Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

@Breccia I’m surprised you didn’t make a comment about trump fleeing to Scotland instead of showing up to his rape trial

Well for one, it hadn't happened last I looked.

And two, Trump knows full what happens the second his fat ass hits the stand. He's not entering that courtroom unless it's figurative and/or literal gunpoint. Honestly, his lawyers might have better luck if he isn't giving them directions.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually @Resurgo your link did get me looking. Not about Scotland, about the trial.

Tapioca is throwing a hissy fit. In an 18-page filing...wait, no, this is just a letter. In an 18-page letter with no legal standing, he's demanding a mistrial.

"On what grounds?"

That the judge is biased. In the letter, Tapioca points out every time the judge has ruled against him and insisted that the judge was wrong every time.

"The rulings where the judge called Tapioca out on his bullshit?"

Yes, those.

"If the judge is biased, why would the judge grant a mistrial? Isn't the term he's looking for 'appeal' here?"

I theorize that it is not. And I will ask @cubby to correct me if I'm wrong, but, Tapioca does not want an appeal.

1) An appeal will likely be held before a group of judges, making it far less likely that a single Trump-supporting judge bends the rules the other way and springs Trump "because reasons".

2) Also, to my experience at least, appeals courts don't have juries.

This means the case is more likely to be decided on the legal precedent and the letter of the law, and not "come, you just need to say Trump's not guilty, be a pal". Judges write out the details of their rulings. Juries do not.

Tapioca cannot win this case on the merits. He has no case. I mean, his client never once entered the courtroom. His client fled the continent.

I mean, seriously, look at the DNA evidence in particular. This lawsuit is not new. For years, literally years plural, Trump was asked to contribute a DNA sample and he refused. He only changed his mind past the due-date, and had the condition that he would only contribute a sample if Tapioca could say under oath that the DNA was so old that a 100% positive match meant nothing. Because Trump refused to cooperate, his team was also prevented from saying "the DNA doesn't even match" because they're the ones that prevented the match by their non-compliance.

And Tapioca took offense to that. And, like, everything else. He takes offense at Carroll's lawyers having two tables while Team Trump gets one. No really, it's on the front page.

In a move that's so "Trump lawyer" it hurts (not me, it hurts Trump) Tapioca spent half the letter cutting and pasting courtroom transcripts of, you guessed it, him trying bullshit and the judge having none of it.

Which is fucking stupid.

I think Tapioca knows he's going to lose, I think he knows he'll lose on appeal, and I think he knows he'll be fired without being paid. When you're down 35-3 at the two-minute warning, yes you throw a Hail Mary pass, but you are basically doing it to appease the few fans that haven't already left early to beat the crowd. You don't expect it to actually work, and of course, the other team knows exactly what you're going to do and is set up for it.

[fwc577]

@Breccia I think the most frightening thing is, that with all the gerrymandering going on and the potential loss of Manchin, a Republican Senate majority is looking more and more likely. With the GOP trying to make it harder for college students and minorities to vote, as well as screwing over mail-in or absentee voting, even if we have record turn-outs it's going to be a painfully close election next year...

I'm certainly not looking forward to the 2024 election because yeah, it's going to be way closer than I would like in the Senate AND Wisconsin should've ousted Johnson in the midterms and that's on Democrat's for running a poor campaign.

However, we've got almost a year and a half for Republicans to continue to piss off the American public and we're looking at a climate after 2022 where we should've had a red wave but instead had a red sputter.

My gut feelings tell me that the house falls back Democrat and that the Senate is retained by Democrats assuming that the Biden admin doesn't fuck it up in the next year.

There has been considerable disdain for the GOP right now, especially in many states and on the national front where we see the GOP doing nothing but riling up culture wars, halting progress, and overall, making the country worse.

I think the following seats currently filled by Republicans are potentially up for grabs depending on how the next 1-1.5 years shakeout:

Rick Scott -- Florida
Mike Braun -- Indiana
Josh Hawley -- Missouri
Marsha Blackburn -- Tennessee
Ted Cruz -- Texas

These are all people retiring and/or who won their last election by margins slim enough they should be concerned. If the overall electorate shifts +2 toward Dem over their previous election, that is 4 of that 5 losing their seat.

