Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

[Breccia]

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Well, for one, not the court that just ruled he's as full of shit as he's full of nacho cheese.

Again, until Trump says under oath that he declassified them, the things he says in public not under oath are irrelevant. I didn't bother posting anything about the classification status from the ruling, but the judges were lighter on that part, and it still boiled down to "lol no".

I'm not great at reading legal-ese, but the court also seemed to take specific issue with "Plaintiff says we lack standing". I don't know if there was any wiggle room for that to affect their ruling, it was pretty much textbook already, but I can't imagine a stupider thing to do when you're objectively guilty than to piss off the judge(s).

[cubby]

There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.

Guess who just said this on Sean Hannity?

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

And, because Donnie Dipshit is an absolute fucking moron, that statement can be used against him in a court of law. Literally.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, for one, not the court that just ruled he's as full of shit as he's full of nacho cheese.

Again, until Trump says under oath that he declassified them, the things he says in public not under oath are irrelevant. I didn't bother posting anything about the classification status from the ruling, but the judges were lighter on that part, and it still boiled down to "lol no".

I'm not great at reading legal-ese, but the court also seemed to take specific issue with "Plaintiff says we lack standing". I don't know if there was any wiggle room for that to affect their ruling, it was pretty much textbook already, but I can't imagine a stupider thing to do when you're objectively guilty than to piss off the judge(s).

Unfortunately for Trump, the statements he makes in public can be used against him. And would fall under an exception to the FRCP's hearsay rule, "statements against ones own interest". The trap continues to close.

[Breccia]

Unfortunately for Trump, the statements he makes in public can be used against him.

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

[Kaleredar]

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

I mean, if you say "I totally killed that guy" in public I think the prosecution would be able to bring it up at the murder trial.


I hope Trump's lawyers all did a collective facepalm when they heard him say that.

This is why getting Trump on the stand is so imperative. He basically can't not incriminate himself. And he's such a fragile snowflake I think a simple matter of requisite media talking heads saying "Trump is a coward for not taking the stand, only guilty people plead the fifth, why doesn't he speak?" would be enough to goad him into doing it, despite what I'm sure are constant reminders from his lawyers that "the one thing you do not do is take the stand."

Because they know as well as the rest of us that if he does, it's game over for him.

[Breccia]

"the one thing you do not do is take the stand."

And, quite frankly, even not taking the stand, is hurting him. In about 24 hours, we saw both the "special master" saying Trump had not actually said anything meaningful about classification status, and the bitchslap of that appeals ruling saying "he hasn't cited XXX" like six times.

Not that this part matters, because neither Executive Privilege nor classification has any effect here, actually wait hold on.

We also doubt that Plaintiff risks irreparable injury in the form of disclosure of privileged information; he has not, for example, asserted attorney-client privilege over any of the classified documents.

I knew it was in there somewhere. Anyhow not that this part matters, but, Trump could try to throw yet more people under the bus and try to exploit a loophole along the lines of "I told XXX that they were declassified but he didn't fill out the paperwork, it's not my fault". As his lawyers said, maybe he could have done that or a related defense at trial. He hasn't yet.

Until Trump actually asserts privilege and/or declassification under oath, his public statements are meaningless his public statements can apparently be used against him in court. The pile of evidence just got ten feet higher.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, guess who doesn't know that a declassification process even exists?

Oh, about that:

Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these documents when he was President. But the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified. And before the special master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents. See Doc. No. 97 at 2–3., Sept. 19, 2022, letter from James M. Trusty, et al., to Special Master Raymond J. Dearie, at 2–3. In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them

Resisted. The ruling points out, not only is there no evidence of declassification, but also, Trump was asked to provide it and refused. Because Trump taking the stand is suicide.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, if Trump and family, especially his family, take financial hit, I'm all for it.

It's been a busy day, but this part needs to be clarified before it gets lost: NYState is not suing Trump Org, they are suing Trump directly.

[cubby]

...wait, for realsies? Does....does he know that?

Yes, public statements, excited utterances, statements against ones own interest, and a number of other niche exceptions to the hearsay law are possible admissions of evidence by the DoJ. If Trump is saying he declassified the documents in a sworn statement, and the DoJ proves Trump lied with contrary statements, he could face perjury charges.

Trump doesn't know much when it comes to the law.

