Democracy on Trial: Robert Ray (interview) | FRONTLINE

44 thoughts on “Democracy on Trial: Robert Ray (interview) | FRONTLINE”

1. This interview is being published as part of FRONTLINE’s Transparency Project, an effort to open up the source material behind our documentaries. Explore more interviews from "Democracy on Trial" here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_pPc6-qR9ZyWnFlH6G5Ph_r_PKmNs0wG

2. “Fight like hejj” LOL How old is this interviewer?

3. How come the interviewer grilled this lawyer who simply gives a legal opinion lefties want but didn’t grill anybody else he interviewed? that’s how you look for bias look at what they cut out of his interview and what they left in that’s how you look for bias noticed the fact that in the fine print they say that it was edited for claritywell I would look at that for bias too but I can’t cause they cut that out

4. The state government mandated audit of the Georgia election found memory cards in 5 of Georgia’s 165 counties, all within 50 miles of Atlanta and Stacy Abrams territory but that is just a coincidence. They were brand new Dominion voting machines and Dominion’s contract required them to train the county elections officials on using their equipment. Part of using their equipment is making sure you download the memory cards so that people votes actually count. Only the Atlanta Constitution General a Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper wrote an article about this right after the election I came up with a list of 10 questions after reading that article and I emailed them to Brad Raffensberger‘s office as the Georgia Secretary of State they said they would answer all questions within 48 hours I also phoned it’s been over four years and despite multiple attempts and they’ve never answered one single question just like after a major plane crash the NTSB goes in and doesn’t investigation to hopefully prevent the crash from happening again we’re going to have future presidential elections where we have several swing states that will decide the election And this should not happen again but I don’t know why it happened the first time because there doesn’t seem to have been investigation one person was fired in one county but the county elections offices operate separately so it’s not gonna do any good to file one person in one county They had nothing to do with the other four counties is it just a coincidence that four of the five counties counties leaned toward Trump and the one that didn’t was neutral. I’m not saying Trump was cheated even in Georgia I’m saying we don’t know I’m saying there were problems that we don’t want to recur regards of who they hurt in a future election and I’m saying this was all swept under the rug cause it would benefit Trump just like he was all swept under the rug that Sully violated sterile cockpit rules And sally should’ve known to flip the ditch switch since he was ditching in the water that shouldn’t of been a memory item that should’ve been a memory item if it wasn’t a memory item it should be made a memory item but it wasn’t nothing was changed nothing was learned from that if somebody had to die before we learned from the plane crash no. Why can’t we learn from the problems that George had with the voting machines they just happen to be dominion voting machines? It is mind-boggling to me that fox settle for so much money in spite of these votes not being downloaded these memory cards dominion was responsible for training the elections officials and clearly they did a lousy job they got five of them didn’t do it right Dominion didn’t just make the machines their contract require them to train the workers on how to use them so dominion screwed up there’s no question about that somebody at Dominion screwed up whoever trained the ones near Atlanta screwed up the others may have done a fantastic job but those ones screwed up was an accident or did they purposely not train them in a way that they would remember to download the memory cards They should’ve designed a voting system where you can’t forget to download the memory cards just like there’s planes where you can’t forget to do certain things without getting a warning.

5. Naturally the biased and woke current version of Frontline left most of this guy’s interview on the cutting room floor even though he was the only interviewee that said anything that would benefit Trump. Think about that. And one of the few if not the only things that he said that wouldn’t benefit Trump, they put in the documentary

6. Michael Kurt doesn’t think he should trust the voters to make the right decision. He thinks he should put a little undue influence on that put a finger on the scales. Unfortunately PBS love that and that’s why they hired his company to make this documentary. That’s right folks Michael kurke doesn’t work for Frontline anymore he has his own company a production company and he has a no bid contract with Frontline

7. Biden pardoned everybody but himself because he has dementia and it was actually whoever was running the country that pardoned everybody because he was incapable due to his dementia. We need to select committee composed almost exclusively of Republicans to investigate VANS dementia who was running the country are these pardons valid because if Biden was incapable of making those decisions who made them and they don’t have the power of the pardon

8. Apparently Michael Kirk has a no bid contract with Frontline just like Gabriel Sterling had a no bid contract as an independent contractor with the state of Georgia during the 2020 election

9. I would sure love to take a documentary film class from Michael Kirk. I’ve got lots of questions I wanna ask that man.