EDIT: And they all were last elected in 2018 and look at the amount of shit that has happened since then. Particularly of note, Roe v Wade wasn't overturned by SCOTUS.

[Paranoid Android]

NEWS

Former President Donald Trump will participate in a CNN presidential town hall next week in New Hampshire.

Remember when the whole narrative that there was too much free media coverage to Trump in 2016. Guess we will never learn. But hey this is CNN they changed to a right, conservative network and they always chase ratings. I think they would give him coverage before the ownership change. CNN just can't help themselves.

[PosPosPos]

NEWS

Former President Donald Trump will participate in a CNN presidential town hall next week in New Hampshire.

Remember when the whole narrative that there was too much free media coverage to Trump in 2016. Guess we will never learn. But hey this is CNN they changed to a right, conservative network and they always chase ratings. I think they would give him coverage before the ownership change. CNN just can't help themselves.

On the contrary, if extensive coverage of Trump's abhorrent words and actions doesn't deter Americans from voting for him, that just damns American voters at broad.

I fail to see why CNN should be blamed for covering both sides of the aisle like they are supposed to begin with.

[Milchshake]

On the contrary, if extensive coverage of Trump's abhorrent words and actions doesn't deter Americans from voting for him, that just damns American voters at broad.

I fail to see why CNN should be blamed for covering both sides of the aisle like they are supposed to begin with.

A whole generation confusing contrarianism for news, is how we got here.

Calling out CNN and others for their bad faith is the necessary first step.

[PosPosPos]

A whole generation confusing contrarianism for news, is how we got here.

Calling out CNN and others for their bad faith is the necessary first step.

Sure, if CNN intentionally painted Trump in a good light. Which I am pretty sure they haven't, so the only logical and rational conclusion here to be had is you voters are to blame for still voting for him in spite of his publicly-visible misbehavior.

[Kaleredar]

Sure, if CNN intentionally painted Trump in a good light. Which I am pretty sure they haven't, so the only logical and rational conclusion here to be had is you voters are to blame for still voting for him in spite of his publicly-visible misbehavior.

…but the majority of Americans didn’t vote trump into office. Ever.

[Paranoid Android]

Sure, if CNN intentionally painted Trump in a good light. Which I am pretty sure they haven't, so the only logical and rational conclusion here to be had is you voters are to blame for still voting for him in spite of his publicly-visible misbehavior.

You don't seem to connect to what happened in 2016 to what is happening now. CNN and the media farmed Trump for ratings and thus he had so much free media coverage.

In 2016 the media thought he was a clown and dismissed him. They even talked about all the shocking and dumb shit he said. You think most people cared about the media interpretation? No, they just heard Trump at every rally and speech covered by the media.

Plus you don't understand how media works. CNN will not press Trump if they want access to Trump. If you think CNN is going to take down Trump and again this is a Town Hall, it won't. There is the oh btw, CNN's turn to the right.

[Edge-]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald...in-nine-months

Donald Trump Jr.—the self-proclaimed general of the meme wars—tore into Fox News on a podcast Monday, partly over the right-wing cable behemoth not welcoming him on their airwaves in nine months. “I’ve been watching the censorship happening, even in conservative mainstream media,” Trump Jr. said on a Monday edition of the right-wing Steak for Breakfast podcast. “You saw what Fox did to Tucker Carlson last week, and the week before that, it was Dan Bongino, and, you know, the people who would actually question some of that narrative like: Is it a brilliant plan to send $130 billion to Ukraine, one of the most corrupt nations in the world?” Then the son of the former president took issue with the network over not having him on in months. “I used to be on Fox 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 times a week. I haven’t been on in nine months. Not a call, not an invite, not anything,” he continued. “So I understand what it appears like they’re trying to do to the America First movement. You know, Tucker was another one of those voices,” he concluded, suggesting Carlson’s Fox News ouster was over the host talking about forbidden topics. A Trump Jr. spokesman declined further comment, while Fox News representatives didn’t return The Daily Beast’s request for comment

Donnie Jr., complaining that he's not given a platform he believes he's owed because his family has become legally toxic. Also, because he's now the son of an ex-president, not exactly the most newsworthy person around.

