Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Mekh]

We lost a couple pages again. Whom did we lose?

[Rustedsaint]

We lost a couple pages again. Whom did we lose?

Probably another Russian who got called for duty so he decided to run away, deleting all his fourms accounts incase his computer/phone gets seized and searched. The uk/Russian war thread is also bugged

[Paranoid Android]

The decision to appoint a special prosecutor was effectively out of Garland's hands the moment Trump formally announced. Prosecuting a former President without a Special Prosecutor was just barely legally do-able to begin with. Prosecuting a credible (in the sense that he has a real chance to win) candidate for President pretty much requires the independence of a Special Prosecutor's office in order to address conflict of interest issues (that it will also have the side-effect on insulating the investigation from interference by Republicans, including House Republicans who might de-fund the entire government in order to shut down the investigation into their leader is an additional benefit).

I mean c'mon that is such bs. Announcing a candidacy should not make you immune. I get this is your interpretation of why.

So this subject is a discussion and leans heavily to Trump announcing and using this as "political prosecution, blah, blah, blah". This is literally someone announcing for President or political office than going out to commit a crime. Such weak shit, but with the partisanship hack shit, it will carry weight.

This isn't about appeasing the right. This is a make-or-break moment for American democracy and constitutional government. Of course Trump belongs in prison (or six feet under), the question is whether the existing government structure of the United States is capable of putting him there in accordance with the law; if it cannot (because it cannot effectively prosecute any members well-connected member of the elite, no matter how criminal) , then it's doomed, and needs to be replaced with something that works. (Personally, I think that latter, painful, course is where the US is likely headed, but I certainly hope otherwise

.

I don't know if the special counsel is about appeasing the right. I will say Garland is a huuuge wimp and Dems play a different game where they think the rules apply. Getting into speculation but if the Dems every do the "this is an Independent special counsel" I will hurl. Republicans don't give an eff, they would attack no matter what. If I'm positive on special counsel this better be a person who will pursue with full effect.

I as you mentioned about protection of the political elite and/or the rich. Which is why I'm hesitant.

[Endus]

The decision to appoint a special prosecutor was effectively out of Garland's hands the moment Trump formally announced. Prosecuting a former President without a Special Prosecutor was just barely legally do-able to begin with. Prosecuting a credible (in the sense that he has a real chance to win) candidate for President pretty much requires the independence of a Special Prosecutor's office in order to address conflict of interest issues (that it will also have the side-effect on insulating the investigation from interference by Republicans, including House Republicans who might de-fund the entire government in order to shut down the investigation into their leader is an additional benefit).

It needs to be repeated because Americans need to start to understand this; what you are describing is literally political corruption. That politicians, particularly at the highest levels, have special protections and immunities to prosecution for crimes committed, because they stand above the normal law due to their position.

This is not normal. It's corruption at play. This goes double for the ability of politicians to pressure the Department of Justice to drop investigations or to fire the head of the Department to replace them with someone who'll do what the political class wants them to do. All of that is corrupt. It's the placement of partisan self-interest to twist and bend the scales of justice out of whack, to ensure that the legal system is used to effect the will of the political party in power rather than being free to pursue justice.

That you're having to pull these kinds of shenanigans says that your American democracy is already deeply broken, and it's not even a partisan break.

[D Luniz]

Nixon retcon 2.0. They will be saying they never supported Trump soon.

can do more recent than that

how did GW Bush get a 2nd term when everyone that's now a republican again was supposed to be "an independent that didn't vote for him" at the time?

[Fugus]

Anyone know who was removed from the forums this time to have all these deleted posts?

[Lanrefni]

Anyone know who was removed from the forums this time to have all these deleted posts?

Whoever it was apparently took 2 pages of the Doctor Who thread with them as well.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

I wonder what Trump will tweet first

[SoulForge]

I wonder what Trump will tweet first

How unfair people are to him.

[Breccia]

We've heard from multiple legal experts over the years...wait, it's only been months?...that the DOJ has an objectively indisputable case and must indict. And just so we're clear, Trump appointee Barr is one of them.

Given what's gone on, I think they probably have the evidence that would check the box. They have the case.

So basically everyone was on board when a fucking war crimes prosecutor was put in charge. This includes FOX News.

