Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had some curious questions to ask Georgia election official, Gabriel Sterling as he testified in court Tuesday. She especially wanted to know if he enjoyed some of the more colorful jabs directed at him by Trump supporters on social media.
She was in court to make it clear that she believes Harrison Floyd, one of former President Donald Trump’s co-defendants in the ever-growing election interference case should have his bond revoked, Mediaite reports. Willis argued that Floyd, a former leader in the organization Black Voices for Trump, was attempting witness intimidation and was trying to contact other co-defendants in the case, something that’s against the terms of his bail.
Sterling became well-known for vehemently defending the integrity of Georgia elections and that led Willis to ask him to review some of the posts Floyd made and tell the court whether he was aware of them or not.
That led to this exchange:
Willis: And also, if someone tagged at Georgia Secretary of State, is that something that a member of the secretary of state’s office to include, you would receive?
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.Y
Willis: Okay. And moving on to state’s exhibit number seven. Have you, in fact, seen this post? Thanks. Exhibit number seven.
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.
Willis: And is that because you were tagged at Gabriel Sterling?
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.
Willis: I’m moving on to State’s exhibit number nine. Are you familiar with State’s exhibit nine?
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.
Willis: And is that because because it was tagged at Georgia Secretary of State?
Sterling: Yes, ma’am.
Willis: Is that what allows these are these tags would allow these messages to communicate with you?
Sterling: When you’re tagged that shows up in your feed of items that mention you. So, yes.
And then after a slight preamble, Willis asked the million-dollar question:
“Are you familiar with state’s exhibit number eight? yes, ma’am. and is that again, because you were tagged both georgia’s secretary of state and gabe gabriel sterling? yes, ma’am. And do you enjoy being called a piece of fecal matter?
Sterling responded, “No, ma’am.”
But apparently, this isn’t the first go-round for Sterling, adding this isn’t the first time he and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger have dealt with such insults.
We’ve really reached a new low when respected state officials are insulted by Trump supporters for not doing something illegal.
We reached a new low in 2016. We’ve been descending into Hell ever since.
in maga land, fecal matters.
except their king shit of turd island
doesn’t deal in fecal matter as much
he deals in fecal flow.
👇🏻
I would appreciate some context. Does ‘tags’ and ‘tagged’ refer to the mention of a person’s name (in this case Sterling’s) in the body of a communication like a letter or email, or are they just copied on it?
Without seeing the exhibits (posts) it’s a little difficult to follow.
Tagging someone’s twitter handle on a Twitter tweet ensures that every tweep who thereafter retweets that post will be automatically spreading (gaslighting) that post to their followers feeds and anyone else picked up by the Twitter algorithm. Also, if you are tagged, you will receive every viral gaslighted post thereafter as a notification. It’s a very easy & simple way to magnify hate speech against someone to thousands and thousands on twitter very rapidly. So it’s more than just mentioning one’s name & yes the person is copied every time on the hateful retreats.
Trump.supporters are bullies, which is probably protected by the first amendment– unless the bullying consists of a threat. Calling someone derogatory names –the n-word, the ex-wife for a,woman’s is unpleasant but doesn’t do actual.harm. That changes when someone says or writes,”Someone is gonna take you out, n-word.” Or “Since your husband won’t teach you how a,woman should behave, you c-word, A man like me will have to. You deserve to be tapes and beaten with an inch of your life.” It would be up.to a judge to decide if it constitutes a,direct terroristic threat or just some @$$hole mouthing off,which is nasty but not illegal.
The multi-million dollar Judgments against neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin for directing his followers through his publication Der Stormer to troll specific Jews and Blacks with death threats by phone calls, e-mails and on social media were determined by Jury & Judges to be illegal coordinated intimidation. Case law from these illegal acts demonstrate that Hate speech is not protected by the 1st Amendment when it can be proven it was coordinated or ordered by a person of group of persons with the intent of inflicting harm.
and boy don’t you know, those who speak
the worst of words are not speaking in jest.
they may have spoke lightly at first but as trial balloons are
floated along the way, the more wicked becomes
what they say.