10. Very interesting the parts that they chose from his interview versus the parts that they left out in the documentary. this is the only person that said things that benefit Trump so you would think they would include a lot of what he says but the only thing I remember them including was him saying that Trump could pardon himself if he wins the . Instead they included a whole bunch of irrelevant self serving, self back patting, aggrandizement by Gabriel Sterling the drama queen, who was not an election official during that election, but who is a liar.

11. How come there’s no interview of Brad Raffensperger?

12. I didn’t know the interviewer Mike Weiser knew that the word why existed. Seriously. He never asked any of the anti-Trump people that he interviewed why. He just took them at their word

13. Ray seems to believe that someone can allege fraud, and it is the responsibility of others to disprove the assertion.

    We re-elected a demagogue now, because we have neglected systemic flaws in our society for so long that people have lost trust in institutions. Demagogues can gain traction by exploiting anger and resentment. We should not be surprised that our willingness to accept a dishonest market and a dysfunctional politics has caused an erosion of confidence in institutions.

14. Sycophant

15. Ray’s assertions of a better path forward are pure nonsense.

    First, Ray claims that the EAC being clarified in 2022 displays the plausible validity of John Eastman’s legal theory at the time, and thus no criminal wrongdoing could have occurred. But this is not in accordance with the facts. Eastman discusses this very issue in his second memo – where he posits that the legal validity of his theory is largely irrelevant, because the Supreme Court would refuse to hear the case based upon the “Political Questions” doctrine.

    During the J6 hearings Greg Jacob, Pence Chief of Staff, recalls a conversation he had with Eastman in which Eastman hand waves the Supreme Court, saying the issue will never get there. Jacob contests that, and points out the theory would lose, 9-0. Eastman first replies “it’d be 7-2,” but eventually agrees with Jacob’s contention.

    If I rob a bank under the impression the cops won’t pursue me and no court would ever hear my case, robbing the bank remains a crime. If your legal theory relies upon the federal court simply abdicating responsibility, it’s not a legal theory, it’s a crime.

    Second, Ray continually bemoans that this issue is divisive, and states that an election should be sufficient to remedy the situation. But wait – this doesn’t make any sense. The election was carried out. Trump lost. If he had gotten his way, Pence would have turned his win into a loss. Then, any potential political successor would merely need to be named by Pence in 2024, and on and on. What election does Ray think would have been allowed to hold if Trump had succeeded? I fail to see a compelling reason, absent violent force, that the party in power wouldn’t grant itself continuous power, in perpetuity.

    People in Ray’s camp would say oh, that would never happen! Just like they said Trump was a normal president. Just like they said Trump would concede. Just like they said Trump wouldn’t impede the peaceful transition. Absolute power – granted by Pence’s decision – corrupts absolutely. Yet reasonable people are meant to assume Donald Trump would allow himself or his chosen successor to lose? This is illogical.

    The ONLY reason someone like Trump has a chance at a second term is because of people like Robert Ray. They lie. They obfuscate. They divert. They corrupt. They’ll do whatever it takes to confuse the public on the veracity of the facts of Trump’s attempt to overturn the election.

    I’m glad I listened to the full thing through, at least to be reminded how deep the rot inside the Republican Party runs. God help us.

16. Conservatives: “We must have limited government. We must protect the natural rights of all citizens. We must have law and order!”

    Also conservatives:

17. lawyers are going overboard with pardon rules. Fed Paper #69, third paragraph states a person elected to office shall hold the office for four years and be re-elected as often as the people see fit. (not exact wording otherwise YouTube will flag it for plagiarism) BUT we have a two term limit nowadays. The reason I mentioned this lawyers tend to get caught in the moment believing when it comes to the Constitution, we need to follow the laws of 1789. But the Founder wrote the Constitution as a framework for our government to follow for years to come. When new laws are introduced these laws cannot violate the Constitution, except when amended. 

    Fourth paragraph, procedure if the president was found for treason, like Trump. impeachment, or bribery, then convected in the court of law. 

    Sixth paragraph, The reason for impeachment, the president cannot be PARDON if found guilty of treason, or bribery. Since Trump is being tried for treason he does not have the power to pardon the other members of his staff for the same crime.
    The Constitution covers current laws, just by using common sense judgement. Paper #69 shows no man is above the law or is a king.