By John Amato — November 19, 2022
Jonathan Turley, Fox News legal analyst who routinely sides with Trump, explained why Jack Smith is an excellent appointment for the special counsel investigating Trump, his role in events leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, and his handling of sensitive government documents.

America's Newsroom came back to Turley after AG Garland finished his press conference where he announced the special counsel.




"Smith is a solid appointment; I don't think you're going to find many critics," Turley said. "He has an extensive legal background, a great deal of experience across the board from public integrity to international cases."

Turley explained that possessing and removing usually don't result in a lengthy sentence.

"That is not the case with obstruction. When we are talking about obstruction, that is something that can come; it has historically come with significant penalties," he said.

"I think the scope of this investigation is going to be a serious concern obviously [For Trump] ---I think most of us are really looking at still Mar-A-Lago where those torpedoes in the water are probably..."

Turley called the documents "torpedoes in the water" for Trump. That is no joke coming from him.

And what happened next?

How unfair people are to him.

Basically, this. Even C-SPAN cut away from Trump when he started babbling like a madman as he went on an unhinged rant about random buzzword salad, not on Twitter, but close enough.

This is a rigged deal just as the 2020 election was rigged, and we can't let them get away with it, we can't do it, we can't let this happen to our country.

-- Trump, still spouting election lies

Not satisfied with, well, telling the truth for once -- the special prosecutor is just as rigged as the 2020 election -- he ironically continued his rant on Truth nope still not calling it that CyberTrump 2077.

There has never been a 'Fringe Benefits' case such as this brought before. Did a long time executive pay tax on the use of a company car, or a company apartment, or payments (not even taken by us as a tax deduction!) for the education of his grandchildren? For this, he gets handcuffs and jail? The highly paid accounting firm should have routinely picked these things up - we relied on them. VERY UNFAIR!

Yeah, apparently Trump didn't like what Weaselberg said under oath. (When Trump refutes the charges under oath let me know, until then, I'll believe the guy who is both at risk of perjury and also losing a sweet immunity deal if he lies, over the person who lied 10,000 times to the American people but hasn't taken the stand).

Weaselberg's testimony seems pretty damning.

Weisselberg said Donald Trump, or at times Eric Trump or Donald Trump Jr., signed checks to pay up to $100,000 for private school tuition for Weisselberg's grandchildren. Weisselberg said he then instructed the company's controller to deduct the $100,000 from his salary, allowing him to report a smaller income. Copies of some of the checks signed by the Trumps have been shown in court.

Weisselberg said the first time Trump signed a tuition check, Weisselberg told him, "Don't forget, I'm going to pay you back for this." The payback, he said, was the salary reduction.

He said for himself and several other executives, the salary reductions were then mitigated by hefty bonus checks paid to the executives as if they were independent contractors for Trump Organization entities.

"Donald Trump always wanted to sign the bonus checks" before he became president in 2017, Weisselberg said.

That practice ceased during the next two years after an internal review led to changes at the company, he said.

"We were going through a company-wide cleanup process, making sure that since Mr. Trump was now president, everything was being done properly," Weisselberg said.

First, Trump should have divested. Then you could have kept cheating, asshole.

Second, funny how Weaselberg and Trump Org only started doing things properly when people were watching, because there might be consequences. I believe the term is "Lawful Evil"?

Not satisfied with railing against the nation's law enforcement and his own employees, Trump also railed against...oh, the nation's law enforcement again, but in a different way.

"Nobody should ever be interviewed by the FBI without making a recording of the interview," Trump, who is not an attorney, counseled.

The FBI doesn’t want recorded interviews because that way they can make up statements as to what was said - happens all the time," Trump alleged.

"Our corrupt 'justice' system is at work today like never before," he alleged.

"Wasn't Trump in charge of the FBI for four years?"

Why, yes he was.

"Did he make any changes during that time, to deal with this systematic corruption he claims exists?"

Yes, he pulled strings to keep their headquarters next to his hotel.

"...and?"

He sold the hotel as soon as he left office.

"No no I meant changes to the FBI."

He fired Comey for refusing to investigate a national security risk that turned out to be true.

"So, Trump is claiming the FBI was corrupt because he personally made it so?"

Well, he tried to make it so, at least.

So Trump, already low on friends, spent the last 48 hours lashing out basically at random, and it's about to get worse. Cohen went on live TV to plant the seed that Ivanka and Kushner didn't join the 2024 run because they were the FBI moles. Nicely trolled, Cohen.