I don't think they're going to be taking all this well.

[Breccia]

Donnie Jr., complaining that he's not given a platform he believes he's owed because his family has become legally toxic.

He.

Literally.

Was.

His father bought one. He has a platform.

[Edge-]

He.

Literally.

Was.

His father bought one. He has a platform.

A platform anyone watches/reads*

[DarkTZeratul]

The typical "no one's talking to me, it must be because I'm censored" act. It honestly baffles me every day how people can be conned by these turds and their terrible outlook on things.

"I've said it before, conservative voices are being silenced. I said it on my Youtube channel. I said it on Joe Rogan. I said it on Jordan Peterson's kayaking podcast. I said it on Tucker Carlson - twice, actually. And I said it in my New York Times bestselling book, Conservative Voices Are Being Silenced. It's a point I have to keep making over and over and over again."

[Breccia]

Well, things are not looking good for Donald Trump.

1) The DA in the "$130,000 whore payment" case has asked the judge if Trump could please stop attacking lawyers and witnesses in the case and naturally Team Trump is insisting that he still be allowed.

The filing is in response to a motion last week from prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office who are seeking to bar Trump from publicly disclosing evidence that is due to be turned over to his defense team as the case moves toward trial next year.

The filing by Assistant District Attorney Catherine McCaw argued that “safeguards that will protect the integrity of the materials” are necessary because the “risk” that Trump would use them “inappropriately is substantial.” She asked the judge to ensure that the defense could use discovery materials only for trial purposes and that Trump view the evidence only in the presence of his lawyers.

McCaw cited Trump’s record of speaking out against witnesses, investigators and court officials involved in the swirling probes in his orbit.

“Donald J. Trump has a longstanding and perhaps singular history of attacking witnesses, investigators, prosecutors, trial jurors, grand jurors, judges, and others involved in legal proceedings against him, putting those individuals and their families at considerable safety risk,” McCaw wrote.

She pointed to Trump’s attacks against his former personal attorney Michael Cohen as one such example. Cohen is expected to be a key witness in the DA’s case, which involves hush money payments Cohen was involved with.

Trump's lawyers return filing was, basically, "he's running for President".

No, really.

"The People have proposed what would be an unprecedented and extraordinarily broad muzzle on a leading contender for the presidency of the United States," Trump attorneys Susan Necheles, Joe Tacopina and Todd Blanche wrote to New York state Judge Juan Merchan, who is overseeing the case.

“The People’s Proposed Protective Order infringes upon Trump’s First Amendment right to freely discuss his own character and qualifications for federal office and the First Amendment rights of the American people to hear Trump’s side of the story,” it said.

So that's the deal, people. Want to discuss the case you're in despite a gag order? Just run for office.

2) It's time for the chorus, ladies and gentlemen, sing along, you all know the words!

Ninety-nine bottles of beer on the wall,
Ninety-nine bottles of beeeeer,
I never thought Trump would turn on me
Ninety-eight bottles of beer on the wall.

Trump attacks McEnemy in broad freaking daylight.

Trump reshared a post from McEnany on his Truth Social platform and wrote, “I guess Kayleigh is no longer speaking so favorably about DeSanctimonious now that his Polls are shot!”

In February, McEnany urged Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to join the 2024 GOP presidential race and challenge her former boss. McEnany argued at the time, “How can you wait when you are currently the hottest governor in Republican politics…?”

Then things spilled out onto the streets as various MAGA people took sides. Of note:

Over the last few months, she’s been a cheerleader for @GovRon DeSantis even though she owes her career to Trump.
She still hasn’t endorsed him for 2024.