[postman1782]

Lindell, on his quest to try and make a copy of everything else that someone else has made and call it My something, cannot find or retain people to sell stuff on his new platform, MyStore. At least he cannot use MySpace, that was already taken and was a precursor to Facebook.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...edcb1283a521c9

Did you see who he allied with to get pillows sold? He gave a discount code to Vincent James. If people don't remember who that fucker is, he is the dumbass that posed with Tim Pool hiding in a corner after a Nazi rally in 2017.



The people in the picture, of course, Tim Pool is the dumbass in the corner trying to hide, Vincent James is the moron in the middle straight back, off to the left is literal Nazi bitch Brittany Pettibone Sellner, she married a literal Nazi that was kicked out of the UK Martin Sellner, directly behind her is one of the organizers of the Unite the Right rally James Allsup, oh and don't forget the moron in the beard and blonde dyed hair on the right is Baked Alaska, currently waiting sentencing I believe still for his part in the J6 insurrection.


FYI NSFW speech from the Nazi, but here is the video of him trying to get Vincent James to sell his dumbass pillows:

[Mekh]

Oh, man.

DOJ investigating Mike Lindell over potential identity theft

Not even Mike Lindell wants to be Mike Lindell.

[Breccia]

If Trump is saying he declassified the documents in a sworn statement, and the DoJ proves Trump lied with contrary statements, he could face perjury charges.

So, he'd have to admit he lied to the American people to avoid jail time.

- - - Updated - - -

As expected: Trump says the war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened if he was still in the WH.

"It's simple," he didn't say but would have if he was telling the truth, "I would have blackmailed Ukraine into surrendering. You heard the phone call, you saw me buddy up to Putin, it's 100% in character I would have done exactly that."

He also claims Putin isn't bluffing about using nukes, but I think that's just sociopathic projection.

[Flarelaine]

So, he'd have to admit he lied to the American people to avoid jail time.

- - - Updated - - -

As expected: Trump says the war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened if he was still in the WH.

"It's simple," he didn't say but would have if he was telling the truth, "I would have blackmailed Ukraine into surrendering. You heard the phone call, you saw me buddy up to Putin, it's 100% in character I would have done exactly that."

He also claims Putin isn't bluffing about using nukes, but I think that's just sociopathic projection.

I just thought a bit about that. You know, Ukraine would be doomed anyway but after the past half year I'm not sure he could have blackmailed them into surrendering. He could have helped Putin by withholding aid, to be sure, but I don't see Zelensky going down without a fight.

And I'd also bet that even though fatso could have decided to withhold all the intel Biden laid on the table in the weeks before the invasion, intel that made sure everyone knew what's up (and even more intel that was simply shown to Ukraine), somehow that stuff would have ended up on a fancy desk in Kyiv.

[Poopymonster]

Man they really take a dump on this privilege argument, lol. Damn.

It's almost like they were asked ARE YOU INVOKING PRIVILEGE and replied "Maybe, maybe not. Bigly."

[Breccia]

Once again, it's time for Guess the Speaker!

When she mentioned my name, I was obviously quite elated, to be honest, because I’m finally getting the recognition for what I’ve been sitting on the mountain tops yelling for three and a half, four years, which is that the Trump Organization is a criminal enterprise and that I got thrown under the bus by dear old Donald

The answer, of course, is seriously you didn't instantly know it's Cohen?.

In an interview on MSNBC, very likely laughing hysterically, he said the $250 million figure was the minimum asked penalty and would likely triple once the facts were known. Meaning, Trump would have to personally pay $750 million...if the source was correct, of course. Oh, and then step down in leadership of his most famous company.

Others have also pointed out that the NY AG is talking with the IRS. Anything NYState learns, they'll gleefully give directly to Biden. It is very difficult to cheat on only your state and somehow not your federal taxes, considering the majority of those numbers are the same, and while it is possible I don't see anyone doing that on purpose. "Now remember, only lie on the state-only relevant lines, because I only want to be guilty of a crime that can't be pardoned." Oh also Trump forgot to pardon himself for lying to the IRS, so, that'll be fun.

We've all seen the Forbes net worth values for Trump. They dropped during his Residency, his properties are still dropping, CyberTrump 2077 has no realistic prospects but does currently have a stock price above water, so his value is now about $3 billion, a lot of which is property with loans coming due soon. Trump does not have $750 million to spare. I don't know that he has $250 million to spare, either. Maybe Trump running for office will slow down a federal investigation, but I no longer believe it will slow down NYState going for the throat.

