Case 1:23-cr-00257-TSC Doc 226 Filed 08/27/24 Web page 14 of 36
34.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Defendant responded, “I do not care a few hyperlink, I do not want it. I’ve a
a lot, [Georgia Secretary of State], I’ve a a lot better hyperlink.”
The Defendant requested about rumors that paper ballots forged within the election
have been being destroyed, and the Georgia Secretary of State’s Counsel
defined to him that the declare had been investigated and was not true.
The Defendant claimed that 5,000 useless folks voted in Georgia, inflicting
the Georgia Secretary of State to reply, “Effectively, Mr. President, the
problem that you’ve is the info you have got is improper. . . . The precise
quantity have been two. Two. Two those who have been useless that voted. And so
[your information]’s improper, that was two.”
The Defendant claimed that 1000’s of out-of-state voters had forged ballots
in Georgia’s election, which the Georgia Secretary of State’s Counsel
refuted, explaining, “We have been going by every of these as effectively, and
these numbers that we acquired, that [Defendant’s counsel] was simply saying,
they don’t seem to be correct. Each one we have been by are those who lived
in Georgia, moved to a unique state, however then moved again to Georgia
legitimately… they moved again in years in the past. This was not like one thing
simply earlier than the election.”
In response to a number of different of the Defendant’s allegations, the Georgia
Secretary of State’s Counsel advised the Defendant that the Georgia Bureau of
Investigation was inspecting all such claims and discovering no advantage to them.
The Defendant stated that he wanted to “discover” 11,780 votes, and insinuated
that the Georgia Secretary of State and his Counsel may very well be topic to
legal prosecution in the event that they failed to search out election fraud as he demanded,
stating, “And you will discover that they are-which is completely unlawful—
it is, it is, it is extra unlawful for you than it’s for them as a result of you recognize what
they did and you are not reporting it. That is a legal, you recognize, that is a
legal offense. And you recognize, you may’t let that occur. That is a giant
danger to you and to [the Georgia Secretary of State’s Counsel], your lawyer.”
The following day, on January 3, the Defendant falsely claimed that the Georgia
Secretary of State had not addressed the Defendant’s allegations, publicly stating that the Georgia
Secretary of State “was unwilling, or unable, to reply questions such because the ‘ballots underneath desk’
rip-off, poll destruction, out of state ‘voters’, useless voters, and extra. He has no clue!”
– 14 –
