Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps...ource=web_push

The fake GOP electors in Georgia that former President Donald Trump recruited as part of his failed attempt to stay in power are starting to point fingers at each other, court documents revealed on Tuesday.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, the Atlanta-area prosecutor who’s investigating Trump’s effort to upend American democracy there, laid out the details in a legal memo to a state judge—one that hints at criminal indictments to come.

According to the memo, prosecutors in July last year dangled immunity deals for “alternate electors” who were willing to cooperate with the investigation—but their defense lawyer is now accused of never telling them about the potential deal.

Rofl, why do all the best lawyers seem to be representing Trump or those connected to him?

Following a special purpose grand jury recommendation in December that the DA seek indictments against some people involved in the fraudulent scheme, investigators have turned up the pressure.

It turns out, these Republican officials and political operatives are now starting to squirm, identifying illegal behavior by their colleagues while trying to save their own skin—a sudden pivot that came when Willis’ investigators met with these fake electors last week.

Wednesday and Friday, “some of the electors stated that another elector… committed acts that are violations of Georgia law and that they were not party to these additional acts,” Willis explained in her court filing.

Oh, spicy! And it adds layers to this multi-layer dip.

But that situation has created what Willis calls “an impracticable and ethical mess,” because 10 of these fake electors are being represented by a single Atlanta defense lawyer—who can’t possibly advocate for clients who are simultaneously ratting each other out. The DA’s office is using those details to make the case that the judge should intervene and disqualify that defense lawyer, Kimberly Bourroughs Debrow, citing a conflict of interest.

Well yeah...that is a bit of conflict of interest if some of your clients are ratting out some of your other clients in relation to the issue you're representing them on.

The DA also accused Debrow of highly unethical behavior, noting how several fake electors interviewed last week revealed that they’d never been told about the potential immunity deals—because Debrow never conveyed the message. The DA said that failure “is in direct conflict” with what Debrow’s fellow defense lawyer, Holly A. Pierson, told the judge in August last year.

Oh boy, and lying by omission to your clients and your legal team lying to a judge. That's a bad one-two combo.

Pierson, a former federal prosecutor, called the allegations “entirely false” and said the court has documents that undermine the DA’s previous attempts to disqualify the defense lawyers.

“Sadly, the DA's office continues to seem more interested in media attention, trampling on the constitutional rights of presumptively innocent citizens, and recklessly defaming its perceived opponents than in the facts, the law, or the truth,” Pierson said in a statement.

We've got a half-hearted defense from one of the lawyers, at least.

[Gorsameth]

Ohh another lawyer looking to get disbarred (I assume failing to tell your client about an offered deal and then lying about it to a judge is grounds for disbarment)
They do pick the best ones.

[Breccia]

Ohh another lawyer looking to get disbarred (I assume failing to tell your client about an offered deal and then lying about it to a judge is grounds for disbarment)

I would assume so as well. Even if the lawyer thought it was a bad deal, it's still their client's choice. Also, there are conflict of interest ethical rules for this kind of result.

- - - Updated - - -

Not a single thing here surprises me. Not the fact Trump came back to IG, not the fact it was to sell shit, not the fact the NFT is the laziest thing I've ever seen... not a thing.

foxnews.com does not have any stories on this second series. Considering they are desperate for any deflection at all, and still haven't posted on this in the last week, I think that tells us something.

[D Luniz]

*snip*

Is Debrow someone that just walked in the door hoping for fame and agreed to rep them, or was he hired by "Trump World"?

Cause if its the latter, well
hey @cubby, does it cross into criminal charges if a lawyer was hired to purposefully toss some people to the wolves to cover for others?

[cubby]

Is Debrow someone that just walked in the door hoping for fame and agreed to rep them, or was he hired by "Trump World"?

Cause if its the latter, well
hey @cubby, does it cross into criminal charges if a lawyer was hired to purposefully toss some people to the wolves to cover for others?

I hate to give you the standard answer, but it depends. Probably not, though, if it's carried out carefully and strategically. It would loosely be analogous to someone coming in and giving testimony in order to get a lighter sentence, but in the reverse. A better one still would be a high end criminal who gives up smaller "fish" as a Confidential Informant.

[Breccia]

Well yeah...that is a bit of conflict of interest if some of your clients are ratting out some of your other clients in relation to the issue you're representing them on.