And then there's Deutsche Bank, known Russian money launderer who owns more of Trump than Trump does. They've given him more leeway than he's proven he's earned, but is now facing not just the attack on his company and this new attack on him because of his company, but also the federal felonies of having stolen government property plus whatever Jan 6th issues are found (in and out of those folders and Lindell's phone). Giving Trump a loan after his sixth bankruptcy was already a bad risk. Giving him a new loan or extending an old one now isn't just bad business, it's monetary suicide.

How much would you loan a businessman who was unable to run a business?

Now I am not a legal expert, and don't know the answer to this highly nonstandard question. The NY AG is trying to prevent Trump from running a business in New York. Okay, fine. What about a national business? Trump is not listed on the board of CyberTrump 2077, but what if he was? Would such an injunction get in the way, or not in this case because CyberTrump 2077 is based out of a state that isn't New York?

[Kaleredar]

I just thought a bit about that. You know, Ukraine would be doomed anyway but after the past half year I'm not sure he could have blackmailed them into surrendering. He could have helped Putin by withholding aid, to be sure, but I don't see Zelensky going down without a fight.

And I'd also bet that even though fatso could have decided to withhold all the intel Biden laid on the table in the weeks before the invasion, intel that made sure everyone knew what's up (and even more intel that was simply shown to Ukraine), somehow that stuff would have ended up on a fancy desk in Kyiv.

Trump likely would have refused supplying any military aid. Seeing as the US is the single largest supplier of arms to Ukraine by a sizable margin, that probably would have set Ukraine back pretty heavily.

[Breccia]

A new poll says that one in three Americans, and about six in ten Republicans, do not believe that Trump had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Which means they either believe that Trump declassified them but somehow the record of that doesn't exist; that Trump declassified them by thinking hard; or that the FBI is just flat-out lying.

Now, I at least would understand the idea in that first option, even though I don't believe such. "We haven't found the records yet" is a fair thing to say. The other two? Pure fantasy bullshit only believed by cultists.

[cubby]

A new poll says that one in three Americans, and about six in ten Republicans, do not believe that Trump had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Which means they either believe that Trump declassified them but somehow the record of that doesn't exist; that Trump declassified them by thinking hard; or that the FBI is just flat-out lying.

Now, I at least would understand the idea in that first option, even though I don't believe such. "We haven't found the records yet" is a fair thing to say. The other two? Pure fantasy bullshit only believed by cultists.

With everything going on, this is still the worst takeaway. People literally don't believe reality. It still boggles my mind, even after all these years.

[Endus]

Now, I at least would understand the idea in that first option, even though I don't believe such. "We haven't found the records yet" is a fair thing to say. The other two? Pure fantasy bullshit only believed by cultists.

With everything going on, this is still the worst takeaway. People literally don't believe reality. It still boggles my mind, even after all these years.

We need to start using the proper language for this behaviour.

They're radicals. They have been radicalized. Intentionally so, by the Republican Party and its representatives, who have actively sought to radicalize their supporters into extremist views. They reject reality because they have been sold a narrative and invited to dig themselves in so deep that to accept reality would require them to admit that everything they have ever believed for a decade or more was a lie. But that's how radicalism works; once you've arranged that disconnect, it's easy to push the lie ever further, because the short step to the new lie is now always easier than the giant leap back to reality. For these kinds of people, truth not only doesn't matter now, it never mattered; you get into this situation because you want a story that doesn't challenge you.

This is how propaganda changed decent Germans into Nazis in less than 20 years. And that was before the Internet, which is like tossing gasoline on a bonfire.

[Edge-]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-...ar-a-lago-raid

How desperate is Trump?

Trump: There’s a lot of speculation because of the severity of the FBI raiding Mar-a-Lago, were they looking for the Hillary Clinton emails…
Hannity: Wait, you’re not saying you had it
Trump: No, they may have thought that it was in there

Fuckin lol.

The spying on Trump’s campaign

Trump wants to be like Antonin Scalia and refer to himself in the third person. Trump is not Antonin Scalia.

[Belize]

With everything going on, this is still the worst takeaway. People literally don't believe reality. It still boggles my mind, even after all these years.

It's a cult, what else is new?

[Kaleredar]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-...ar-a-lago-raid

How desperate is Trump?



Fuckin lol.



Trump wants to be like Antonin Scalia and refer to himself in the third person. Trump is not Antonin Scalia.

So they were looking for Hillary’s emails…

But ended up walking off with a bunch of stuff that trump stole that they incidentally found?

Like, in no way has he actually defended having these documents in any coherent form.