18. Rusty Bowers could teach them all about character, integrity, and courage. Criminals.

19. A Psychopath test should be required before one can be nominated for the candidacy of President. Trump would probably score 30 or higher (psycho). Mental illness was unknown when the Constitution was written thus there is no legal requirement of competency to serve as president. The Constitution lacks good mental health as a firm legal requirement as a criteria for a president.

20. How can a guy talk so much, yet say so little…? I give Frontline credit for trying, but this guy is a mouthpiece for the trump camp, offering nothing of substance… "You have to be careful about trying to turn that into criminal intent…" Really? LOL

21. He won’t listen to anyones advice

22. Where’s the proof that there was fraud?

23. I practiced with Robert Ray at a big law firm (based in Texas) for 3.5 years. He was widely known as a partisan hack, devoted to shilling “legal opinions” for Fox News hits.

24. There is absolutely no way that Joe Biden received 81 million votes

25. Screw that dope.

26. I don’t trust this man!

27. Is there anywhere in this flood of words and nonsense that this 'lawyer' notes that he realized at some (early) point that Donald J. Trump is utterly insane? Bonkers? Hopelessly unfit for office? No? I didn't think so. This entire interview is him trying to buy back his place in society, after kowtowing to an insane asylum masquerading as the Oval Office.

28. If Trump and his lawyers didn't do anything wrong why do they need immunity to testify??

29. I am just going to say here irony. Around the 28:00 minute mark the lawyer tells people "they need to get over it" concerning the POTUS has more power or rights than most people. But he spent 5 minutes defending the President not getting over losing the election results. Gtfoh

30. Trump basically told any Republicans that if they were apart of the congressional hearing to investigate the crimes he was thought to be apart of he would mAke sure they lost come election time. He did. So bipartisanship was out the window.

31. This guy is…an issue. Someone like him will be behind the next successful right wing overthrow of the Constitution and our democracy.

32. He refers to trump as “President “ too many times. Can’t finish the video. No credibility here with this guy

33. He is EXACTLY the kind of attorney that DJT would hire…

34. First Off….MICRO-PENIS ANNND…..I bet he has a TON of friends….is he Married or have kids…uffff…the only thing I could take away from this HOstile Butt-hurt interview….he made QUICK work of our criminal Justice system flaws in the first few minutes…I bet he is a damn good attorney…..if he is using ACTUAL FACTS…

35. A sewer in a suit.

36. The statement that sums up the "stolen election" said by The former NY Mayor….. "We have a lot of theories, we just don't have any evidence" – Rudy Guiliani. NO EVIDENCE OF A STOLEN ELECTION. How can one man shout this for 4 years and still ,……no evidence….

37. I was kind of okay with hearing this guy out until he said… “it’s just an ask…” Obviously a dishonest perspective. I sure hope that the jury can see through such blatant obfuscations of the truth.

38. Steve Bannon gave the plan away about saying the election was going to be rigged even before they even knew he had lost,defeat was never going to be admitted,they actually thought it was a good chance Trump would loose after all the ballots were counted, some of these interviews just get rolled over.

39. Did he have the same argument when he investigated Whitewater? The argument that there was no cross examination????

    Highly doubt that!

    Give me a break

40. Everyone is entitled to a robust defense in this country, even a narcissistic jerk whose selfishness caused him to commit insurrection against the government and erode faith in our institutions.

41. This guy is soooo full of gas. Ummm, Gee….lemme think, "proving intent…." huh, gosh, what could Trumps intent have been? Because you know, insurrection, as a "white collar crime" is such a sticky wicket, isn't it? 26:54
    And, witnesses under cross examination, boy, trying to decode a barely literate guy with no beltway experience like Bill Barr (or some such person) would take a real stretch.
    Last, any attorney of Trumps choosing so far- we already know- is akin to a reincarnation of Clarence Darrow.
    Gimme a break.

42. This guy is a word twister at best. Not very well thought out.

43. Donald trumps crime is not that he thought he won ..it lies in the fact that he tried to overturn the election results . Duh

44. Mr Ray kept repeating that it should be settled by the vote. That was done. The majority said no to Mr. Trump. When he and his cohorts used every scheme, legal, illegal and violent, to overturn the election, it is time for a jury to hear every sorid tale of what, where, and how they did it. Too even allow him anywhere near the White House again is despicable.

Comments are closed.