The tweet cited in the [Mediaite] article was from Jan. 3, 2021 based on the Washington Post account, which indicated that Trump told the officials to just “find” the votes. The transcript presented a sharply different context and meaning. The next day, I gave interviews on those differences and I then ran a column stating that the transcript shows a clear alternative meaning. Indeed, I continued to write about the errors in the original Post account of the calls. To its credit, the Post admitted the errors in its original story. I stated, as I have continued to state, that reasonable people can disagree on that meaning.

I continued to criticize the call (as I did this week) but stressed that the transcript offers a viable and compelling defense. I made that observation the same week as the cited tweet. There was no change or recent evolution of my views on the call. I actually later wrote a column on the errors in the Post account of the calls.

Putting aside my statement the next day in light of the transcript, there is also a difference between criticism of the language and the view of language as part of a criminal case. After reading the full transcript, I concluded that that defense is strong and that Trump was referring to what he needed to overcome the deficit in votes. Any “evolution” that occurred was limited to the span a few hours between the erroneous Post article and my view of language in context in 2021.

[Mediaite is preparing a note or a correction, according to Turley, which would be the appropriate remedy. We all make mistakes; correcting them quickly is essential. — Ed]