Good afternoon, and thank you very much for coming. This is a representative of our legal team. Were representing President Trump and the Trump Campaign. When i finish, Sidney Powell and jenna ellis will follow me, and we will present in brief the evidence weve collected over the last two weeks. Also joseph, jennifer, victoria is here with me. There are a lot more lawyers working on this, but were i guess were the senior lawyers and boris epstein. I guess the best way to describe this is when we began our representation of the president , we certainly were confronted with an anomalous set of results, the president way ahead on election night, 7 or 800,000 in pennsylvania. Somehow he lost pennsylvania. We have statisticians willing to testify thats almost statistically impossible to happen in the period of time it happened. But of course, thats your speculation. As we started investigating, both our investigations and the very patriotic and brave american citizens that have come forward
Recognized we were only telling half of the story. And so with the determination and courage and perseverance, programming was designed by our panelists tonight so that we could tell the whole story of our 18th century community. Blending social history with public history to tell the africanamerican story had never been done before. And quite literally, they were making history. This is the first of three panelist discussions were going to have this year, and i would welcome you to come back on july 5th, where we will look at current programming that focuses on africanamerican stories. And also on october 18th, where we will be focusing on the future. And our panelists at that discussion will be helping us to think about how do we continue to tell this story . For as mitchell said, its really all of our story. I know our panelists well. And they have plenty to share with us. So please let me begin the evening by introducing our moderator. He began his career here at Colonial Williamsb
Programming with designs by our panelists tonight, so that we could tell the whole story of our 18th century community. Blending social history with public history to tell the africanamerican story has never been done before. And quite literally, they were making history. This is the first of three panelist discussions that we are going to have this year. And i would welcome you to come back on july 5, when we will look at current programming that focuses on African American stories, and also on october 18, where we will be focusing on the future, and our panelists at that discussion will be helping us to think about, how do we continue to tell the story . Lawrence mitchell said it really is all of our story. Now i know our panelists well. And they have plenty to share with us. So, please let me begin the evening by introducing our moderator. He began his career here at Colonial Williamsburg as a junior interpreter, and became an active interpreter and manager of the interpreters. And
I think it lines up with the 10 change of other jurisdictions and realizing this was the threshold. We werent sure why it was set the way it was back in 2003. We didnt see a strong justification for that at the time. What was the justification in new york city for 10 . I guess it was they had a substantial white paper done by nyu on the number of individuals that were associated with contractors and business entities in the city that were giving and they had given around 25 of all contributions. We have not been able to do the same analysis that was done by a university working with the Campaign Finance board to complete that. But it seemed to given the sort of similar circumstances between the two cities seemed to be well reasoned. Is that the same argument for why the threshold for the dollar amount in the contract was raised from 50 to 100 . We were able to break that down in our analysis based on the reports we had seen and it appeared to us that the 50,000 threshold was capturing
Otherwise, the discloser would have to change to the individual making the contribution. The committee would be in a better place to report it to us. Are committees liable if donors are not forth coming and fail to inform the committee out of neglect . I think thats i dont think that was the intention of the commission but a policy directive for them to determine. Theres administrative opposed to civil criminal agency, we look at strict liability and dont try to understand the intent. But we look at all the factors for enforcement action and what severity. Page 10 line 9, why is the ownership interest threshold lowered from 20 to 10 . Is there data that supports that change . I think its consistent with the ideas from other jurisdictions, particularly new york citys ban where this was extracted or amended from. I think it lines up with the 10 change of other jurisdictions and realizing this was the threshold. We werent sure why it was set the way it was back in 2003. We didnt see a str