-- Laura Loomer

vs

McEnany doesn’t owe her career to Trump. She was a CNN contributor and the RNC spokesperson prior to her roles with Trump’s campaign and Admin. She’s also a graduate of Harvard. Her own hard work and faithfulness to Christ advanced her career.

Kayleigh and many other strong women (including Katrina Pierson, Erin Perrine, me, and others) had careers long before and will long after working for Trump. We simply moved forward with our lives like normal women. This is embarrassing from idiots like Loomer whose own focus now is just desperately trying to get where we were.

-- Jenna Ellis

I'm not typically one to yell "Catfight! CATFIGHT!" but "MAGA fight!" is different.

3) Team Trump hands Jack Smith a roadmap to their defense strategy for the stolen intelligence documents case.

"Don't you mean 'the Mar-a-Lago case'?"

No. The issue is stolen federal documents, some of which were top secret. Which privately-owned building they were in isn't really my concern.

While speaking on MSNBC's The Katie Phang Show on Sunday, Coleman Jr. discussed a letter that Trump's attorneys sent to House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Turner, an Ohio Republican, asking for the GOP majority House to take over the federal investigation. Coleman Jr. noted the letter included how Trump's attorneys view his innocence, which would give Smith's office a glimpse of how they will present their case.

"I think it is very interesting though from a lawyer's perspective to see them lay out their entire defense basically before this has even happened," Coleman Jr. said. "It is right there. So, if you are looking at that, and you are thinking about how you are going to prosecute this case, you have just given Jack Smith a roadmap into what you do need to cover during the grand jury presentation to make sure, not only that you are able to get an indictment, but then how you are going to structure your prosecution."

On Sunday, Coleman Jr. concluded his comments about Smith, adding, "It will be interesting to see moving forward, if he [Trump] is indicted for this, which I do believe he will be, how that impacts Jack Smith's presentation of the case and then ultimately their theory of how they move forward."

For the record, I think Coleman might be a bit optimistic, but not too much. It's going to be hard to defend Trump on this case, considering the FBI raid did find stolen federal government (not privately-owned) documents which Trump said he didn't have. Trump cannot argue "I didn't do it" only "it was okay that I did" in some form...which he just gave to Jack Smith to plan a counter-attack.

"Couldn't Team Trump come up with a secondary defense? Swap tactics?"

His options are already few. There isn't much to swap to. So unless there's evidence that the documents were declassified -- and I'm just calling it now, no there isn't, Trump's claims that he declassified them with telepathy tells me he never signed anything -- his only option really is "I'm innocent, because I say I am".

4) And finally, it hasn't been a good day for Trump on Twitter.

Someone posted an AI image of Trump in Vietnam and Twitter slapped a clarifying note on it almost immediately.

"Wait, did the poster claim the image was real?"

Actually funny story, no. If they actually think Trump served, the poster never said that. And quite frankly the image is clearly fake.



Trump's face is clearly too old for the Vietnam War. And, no expert, but that uniform looks way more recent, too.

"Can you link it?"

Uh...no. It was taken down. But that's not the point.

Twitter flagged that with a "clarification"

This is AI-generated picture of Donald Trump.

Donald Trump has never served in the military.

linked to a NYTimes article, citing that Trump dodged Vietnam, and yes, "bone spurs" that mysteriously appeared once he graduated, diagnosed by a friend of the family whose office was in Trump Tower.

"Are you calling Trump a draft dodger?"

Yes, but I don't put a negative connotation to that term in and of itself. My father joined the National Guard, for example. Difference is, my father never ran for a pro-war Republican Party insisting on using US troops as armor for Saudi oil tanks.

But that's bone spurs under the bridge. Twitter flagging even a clearly fake image to remind everyone Trump never served should come as a warning to Trump and his rabid fanbase. Gosh, it looks like Trump and Twitter aren't friends, you guys.

[D Luniz]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald...in-nine-months



Donnie Jr., complaining that he's not given a platform he believes he's owed because his family has become legally toxic. Also, because he's now the son of an ex-president, not exactly the most newsworthy person around.

