'I didn't win the election': Trump admits defeat in session with historians

[LetMyPeopleVote]

41. Your attempt at analysis is WRONG

I have not found your posts worth following and so I did not pay attention to your claimed qualifications. It was clear that you are NOT a member of the Bar which is why your attempts at analysis are so wrong that they are funny. If you want me to pay attention to your posts, then please do NOT post attempts at analysis that are totally WRONG.

Anyone, comparing Glen Kirshner to Glen Greenwald is really sad. It is also clear that as a layperson you do NOT understand the issues.

Glen Kirshner is a litigator who has prosecuted many criminals in the real world and understand legal concepts and your attempt at analysis is simply wrong. Again, there are good reasons why it is illegal for lay persons to attempt to practice law. There is a ton of evidence proving that TFG committed acts that constitute crimes. One of TFG's only defenses is to claim that he really believed that he won and so did not have the required mens rea to have committed the crime. There is a ton of evidence that will be used to show that it is not reasonable for TFG to believe that he won including (i) the fact that his own campaign tolt him that he lost. (ii) Bill Barr told him that there was no fraud, (iii) the govt. official in charge of cyber defenses opined that the 2020 election was the fairest election in history, (iv) 63 court rulings found no fraud, (v) all of the post-election audits have found no fraud, and (vi) TFG has been able to monetize the lies about fraud to raise over $100 million in funds. Glen is pointing out that this admission (and it is an admission under the rules of evidence) will be used with the other evidence.

TFG would be an idiot to take the stand in a criminal trial. TFG has not done well in depositions in civil trials and would not stand up to cross examination in either a criminal or civil trial. If TFG wants to dispute the admission being discussed, he would need to take the stand to advance your amusing argument.

TFG is a layperson who has issues. For example, in a post from yesterday, it was pointed out that TFG on a regular basis confesses to his crimes, See https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016319638

A central feature of Trump’s corruption is that he sometimes confesses to it in public. In this circular wizardry, Trump’s conduct can’t possibly be corrupt if he’s so eager to cop to it openly.

Here Trump appears to blithely confirm he spoke to lawmakers during the insurrection, and suggests there was nothing wrong with those calls. Presto! All wrongdoing goes poof!

That interview may be used by the prosecutor if there is a trial to show that TFG was talking steps to further the attempted insurrection and will be admissible

Again, thank you for proving why the laws prohibiting laypersons from practicing laws are needed. Your attempt at analysis is so bad that it is funny..