Smith's claim about no hacked election systems could boomerang on him during Trump case

Just The News ^ | 8/1/23 | Ben Whedon

[CFW]

Special Counsel Jack Smith's Tuesday indictment of former President Donald Trump contends that he knew his claims of election fraud were false and pushed them anyway, but at least one instance Smith cites to make that claim could backfire on him in a big way.

The indictment includes several examples of Trump's supporters and and officials telling him that his claims were false as evidence that Trump knowingly pursued false claims. Among those instances cited is a statement from Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) that Trump created claiming that no evidence supported claims of compromised voting systems.

[embedded link to indictment]

"The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ('CISA')–whose existence the Defendant signed into law to protect the nation's cybersecurity infrastructure from attack–joined an official multi-agency statement that there was no evidence any voting system had been compromised and that declared the 2020 election 'the most secure in American history,'" the indictment reads. "Days later, after the CISA Director–whom the Defendant had appointed–announced publicly that election security experts were in agreement that claims of computer-based election fraud were unsubstantiated, the Defendant fired him."

[CFW]

"Potentially undercutting that example, however, was a federal indictment from roughly a year later accusing a pair of Iranian hackers of successfully hacking into a state computer election system, subsequently stealing voter data, and using that material to intimidate Republican lawmakers."

[nopardons]

BTTT

[Michael.SF.]

There is another problem with the statement ('Most Secure in history'): It was made on Nov. 13, 2020, nine days after the election. Votes were still being counted and many states had not yet certified the election results.

The statement was made with no evidence of support.

"2020 Most Secure in History"

[Reno89519]

Yes, this seems to open to door to litigating the election. At a minimum, Trump just needs to show one state where the results appear bad, better several critical states, to establish reasonable doubt. What is Smith to do, prove them wrong? Thought crimes.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Most of the cases questioning matching were dismissed over standing so this issue has never really been appropriately litigated. Something President Word Salad had failed to consistently point out and get into the public discussion.

[Tench_Coxe]

Just spitballing here...

Watch Smith and the judge try to suppress the evidence, which on the record as to actually have happened.
And if a jury still convicts on that charge despite being shown the evidence, I can't imagine that wouldn't be appealed.

[Tennessee Nana]

Since its up to Smith’s office to prove the case against President Trump dont they have to examine every nuance of the election process and vote counting in every state and territory to announce them all clean and free of error ???

How can they say President Trump is in the wrong if thats not done ???

[kiryandil]

All this Jack "Javert" Smith stuff is total fiction, and a waste of time to distract people.

Screw this banana republic. Their fake government better stay out of my face.

[william clark]

There’s no way that judge will allow any such discovery evidence.

[FreedBird]

The Judge has Conflict of Interests.

[Gay State Conservative]

If this case goes to a jury DJT *will* be convicted on all charges.

[sima_yi]

...Trump just needs to show one state where the results appear bad,...

Antrim County, Michigan

[vivenne]

It will be appealed but long after the damage is done. Smith knows this is bogus but a DC judge and jury will convict Trump of picking his nose and the election will be thrown. Mission accomplished.

[vivenne]

Because they system in DC is rigged. Smith could indict Trump of picking his nose on J6 and the DC jury will convict him.

[PUGACHEV]

Many trials, if not most, are won or lost on interpretations of the Federal Rules of Evidence. A trial judge has extreme latitude in what they can admit or not. In a case like this, where the judge alleged to be partial to the prosecution, that can result in decisions which are not actually based on what the ordinary person would consider evidence. It could happen here that a different interpretation of what is admissible would result in proof that the election was or was not decided by fraud.

FWIW, and IMHO, this case will be decided on appeal to the Supreme Court and forget about the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. At that point, the substantive issue of election fraud will be so muddled as to be useless to any fair observer.

[william clark]

Absolutely, which is why she was chosen for the Trump case. She won’t have the judicial integrity to recuse herself.

[Eleutheria5]

[fuzzylogic]

Exactly, they’re the ones asserting that there was NO FRAUD. Sorry, there’s ALWAYS SOME FRAUD. To declare NO FRAUD is unknowable, they’re as wrong to assert that as fact just as their claim Trump is wrong to assert there was.

Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. Clearly there were lots of shenanigans going on during election night. To say it is a crime to assert a belief is absurd.

[smokingfrog]

Yep. As soon as joE seemingly had the necessary electoral votes, it was declared to be the most fabulously secure election in the history of mankind.

Federal election infrastructure officials said in a joint statement on Thursday that the 2020 election was the "most secure in American history." Meanwhile, President-elect Biden picked up 11 more Electoral College votes as CBS News projected he had won Arizona, giving him a 73 vote margin over President Trump and putting him well over the 270 electoral vote threshold with a total of 290 projected votes.

[Missouri gal]

Defense's right of discovery will be a bitch for banana republican Jack S*it*.

I'd love to see some of the videos played in court, including the trash truck loading ballots right out of the ballot boxes in the early morning hours, the nationwide count changing by a switch of 12 thousand-plus votes every 30 seconds for hours, and a personal favorite, Ruby Freeman and daughter and fellow rats re-running ballots after kicking out the monitors.

Go ahead and gaslight, Dems. You will always be rats forever.