Lawyer repping fake Trump electors presents "ethical mess," DA says

The developments revealed in a court filing Tuesday prompted Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to ask a judge to disqualify the lawyer jointly representing most of the electors, Kimberly Bourroughs Debrow.

Willis wrote Debrow's representation of the electors has created an "impracticable and ethical mess" and is "rife with serious ethical problems."

Some of those electors recently accused one another of crimes, per the filing, which reveals recent elector interviews with prosecutors.
Willis argues Debrow's ability to represent electors has been undermined and wants her disqualified.

[Edge-]

Lawyer repping fake Trump electors presents "ethical mess," DA says

It's kinda funny to me how poetic a lot of this stuff is.

Like yes, that is a microcosm of the broader issues going on within the conservative/MAGA movement. How perfect of an analogy.

[Shadowferal]

Donald Trump suggests Disney could ditch Florida as he mocks DeSantis over Reedy Creek humiliation

[gondrin]

They genuinely made them huge on purpose, but that just makes the NFT itself look even worse lol I cannot fathom paying money for this shit. There can't possibly be a single person that legitimately thinks that looks good...

Oh, there is most definitely one person who thinks it looks good. They probably thing it's YUGELY great.

[Edge-]

Donald Trump suggests Disney could ditch Florida as he mocks DeSantis over Reedy Creek humiliation

"DeSanctus"? Yeah dude, we know "DeSanctimonious" is too many letters to write/type, that's why it's a bad name.

Though it's hilariously predictable that he's got arguably the worst financial take on this matter possible. Predictable, but still funny.

[Breccia]

Though it's hilariously predictable that he's got arguably the worst financial take on this matter possible.

Trump has every right to join in mocking DeSadness as the rest of us. He fucked up in public, he's scrambling to recover. He was incompetent and it's inherently funny.

But Trump is in no position to give anyone business advice. It's not like students are trading his NFTs on Truth Social while in the Trump University classrooms, are they? The only way Trump's advice would be taken even remotely seriously is, ironically, if it was a joke. "That was a bad deal, and I would know, I've made a few!" Which sociopathic narcissist Trump would never do. He's not self-aware enough to realize he's made many bad business decisions. So his taunting comes off, big surprise, as hypocritical.

[Edge-]

Think Trump can beat... Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to the primary? 'Cos Jr. has announced lmao

I thought that was last week? Also, likely wrong thread as I believe he's running as a Democrat.

Either way, I don't think the antivax nutter guy who compared covid vaccines and vaccine mandates to Nazi's is getting anywhere. The Kennedy name has lost much of its luster over the years.

[Breccia]

Think Trump can beat... Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to the primary?

Well, yes.

The first few victims of the primaries don't matter. It's only the last two standing that matter. The Republican Party will simply "do more of us want Trump, and his quest for protecting Trump and revenge on Trump's enemies, or would we prefer to actually get something done?" Each ejected candidate will put their support behind one of the last two survivors, since only Trump would be petty enough to say "fuck both of you, I'm not endorsing anyone".

In 2016, Republicans knew Trump was an inexperienced, incompetent idiot. They voted for him anyhow. That's deplorable, but at least they get to try to defend themselves. "We didn't know he was that incompetent", they can say in hindsight.

In 2024, with the knowledge of what's already happened, they'll have to make that choice again. Only that defense no longer works. We're already seeing people saying "we need to move on" without dissing Trump directly...or in some cases, dissing Trump directly.

Trump's rabid fanbase is immobile. They've proven at this point they're in their own separate reality where Trump won, Biden committed unspecified crimes that should get him thrown in prison despite nobody knowing what these crimes are or what evidence exists for them, and Obama's a Kenyan in a tan suit.

We'll find out, slowly over time, how many of the classic conservatives are willing to join them. Again.

Jr. will be one of the first to go, based on all current evidence. Nobody was asking for him. But the larger the crowd of never and/or nevermore Trumpers in the fray, the more they'll end up banding together, and hopefully, enough of them do to put Trump second place, causing him to run third-party and kill the Republican Party.

Well, kill their WH hopes, at least.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe he's running as a Democrat.

Fuck! Well, there goes my second point.

