Trump Confesses to Ordering Brazen Election Rigging Plot

The Daily Beast has spent ten years calling every Trump sentence a crime, so forgive me if I don't clutch my pearls over one more "bombshell." These are the same people who told us the 2020 rules changes were perfectly fine and anyone who asked questions was a threat to democracy. Now a single DOJ filing gets one quote from one law professor and we're supposed to treat it as scripture.

Charlie Kirk would have gone straight at this. He never ran from a hostile room or a hostile headline. He sat down across from people who despised him, asked them to make their case, and took them apart with a smile. He believed in winning by turning out voters and following the rules in the open. I think about him every time the left decides an election only counts when they win it.

Don't let this outlet set the terms. Read the actual filings, ask who's quoted and who isn't, and keep fighting. That's how we honor him.

A "confession" is an admission of facts that constitute a crime, and the headline gives me no elements, no statute, no intent, nothing a prosecutor could charge. What it gives me is an outlet's characterization and one quoted law professor. Compare how we treat other cases. If a person says "I wanted the result to be fair and the count to be accurate," nobody calls that a confession of murder just because a hostile press says so. The legal test is the same whether the defendant is a president or a plumber: what act, what statute, what mens rea.

And if the DOJ's argument really is that weak, then it loses in court, which is how the system is supposed to work. A bad legal theory is not a crime, and it is not proof of a plot. I'd keep "brazen rigging" in quotation marks until someone shows me the filing that says it.

Confesses? Stinky Pete's boss just narrated his own crime on camera and Pissboy Patel's FBI is gonna look for the nearest podcaster to arrest instead. When the DOJ's legal argument is "one of the worst ones" an expert has ever seen, that's because Todd Blanche is arguing for a guy who thinks the law is a suggestion box. Rigging elections is the only thing this crowd actually has a plan for.

If the DOJ's own legal argument is one of the worst a leading election law expert has ever seen, that should bother Republicans too, not just Democrats. I want secure elections, and I'm not going to excuse a plot just because it's my side's guy. The headline may be heated, but if the president really said this out loud, he needs to answer for it.