump and other Republicans for their lawful contesting of Georgia’s flawed 2020 election.”
Willis’ indictment includes charges against David Shafer, one of Georgia’s 2020 Republican electors, and Ray Smith, who served as one of Trump’s lawyers at the time of the contest.
Willis claims Shafer and others “unlawfully falsely held themselves out” as Georgia’s “duly elected and qualified” presidential electors. And she insists they tried to “mislead” people such as then-Vice President Mike Pence.
But, the report documents, that Willis has had for the entirely of her investigation proof that is not the case.
“A transcript of the Georgia Republican electors’ Dec. 14, 2020, meeting, obtained by The Federalist, explicitly shows the intent behind casting alternate electors was not to impersonate public officers, as Willis alleged, but to lawfully preserve Trump’s legal challenge to the state’s election results. At the meeting’s outset, Shafer specifically noted how he and his fellow Republicans were acting as ‘Republican nominees for Presidential Elector,’ not as ‘duly elected and qualified’ presidential electors,” The Federalist charges.
Shafer explained the legal contest to the election remained pending, so “in order to preserve his rights, it’s important that the Republican nominees for Presidential Elector meet here today and cast their votes.”
The fight in Georgia, in court, was over Georgia’s 16 electoral college votes. They eventually were awarded to Biden in an election marred by massive outside influences.
Those included Mark Zuckerberg’s delivery of $400 million plus to local elections officials who often used the piles of cash to recruit votes from Democrat districts.
The other was the FBI’s election interference, when it urged media corporations to suppress accurate reporting about scandalous evidence from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop about the Biden family’s international business scheming.
A later poll showed that interference likely cost President Trump the election, and those issues now are the subject of multiple congressional investigations. So far what’s had been revealed by those reviews is that the Biden clan took in tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests while Joe Biden was vice president for Barack Obama, mostly for offering no service other than access to Joe Biden.
Further revealed has been an FBI document confirming a source’s claims that there were $5 million bribes to Joe and Hunter Biden each. An impeachment inquiry now is pending.
The defendants in Willis’ case cast their electoral votes for Trump while the state’s Democrats voted for Biden.
Shafer explained to those at the meeting that the only way for a legal fight to continue would be for the meeting to be held and the votes to be cast.
The Federalist explained it’s happened before.
The naming of contingent Republican electors during the 2020 election closely mirrors efforts taken during the 1960 presidential contest between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. As The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland previously reported, a dispute over who won Hawaii’s electoral votes prompted both Kennedy and Nixon electors to cast their votes for their respective candidates. While Hawaii’s acting Republican governor initially certified the election for Nixon, a legal challenge and subsequent court decision resulted in the state’s electoral votes being awarded to Kennedy.
The report explains had a court ultimately ruled for Trump in the Georgia fight, “the alternative electors would have been in place to ensure the will of the Georgia people was exercised.”
Shafer, at the time, pointed out that the vote was being held because “the contest of the election in Georgia is ongoing.”
Smith noted that to not hold the meeting would be to abandon any challenge in court.
“The revelations unearthed in the transcript raise a significant question: If Willis was in possession of the transcript prior to Aug. 14, why did she charge Shafer and Smith for allegedly partaking in a ‘conspiracy’ to overturn Georgia’s 2020 election results when the aforementioned document shows otherwise?” The Federalist asked.
Further, the report notes that court officials in Fulton County delayed hearing Trump’s legal challenges until after Congress certified Biden the winner of the 2020 election, a delay that appears to violate the Constitution.
The report continued, “It’s worth mentioning that evidence unearthed following the 2020 election shows Trump’s legal challenge in Georgia had strong merit, with records indicating there were more illegal votes than Biden’s margin of victory in Georgia. Under state law, Georgians must vote in the county where they reside, unless they changed their residence within 30 days of Election Day.”
The facts are that nearly 35,000 Georgia voters indicated they had moved from one Georgia county to another, but then voted in the 2020 general election in the county from which they had moved, the report said.
Another wrinkle in Willis case is that a judge ordered her not to prosecute one defendant because of a personal conflict of interest: She raised money for his political opponent. By state Supreme Court precedent, she and her office then should have been barred of acting against any of the defendants.
Reprinted with permission from the WND News Center.