[Edge-]

Maybe in some good news for Trump - https://www.thedailybeast.com/ron-de...uct-with-minor

New reporting revealed Tuesday that Kent Stermon’s suicide came shortly after he was accused of sexual misconduct with an underage teen. Stermon —a staunch DeSantis ally and GOP donor—was found dead in December just shortly after the girl’s father declined a “five-figure” hush money deal and reported Stermon to the police, the Daily Mail reported. Jacksonville police say the investigation is still ongoing, but Stermon allegedly had an inappropriate relationship with an underage girl, to whom he offered Taylor Swift concert tickets in exchange for photos of her breasts. An anonymous law enforcement source told the Daily Mail that this might have just been the tip of the iceberg, though. “Very possibly it was the start of the rope that would unravel. It is the possibility of exposing what might have happened when the girl was a minor in their acquaintance,” the source said. Stermon’s influence in Florida’s Republican Party was vast, with him largely being credited for Ron DeSantis’ recent political success. “Kent was very influential,” Florida politics reporter A.G. Gancarski told First Coast News following his death. “You wouldn’t have Ron DeSantis as governor without Kent Stermon.”

TLDR: Major GOP donor in FL who is credited with helping deliver much of DeSantis's recent successes killed himself in December, 2022. This is apparently in connection to his attempts to solicit sexual materials from at least one young girl, following his inability to reach a settlement with the girls father to keep this story quiet.

Weird how the actual pedophiles who are grooming and pursuing kids keep end up being Republicans. Very weird!

[Gorsameth]

We'll find out, slowly over time, how many of the classic conservatives are willing to join them. Again.

Considering Trump got more votes in 2020 then 2016 my answer is "almost all of them".
Because it doesn't matter if its Trump or what Trump has done, all that matters is that he is the Republican nominee.

[Breccia]

Considering Trump got more votes in 2020 then 2016 my answer is "almost all of them".

I get where you're coming from, but I disagree. Trump was the incumbent. Completely different story.

- - - Updated - - -

Pro-DeSantis PAC launches ad criticizing Trump as ‘gun grabber’

"Is that even close to true? Trump has repeatedly--"

Let them fight! Let them fight!

The two heaviest hitters are going at it in full public view now. Also, nobody here can possibly be surprised that a Republican is cherry-picking at this point. Who cares if it's true? The context in which it lives is the divided Republican Party trying to fuck itself to death.

[s_bushido]

Considering Trump got more votes in 2020 then 2016 my answer is "almost all of them".
Because it doesn't matter if its Trump or what Trump has done, all that matters is that he is the Republican nominee.

While it's true that people will just vote for the guy with an (R) or (D) next to his name, I don't think 2020 is a very good point of comparison. Turnout spiked like 8% for that election because so much shit had been churned-up leading to it. Short of another ridiculous Covid+BLM year in 2024, I doubt motivation is going to be nearly as high.

Trump is going to have an uphill battle to rile up the Republican base since the only spotlight he's been in for 4 years has been his ongoing legal troubles. I assume that's why they're pushing so hard on the anti-trans/lgbtq shit, since the supreme court yanked the abortion rug out from under their feet...but I'm not sure Trump is the guy to push that sort of rhetoric effectively.

[Breccia]

Just as a friendly reminder, Trump Org CFO Weisselberg was in prison until just recently. Because he is a criminal, and working for Trump made him so.

Weaselberg got 5 months (and then reduced for good behavior) because he, a criminal, is turning against the criminal organization he helped run.

Trump hires criminals, and Trump turns people into criminals.

[Fugus]

I get where you're coming from, but I disagree. Trump was the incumbent. Completely different story.

- - - Updated - - -

Pro-DeSantis PAC launches ad criticizing Trump as ‘gun grabber’

"Is that even close to true? Trump has repeatedly--"

Let them fight! Let them fight!

The two heaviest hitters are going at it in full public view now. Also, nobody here can possibly be surprised that a Republican is cherry-picking at this point. Who cares if it's true? The context in which it lives is the divided Republican Party trying to fuck itself to death.

Lets see if this PAC remembers that we have Trump on camera asking officials "Can we just take the guns now and deal with the legal process later?" after the Vegas shooting.

[Edge-]

Lets see if this PAC remembers that we have Trump on camera asking officials "Can we just take the guns now and deal with the legal process later?" after the Vegas shooting.

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...rocess-second/

“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.

“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said.

The PAC is 100% correct, especially after Trump ordered the ATF to ban bump-stocks despite Obama having the ATF look into it and they determined they didn't have the authority to do so.

It's a rare instance in which I agree with him, actually.