Trump's days are numbered, because he's a fat old fat sick fat anti-vaxxer who's obese. But his political days are also numbered, and we just have to know which number is higher.

People trying to say Trump isn't paranoid are, at this point, willfully ignorant to the point of being blind. He's running out of friends, running out of money (I guess we can kiss DWAC goodbye), running out of freedom, and running out of time. None of these are good qualities for running for office.

- - - Updated - - -

Cohen's not the only Trump ejectee that's trying to troll him. Remember Omarosa?

Speaking with host Witt, Omarosa Manigault Newman claimed that Ivanka learned well from her father how to steal the spotlight and make herself the center of attention.

"Look, you know the family," host Witt prompted. "So, specifically, Eric Trump and Jared Kushner were there. Don Junior and Ivanka were not. Ivanka continued by writing on Instagram that she is going to sit out her father's 2024 campaign to prioritize her children."

"Did this surprise you, Omarosa?" she continued. "Do you think there might be more to the story? And, what do you think would be Donald's reaction; the reaction she got from her father considering how he built her up during his presidency?"

"You know, what is interesting is that Ivanka's very strategic," the former Trump aide replied. "I would say she is his favorite child, so, the fact that she chose that timing, that moment to announce that she was not going to support him was her opportunity to be very much like her father, and take the spotlight and let the narrative be about her."

"She knew that that would damage him, she knew the narrative would be that his family was not there for him, his favorite child, I might add," she elaborated. "She is turning herself away from his politics. But, it did not surprise me, the timing, however, was the key element there that she wanted to be so public in the fact that she was not going to support him this time around."

Wanna see the video? Omarosa might be right, or she might be projecting, but she wouldn't be saying this at all if she wasn't trying to damage Trump's feeble grip on reality.

Unrelated, but I want to get some CNN points back so citing FOX News, Trump even after Musk ended his ban claims he's not going back to Twitter. I'm just calling that a lie right now.

- - - Updated - - -

This is an OP ED, and I don't 100% agree with it, but it brings up another viable point of discussion.

Will Trump even survive until the primaries?

Trump’s polling has been soft for over a year, with the percentage of Republicans who want him to run consistently falling 20 points or more below his approval ratings. He has found it difficult to score above 50 percent on ballot tests against Republicans who aren’t even running yet.

And those numbers are getting worse.

Both YouGov and Morning Consult conducted post-election benchmarks, and Trump’s fortunes are falling across-the-board. Morning Consult has the best polling for Trump, but Trump’s favorable rating with Republicans edged below 80 percent. While 61 percent of Republicans still want Trump to run, 73 percent of independents don’t. Trump’s ballot test against DeSantis fell from a 48 percent to 26 percent advantage pre-midterm to a 47 percent to 33 percent advantage, down 8 points.

The YouGov poll is a disaster for Trump. In one week Trump fell from 81 percent approval to 77 percent. Far worse, Republicans who want him to run collapsed from 60 percent to just 47 percent. DeSantis holds a 46 percent to 39 percent advantage on the ballot test. YouGov polled all voters on a Trump-DeSantis ballot and every demographic preferred DeSantis, except Hispanics who were split evenly. Conservatives favored DeSantis 51 percent to 33 percent, a catastrophe for Trump.

"Okay, but we knew all that."

Yes, and then let's add this:

But Trump’s biggest problem going forward is he has nothing new to offer.

His campaign announcement showed a man just plodding forward. After months of teasing a “big announcement” where everyone knew he was getting in the race, the actual event was an anti-climax. Instead of a big show, America saw Trump stroll into a gaudy country club ballroom and drone his way through a desultory teleprompter speech.

He offered nothing really new or interesting. Outside of pivoting from blaming the Democrats for stealing the 2020 election to blaming China (watch for that to become a theme), Trump just re-hashed old promises and complained about Biden. What’s the message? Trump had four years to build a wall and didn’t, so give him a second chance? Trump didn’t drain the swamp, but he will this time? And there was no follow-up. No big Iowa or New Hampshire rally. Trump spoke, and that was it.

Now that's the point I agree with: Trump caught the attention of what would eventually become his rabid fanbase by dangling shiny objects in front of their face. It's been 150 years and...well it feels like it, anyhow...and three elections since then (counting both midterms) and the shiny has gone from tarnish to rust.