I don't think they're going to be taking all this well.

I guess he thinks cause they keep trying bring up Hunter, he needs air time.

[Breccia]

In an 18-page letter with no legal standing, he's demanding a mistrial.

UPDATE: I guess it was a real filing. The judge denied it, on the grounds of "duh", handwaving it with apparently little to no comment, then allowed Carroll's testimony to continue.

I checked several sites, including CNN and Reuters. None of them said anything other than "denied". Granted, I suggested the motion had no legal standing, but I thought there would at least be a sentence or two I could quote. Nope. Handwaved.

That's Team Trump's crack legal team, ladies and gentlemen. They no longer have anything to present that even deserves a sentence in response.

Well...maybe a prison sentence.

[Milchshake]

UPDATE: I guess it was a real filing. The judge denied it, on the grounds of "duh", handwaving it with apparently little to no comment, then allowed Carroll's testimony to continue.

I checked several sites, including CNN and Reuters. None of them said anything other than "denied". Granted, I suggested the motion had no legal standing, but I thought there would at least be a sentence or two I could quote. Nope. Handwaved.

That's Team Trump's crack legal team, ladies and gentlemen. They no longer have anything to present that even deserves a sentence in response.

Well...maybe a prison sentence.

That was basially his defense lawyers whole strategy. They have nothing after that. Now's it's Jean Carroll's turn to present.

[Breccia]

So Team Trump made at least one good decision in Trump's rape trial: Trump didn't testify.

In a trial that has been going quite badly for Trump, he is not going to bother making a last-ditch effort to win over the jury by testifying that he did not rape E. Jean Carroll and then facing cross-examination. In essence, his defense now rests on his attorneys’ cross-examination of E. Jean Carroll, which was abysmal.

Even though Trump’s decision not to testify makes it much more likely that the jury will rule against him, I believe that he and his lawyers are making the wise decision. The former president is currently under indictment in New York for 37 counts of false statements. He also faces an open investigation in Fulton County, Georgia, where District Attorney Fani Willis has announced that she will disclose whether she plans to indict Trump by early summer.

Special Counsel Jack Smith is likewise deciding whether to seek an indictment of Trump for hoarding the classified documents discovered in his office and residence at Mar-A-Lago and/or for his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

It’s important to note that any statement Trump would make on the witness stand during this trial could be used in any of those cases as well.

In addition, Trump faces the theoretical possibility of criminal indictment for the rape of E. Jean Carroll. In New York, there is no statute of limitations for the crime of first-degree rape. If he were to take the stand and melt down (like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men), he could be indicted by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg. So, while choosing not to testify is a bad option, it’s likely the least bad option available to Trump right now.

For more on the bolded above, the same site has an article headlined Trump Lawyer Joe Tacopina’s Terrible Cross-Examination Gets Even Worse. I'll quote the one line I'm sure @cubby would agree with the most:

Tacopina also forgot the cardinal rule to never ask a question where you don’t know the answer.

But, that brings up this next point: he gave a deposition before fleeing the continent. And it's going to be played in the courtroom.

Which means, Trump can't clarify, he can't change his mind, he can't What I Meant Was. Carroll's lawyers, by contrast, can only "ask Trump" questions where they know the answer. Because, effectively, they're cross-examining at VHS tape.

Oh, also, a second victim testified and it is not good news for Trump.

Jessica Leeds, 81, of Asheville, North Carolina, told jurors at a civil trial arising from Carroll’s lawsuit that Trump grabbed her chest and ran his hand up her skirt as they sat side by side in first class on a New York City-bound jet. After a few seconds, she said, she wriggled free of Trump, told him “I don’t need this” and stormed to the back of the plane.

“There was no conversation. It was like out of the blue. It was like a tussle,” Leeds testified. “He was trying to kiss me, trying to pull me towards him. He was grabbing my breasts. It was like he had 40 zillion hands. It was like a tussling match between the two of us."

If that attack sounds familiar, it's because Carroll described it about the same way. The article I cited said they might call a third victim.

