Yes, the
evidence is publicly available, which after all this time with no prosecution suggests that the
law was not technically broken, or not clearly enough to make a case stick. The 'experts' cited in that article don't seem particularly credible, at least as a whole; at least three of them were suggesting that Trump was asking to find 11,780 votes
for him, which is obviously and unequivocally incorrect. Obvious from the full transcript at least; if they had the transcript, then at least those three 'experts' (Kreis, Griffin, Levitt) were either sloppy or flat-out lying... and if they were pontificating on the subject without all the information then their opinions are equally dubious. Trump's unhinged train of thought is a little hard to follow, but regarding the key line "I just want to find 11,780 votes" he immediately finishes the sentence "which is one more than we have because we won the state" - clearly not (in that instant) talking about changing his vote count, but Biden's. 'Experts' who obfuscate on that 'little detail' simply have no credibility whatsoever, and your article cites three of them, at least!
In
more complete context:
In between the rambling, the train of thought building towards that key line is more or less clear; there are ineligible ballots, they're shredding the fraudulent ballots, why won't you let us find the ineligible ballots?
And as I said, amidst all the other nonsense on at least one point Trump was probably correct; if they went over them with a fine-tooth comb comparing signatures from "two years ago, four years ago, six years ago" they'd easily find 'discrepancies' by which to claim an ineligible ballot. They would easily find their 11,780 supposedly-ineligible Biden ballots if they were allowed to do their one-sided hatchet job.
The question is did he
technically break the law by pressing for permission to do this biased 'recount'? The federal law cited by your article, which "
makes it illegal to attempt to “deprive or defraud” people of a “fair and impartially conducted election process”," simply would not apply
as far as I can see: It specifically enumerates the ways in which that deprivation of a fair election will be illegal, and the closest it comes is fraud through "tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent"... but Trump's request here was to unfairly
exclude technically-ineligible ballots in a one-sided manner, not to unfairly tabulate fraudulent ones. Whether by accident or by design, on face value that seems to be a loophole he found.
Maybe there's some other law that he broke, but again, the absence of prosecution implies otherwise. Maybe you should be criticizing the law as it stands, rather than the AG?