I don't think it's worth predicting what might happen to Trump in a calendar year-ish. It could literally be anything from his divorce, to his bankruptcy, to his arrest, to his fatal heart attack. But just because there's no reasonable reason to believe things will somehow get better for Trump doesn't mean he'll drop out of the race. He is still a narcisist to the point of padded celldom and is still facing multiple criminal investigations. He may feel he has no choice.

What do you think it would take for Trump to drop out of the race before the primaries? I've already said he won't do so voluntarily, but let me know your thoughts.

[Zan15]

I wonder what Trump will tweet first

but but he said he would never go back to twitter even if they reinstated him.

are you saying trump is going to be a liar again?

[Fugus]

So we get to watch Trump burn the Republican party down from Twitter for the next 2 years (Or until he is behind bars or Twitter ends up going under or reforming to survive) which would also make sure that Truth Social dies quickly without him as a draw which still likely won't be enough to save Twitter given what is going on.

[Kaleredar]

So we get to watch Trump burn the Republican party down from Twitter for the next 2 years (Or until he is behind bars or Twitter ends up going under or reforming to survive) which would also make sure that Truth Social dies quickly without him as a draw which still likely won't be enough to save Twitter given what is going on.

I dunno.

I think a great contributor to the reason Trump fell off so sharply in popularity is because he didn't have access to Twitter. He had no way of (effectively) disseminating his constant onslaught of bullshit and rage-mongering that beguiled and enchanted his sycophants initially, so he wasn't really able to get in front of any messaging. Sure there was Truth social and press conferences and the like, but those were released to a very limited audience and, more importantly, people were able to ignore him. There were no retweets or people tweeting back at him in disagreement that made it look like he was "successfully triggering the libs."

If the GOP has proven anything it's that they're all pretty much spineless bootlickers. If Trump is able to crest some wave of support in the next few years through his generic play of cultivating anger, bloviating and fear then they'll all fall back in line behind him, no matter how underwhelming his candidacy announcement seems to be right now.


Trump going back on Twitter is a bad thing, plain and simple. Nothing good will come of it.

[Fugus]

I dunno.

I think a great contributor to the reason Trump fell off so sharply in popularity is because he didn't have access to Twitter. He had no way of (effectively) disseminating his constant onslaught of bullshit and rage-mongering that beguiled and enchanted his sycophants initially, so he wasn't really able to get in front of any messaging. Sure there was Truth social and press conferences and the like, but those were released to a very limited audience and, more importantly, people were able to ignore him. There were no retweets or people tweeting back at him in disagreement that made it look like he was "successfully triggering the libs."

If the GOP has proven anything it's that they're all pretty much spineless bootlickers. If Trump is able to crest some wave of support in the next few years through his generic play of cultivating anger, bloviating and fear then they'll all fall back in line behind him, no matter how underwhelming his candidacy announcement seems to be right now.


Trump going back on Twitter is a bad thing, plain and simple. Nothing good will come of it.

Not really when you think about it, Trump has lost them 2 midterms and a general election and has only been getting worse with or without Twitter.

Sure TRUMP will get the boost and attention he craves so much and his base will rally around him, while the rest of the nation continues to turn against him. No doubt I don't want Trump to run for president just because I don't like to run that gamble no matter how much it is in my favor but him on twitter is him airing his grievances against any Republican whom he saw as disloyal which will hurt them up and down that ballot, especially if he starts airing dirty laundry that had them falling in line before.

I see him burning the GOP down for as long as he is on twitter, I see Truth falling apart near overnight after he leaves or even decides to post on both to honor his contract if he actually does, I see him helping to run even more advertisers off of twitter given what he represents and what most companies don't want to be associated with, I see him driving negative voter turn out where people come out to vote against him and his candidates again if they make it through their primaries and so on.

He is hell in a hand basket for the GOP when on a real platform and Musk is making sure to kill Twitter before and what Trump brings is just another nail in that coffin as well.

Trump going on twitter has a lot of potential for good things. Not from anything he actually tries to do but from the backlash caused by it.

[fwc577]

So we get to watch Trump burn the Republican party down from Twitter for the next 2 years (Or until he is behind bars or Twitter ends up going under or reforming to survive) which would also make sure that Truth Social dies quickly without him as a draw which still likely won't be enough to save Twitter given what is going on.