Which directly goes against Trump's VHS tape statements like "she's not my type" when there's a demonstrable pattern of behavior by Trump.

"How do we know they're telling the truth?"

Besides the fact they're taking the stand while Trump is five time zones away? Let Trump take the stand, let him go under oath, let him deny the accusations in the courtroom. Then I'll admit it's he said/they said. Until then, the only evidence is against Trump.

"But you said Trump taking the stand would be stupid!"

Yes. I did. He probably shouldn't have committed all those crimes, huh? If you knock over a Five Guys, flee from the cops, and end up cornered behind a dumpster with nothing but a Little Cheeseburger with green peppers and A1 and three bullets when there are four patrol cars at the other end, surrendering would be stupid because your ass is going to jaili. But it's the choice that doesn't get you shot and killed. The issue isn't that surrendering would be stupid in a vacuum. The issue is that surrendering would still be your best shot at not going to jail, or the morgue, forever.

I know it's not a perfect analogy. Trump would never get the single-patty burger. But he grabbed the goods and fled.

"Could Trump have settled? This is a civil case."

Well, unlike Dominion, I don't think Carroll had a number she'd accept. I mean, not one Trump could afford. Maybe she'd have taken something hyperbolic like TEN BILLION DOLLARS! because you can do a lot of good with that money. Maybe. I don't get that vibe, but we'll never know. Trump doesn't have that. More importantly, someone running for public office effectively admitting rape with a nine-figure payout is committing political suicide. Yes, even in the Republican Party. Enough classic conservatives have backed away already that Trump can't afford to lose more by saying, with a huge check, "I had sex with this woman for way more than $130,000".

- - - Updated - - -

And of course, there's more.

So in addition to the witnesses I already cited, there's Dr. Leslie Lebowitz who is, you guessed it, a psychiatrist who specializes in trauma.

Her testimony went exactly how you think it went.

"Well surely she's some hack off the street Carroll's lawyers knew would lie for them."

Actually this is not her first case. She attempted to defend someone who'd been brain damaged, then convinced by their lawyer to plead guilty to a death sentence.

And before that, in 2011. Incidentally, The Daily Mail calls her Ms. Lebowitz. Not doctor. Shame on you, DM.

"Okay, but I bet she's still an unqualified hack."

"She got her PhD at Duke. The #12 best school for psychology in the USA.

"Pfft. Anyone can graduate with a PhD. I meant besides that."

She's been published and/or cited 22 times since 1988.

"Pfft. Any--"

Wait, here she is in the Columbia Law Review too.

"Um...I mean, those are just--"

Also, she was the one who devised the Air Force sexual abuse training/reporting program.

"...um..."

In her book "Adaptive Disclosure" she talks about how veterans with war-zone exp--

"Okay okay. Fine. But nobody can trust a diagnosis from a few minutes of observation."

She spent 22 hours with Ms. Carroll.

"Whatever. She's clearly just some objectively qualified, routinely published, highly-valued expert who spent sufficient time with the victim in her field of expertise. That doesn't mean anything."

Hmm. What did Trump say on the stand?

"You just posted that he didn't."

Fair enough. What did Trump's doctor say on the stand.

"Trump's doctor that examined Carroll, or Trump's lawyer that examined Trump?"

Either.

"Uh...(flips through notes)...uh...I can't find one."

Exactly. I will admit, as Trump's legal team has proven repeatedly, there will always be people willing to risk their career and good name taking a longshot or losing case purely for publicity. It doesn't typically work out. Dr. Lebowitz shows no signs of this.

Like I said a few hours ago, Trump has no evidence in his favor. Carroll took the stand, Trump didn't, other than the deposition which can't be cross-examined. Tapioca's cross of Carroll was counterproductive. Carroll has witnesses and experts, Trump doesn't, or at least if he does they haven't been mentioned yet. And Carroll might not be allowed to mention the physical evidence, but that's because Trump refused to counter it with what would clearly be proof of innocence if he was. It's not part of the court case, but it's part of reality, and we're allowed to take it into consideration ourselves.

