Document in an easy to read format: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.252.0.pdf

Privately, the defendant told advisors--included [redacted] Campaign personnel, [redacted] (a White House staffer and Campaign volunteer), and [redacted] (the Vice President's Chief of Staff) that in such a scenario, he would simply declare victory before all ballots were counted and any winner was projected. Publicly, the defendant began to plant the seeds of that false declaration. In the months leading up to the election, he refused to say whether he would accept the election results, insisted that he could lose the election only because of fraud, falsely claimed that mail-in ballots were inherently fraudulent, and asserted that only votes counted by election day were valid.

For instance:

• In an interview on July 19, 2020, when asked repeatedly if he would accept the results of the election, the defendant said he would “have to see” and “it depends.” 5
• On July 30, despite having voted by mail himself earlier that year, the defendant suggested that widespread mail-in voting provided cause for delaying the election, tweeting, “With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote???” 6
• In an interview on August 2, the defendant claimed, without any basis, that “[t]here is no way you can go through a mail-in vote without massive cheating.” 7
• At a campaign event in Wisconsin on August 17, the defendant told his supporters,“[t]he only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged, remember that. It’s the only way we’re going to lose this election, so we have to be very careful.” 8
• In his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on August 24, the defendant said that “[t]he only way they can take this election away from us is if this is a rigged election.” 9
• On October 27, during remarks regarding his campaign, the defendant said, “[i]t would be very, very proper and very nice if a winner were declared on November 3rd, instead of counting ballots for two weeks, which is totally inappropriate, and I don’t believe that that’s by our laws. I don’t believe that. So we’ll see what happens.” 10
• The defendant said this despite—or perhaps because—his private advisors had informed him that it was unlikely that the winner of the election would be declared on November 3.

Note: Any typos are my own, I had to retype half of it.