Twitter isn't going to be relevant in 2 years time, lol. That place is slowly crumbling as it is. I'm pretty sure I got a 12 hour temp ban on Twitter today based on a message I saw but I was just able to re-load Twitter and it doesn't appear that it changed anything I was able to do on Twitter after that unless I'm shadowbanned.

Tons of shit on the site is simply just not working. Pretty sure 2FA is still down.

The place is a mess and I'm personally having a blast trolling right-wingers until I get permabanned at this point.

I can take out the rage I normally direct at a few posters here that I let slip through the cracks and generate occasional infractions.

[Fugus]

Twitter isn't going to be relevant in 2 years time, lol. That place is slowly crumbling as it is. I'm pretty sure I got a 12 hour temp ban on Twitter today based on a message I saw but I was just able to re-load Twitter and it doesn't appear that it changed anything I was able to do on Twitter after that unless I'm shadowbanned.

Tons of shit on the site is simply just not working. Pretty sure 2FA is still down.

The place is a mess and I'm personally having a blast trolling right-wingers until I get permabanned at this point.

I can take out the rage I normally direct at a few posters here that I let slip through the cracks and generate occasional infractions.

Figured and hoped it would which would make it even better.

Trump moves from Truth to Twitter,
Truth dies because everyone moved to Twitter,
Twitter dies shortly afterward leaving Trump without Truth or Twitter,
The whole world is better off for both of them being gone,

Now only if we could get rid of FaceBook along with them.

[Lynarii]

Figured and hoped it would which would make it even better.

Trump moves from Truth to Twitter,
Truth dies because everyone moved to Twitter,
Twitter dies shortly afterward leaving Trump without Truth or Twitter,
The whole world is better off for both of them being gone,

Now only if we could get rid of FaceBook along with them.

Unlikely to happen. FaceBook has a market share that Twitter could only dream of. And while people may be ragging on them for the whole Metaverse thing, the reality is that their attempts to diversify themselves has been a strength despite the high profile mistakes. The sheer difference in size and reach that FB has over Twitter is one of the reasons why the idea that Twitter was the 'open public square' and a ban on it was silencing a person's freedom of speech was always laughable.

[fwc577]

Unlikely to happen. FaceBook has a market share that Twitter could only dream of. And while people may be ragging on them for the whole Metaverse thing, the reality is that their attempts to diversify themselves has been a strength despite the high profile mistakes. The sheer difference in size and reach that FB has over Twitter is one of the reasons why the idea that Twitter was the 'open public square' and a ban on it was silencing a person's freedom of speech was always laughable.

Yup, and just to reiterate for @Fugus There are 2.13 billion monthly active Facebook users and 330 million monthly active Twitter users.

[Fugus]

Yup, and just to reiterate for @Fugus There are 2.13 billion monthly active Facebook users and 330 million monthly active Twitter users.

@Lynarii

I know the part with Facebook, that wasn’t talking about it actually going down just wishful thinking. The stuff I put with Trump and Twitter though is what I was serious about.

Sorry, thought I had separated the two good enough to show that intent.

[Breccia]

For people questioning if there will be a civil war within the Republican Party, let me make it clear: you're already seeing it.

1) Rick Scott challenged McConnell for Senate GOP leadership. He failed, the vote was 37 to 10. While that's bad, it's not "CBS turns off the Vikings game" bad. In fact, to quote Ted Cruz

We underperformed among independents and moderates because their impression of many of the people in our party, in leadership roles, is that they’re involved in chaos, negativity, excessive attacks

Shit, that was Mitch McConnell. This is Ted Cruz.

We had a double-digit vote against the current leader and that’s never happened in the time I’ve been here

I didn't bother to look it up. Cruz was one of the ten, just so we're clear.

However, more than just a couple failed but significant runs at leadership are showing the strain. I don't know who these two people are, but they're Religious Right leaders with names worthy enough for WaPo to drop them.

“If Mr. Trump can’t stop his little petty issues, how does he expect people to stop major issues?” James Robison, the president of the Christian group Life Outreach International, said Wednesday night at a meeting of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers (NACL), a conservative political group that focuses on social issues.

The televangelist then started criticizing Trump, prompting the crowd to grow quiet.

“Everything you wanted him to hear — every single thing you ever prayed for him to hear — came through these lips right straight into his face,” Robison told the crowd Wednesday, his voice growing lower and louder. “And with the same force you’ve heard me talking to you, I spoke it to him.”