By various articles I've read, Carroll has enough witnesses to last till next week, and Team Trump has literally nothing but closing arguments.

I don't see how he waddles away from this one.

- - - Updated - - -

In the ongoing effort to prove that grabbing someone against their will isn't like him at all, NBC and WaPo report that, coming back from the Waco rally...anyone remember that?...that Trump was interviewed about Bragg's charges, got frustrated, grabbed the reporter's phone from him, called him a fucktard, and demanded the reporter be thrown off the plane.

But...the phone was still recording...so...yeah, now the recording is everywhere.

The NBC reporter was asking about Trump's own words, specifically, the "death and destruction" posts Trump put on his own platform on purpose.

Funny story, when asked for comment, Team Trump said this:

We extended invites to four other mainstream reporters/outlets and they all said they could not due to either [White House Correspondents’ Dinner] events that week or because their editors refused...

Yeah. Team Trump admitted that, while Trump was on the way to his biggest 2024 rally so far, reporters were RSVPing with "no thanks, we have Biden plans" or better yet "No thanks, we'd rather sit at home and do nothing than interview your boss".

Team Trump said that, as a defense to Trump, on purpose.

[Edge-]

I don't believe you covered this yet @Breccia but - https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-...pay-legal-fees

A New York judge has tossed out Donald Trump’s lawsuit against The New York Times, and ordered the former president to pay all attorneys fees, legal expenses, and associated costs.

Trump filed the lawsuit in 2021, alleging that the newspaper, three of its reporters and his niece Mary Trump engaged in an “insidious plot” to obtain his private records for a Pulitzer-winning story about his tax issues.

While the court tossed out Trump’s claims against the newspaper and its reporters, the claims against the ex-president’s niece have yet to be ruled upon.

“The New York Times is pleased with the judge’s decision today,” a paper spokesperson wrote in a statement to The Daily Beast. “It is an important precedent reaffirming that the press is protected when it engages in routine newsgathering to obtain information of vital importance to the public.”

The twice-impeached former president’s claims against the defendants “fail as a matter of constitutional law,” New York Supreme Court Justice Robert R. Reed wrote in his ruling filed on Wednesday afternoon, deeming the paper’s newsgathering as being at “the very core of protected First Amendment activity.”

Reed further ruled that Trump failed to demonstrate any tortious interference when the Times provided his niece with a burner phone to communicate about the records. Furthermore, the judge said the ex-president failed to prove unjust enrichment or negligent supervision on the parts of the Times or reporters Susanne Craig, David Barstow, and Russell Buettner.

In the original lawsuit Trump alleged that the Times colluded with his niece to “smuggle records out of her attorney’s office and turn them over ” to the paper despite a confidentiality agreement she signed in 2001 during a family dispute. He further claimed that Craig, Barstow, and Buettner were “motivated, at least in part, by their actual malice” in reporting on the details within tax returns he’d refused to disclose.

After her uncle initially filed his lawsuit in September 2021, Mary Trump told The Daily Beast: “I think he is a fucking loser, and he is going to throw anything against the wall he can. It’s desperation. The walls are closing in and he is throwing anything against the wall that will stick. As is always the case with Donald, he’ll try and change the subject.”

Another legal failure to add to the list, and he owes the NYT some money now!

But I guess if he really wants to continue to pursue the case against his niece he might have a chance there as that hasn't been ruled on yet!

[Breccia]

“I think he is a fucking loser,"

As a reminder, Trump sued for one hundred million dollars. The fact that he got less than nothing is...actually a tad surprising, releasing tax records is awkward territory.

Also worth noting: the NYTimes effectively said, and got a Pulitzer for, "Trump is not very rich at all, and cheats on his taxes". Trump has yet to sue for defamation. It might have something to do with the Trump Org being sued for cheating on his taxes.

[Templar 331]

I thought his ass couldn't leave the country because his passport was confiscated? Imagine if any of us were arrested for 32 felonies and left the country. But then again it's not like we don't know where he is ALL the time.