busy. So I didn't really have time for, you know.
Q So staying in exhibit 26, can you now go to page 238? And on the bottom half of the page, it appears that you're texting Ms. Kimberly Fletcher.
A Yeah.
Q So at 2:38, or as it's here 1438. Sorry. I am just translating the 24-hour clock there. It looks like you say, "POTUS is not ignorant of what his words will do. Wish it didn't happen, but understand the people and I won't denounce them." So reading this text, is it fair to say that President Trump's words were influential to his supporters?
A The short answer is no, because we have a wise Supreme Court that came out with a case called Brandenburg v. Ohio which helped us, you know—and I say "us" as in human civilization—establish jurisprudence about, you know, what is a tool of rhetoric, and then what is incitement. And the Supreme Court, you know, tried to help guide us on that philosophical journey.
What I will tell you about this text is, this text was sent when I didn't know some of the worst that had happened. So I'm specifically referencing, you know, aggressive stuff that was, you know, not good, not good at all. Trespassing stuff, not good at all. Being on the scaffolding, stupid, stupid and reckless.
But I will tell you that, you know, no one has the authority outside of a judge or a jury to determine the answer to your question. I certainly don't. But because this text can be used against what—what did I mean, is I was hurt. I was hurt. I was frustrated. And, you know, at one point, what I want to point out is, if you scroll up on those text messages, you know, it's almost like what happened? Ali, this is a madhouse.
And I'm getting this flurry of text message that spontaneous come in because of the jammers that were put up. And I'm thinking, like, like, I can't possibly be responsible