Robison continued: “It’s time for us to get together and pray and stop trying to destroy each other, and I make that loud and clearly heard to Mr. Trump! We’ve got to quit amputating each other, slicing each other, and come together in supernatural unity that Jesus Christ prayed for!”

In an essay sent to The Washington Post earlier this month, Mike Evans, a former member of the evangelical advisory board, said he would not vote for Trump again and recalled how he once left a Trump rally “in tears because I saw Bible believers glorifying Donald Trump like he was an idol.”

“All of us knew that Trump had character flaws, but we considered our relationship with him transactional,” wrote Evans, a Texas author and Christian Zionist who raises money for outreach and support in Israel. “We wanted Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. We wanted his support of our biblical values. We all wanted his support for the State of Israel. Donald Trump indeed kept and exceeded his promises to us.”

However, Evans said Trump had done damage by turning “the pulpit that we preach from” into a political platform.

“Donald Trump can’t save America. He can’t even save himself. He used us to win the White House. We had to close our mouths and eyes when he said things that horrified us,” Evans wrote. “I cannot do that anymore.”

So, yeah, that's a couple of apparenlty top-tier "Christians" saying Trump wasn't worth the benefits they got. Newsweek found a third who is, at the most charitable, hesitant.

Robert Jeffress, a pastor at the First Baptist Dallas church in Texas and staunch evangelical ally of Donald Trump, said on Wednesday that he will wait for the Republican Party nomination to endorse the former president.

"Donald Trump was a great president, and if he becomes the GOP nominee in 2024 I will happily support him," Jeffress told Newsweek.

When further asked about supporting Trump ahead of the Republican nomination, Jeffress told Newsweek that "the Republican Party is headed toward a civil war that I have no desire or need to be part of. My priority is being pastor of First Baptist Church Dallas and preaching God's word to millions of people each week on our television and radio broadcasts."

Jeffress' church is substantial, and he has endorsed Trump before. He's not now, at least, not yet. If Trump wins the nomination, he probably will, but we're a ways off from fucking around and finding out.

This was further echoed by this Washington Times OP ED from Prof. Everett Piper, which mirrors the approach of Robinson above.

It’s the weekend after the November midterms, and here are three key takeaways from Tuesday’s election.

No. 1: Conservatism still wins.
No. 2: Trumpism does not.
No. 3: If we don’t learn lessons one and two, and learn them quickly, the GOP will get destroyed in 2024.

Before you accuse me of treason, please take a deep breath, calm down, and do what all good Republicans should do — listen to the message before you shoot the messenger. In other words, don’t succumb to the conservative variant of TDS that causes inexplicable babblings of “Yeah, but Trump …” and just consider the following argument with an open mind.

What you're seeing is pushback across the board. Pushback against "Because he's Trump" with actual evidence which spans from "he keeps losing" to "and he's a horrible human being". And they're not talking to reasonable people who never liked Trump in the first place. They're talking to each other. That crowd Robinson addressed went quiet. Piper was expecting readers to immediately be turned off when he pointed out Trump was losing, something everyone already knows. Piper also wrote this other OP ED asking for a bunch of other GOPers to jump into the competition.

The Republican Party is in conflict so bad they're admitting it in public. On one side, the classic Republicans who are saying "thanks for stacking the courts, now get out before you do any more damage". On the other, literal idolators who, maybe even literally in some cases, worship Trump as a god, an act even less Christian than refusing food and medicine for the poor while arming themselves with weapons intentionally designed to kill human beings.

Trump still has the usual problems. The NYTimes char-broiled him again, calling Melania a hostage and...well, I'll quote one paragraph:

Trump flaunts his faux Macho Macho Man rhetoric. For decades, Republicans have lectured Americans to quit embracing victimhood and stand on their own two feet, and here’s their leader announcing his presidency on a platform of Woe is me! Quit picking on me! Elect me because I’m a fall guy!

Trump saw that and responded....and his literal first line was, yep, playing the victim game.

Maureen Dowd, the super whacko who constantly writes so nastily about me, saying things that if ever said about another person, trouble would ensue

Why yes, he did put that on CyberTrump 2077 and not Twitter, which means more people read the NYTimes article than Trump's response. But everything above that? That's proof a rift...beyond any Dowd.