Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

Damn man, I really shoulda shorted the shit outta DWAC when it was at like $100/share or some shit.

[postman1782]

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1...otk1ZWhIA&s=19

Trump is coming back and likely burying his own Truth Social. It is what is. Idk if this is news anymore.

I feel dirty posting this on this loser. I hope only time is if prosecuted. I don't even want to say anything until he sadly becomes the Republican nominee.

So, he is going to violate his FCC contract? Color me shocked. He has an exclusivity contract with DWAC, the company that owns the majority with Truth Social.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63725948

If Donald Trump were to stop posting, or do it elsewhere, he could potentially tank the share price of DWAC, wiping hundreds of millions of dollars off its value.

So important was Donald Trump's exclusivity with Truth Social to the proposed merger with DWAC, that a legal provision was placed in the agreement.

It states that "President Trump is generally obligated to make any social media post on Truth Social and may not make the same post on another social media site for 6 hours."

It means that not only could Donald Trump lose a lot of money by using Twitter (by spooking investors) but he could also get sued.

"It's hard to say for sure who would win, but it wouldn't be a completely crazy suit to try to bring," says Ohlrogge.

It means Donald Trump is now in a quandary. He might want to go back to Twitter. But he is financially - not to mention legally - incentivised not to.

[Breccia]

Damn man, I really shoulda shorted the shit outta DWAC when it was at like $100/share or some shit.

It's been a while since I looked, but I think you can ionly short a stock inside a single day of trading. And DWAC didn't really dive enough in a single day for you to have second thoughts.

For example, on the news that

Trump is coming back and likely burying his own Truth Social.

Thanks P.A. for that, by the way. Today, the stock dropped about 7.50%! Which...is a dollar thirty per share.

Oh, and it's too late now. The stock has an effective floor of $10 due to the nature of these special types of buyouts. Yes, I suppose it could technically drop lower if the free market thinks DWAC doesn't have enough money to pay back all its investors, but somehow, I think they all saw this coming, and don't want to get sued or jailed.

Your best bet numerically would have been to buy it at $10 and sell it immediately, honestly. That shit happened nearly instantly.

Also I hate to disagree with the BBC and/or @postman1782 so...I won't. Well, not entirely. Various sites I have used before say about 30 million shares of stock were sold. So if, for example, the current price of $16 drops to the basement of $10, that's $6 x 30 million = $180 million. That's just barely "hundreds of millions" but the article was written in Nov 2022 when the stock was...well it still sucked, but it didn't suck balls.

On that note, if anyone still exists who bought at $10 and hasn't sold yet, they're...okay their judgement is questionable for (a) not selling yet and (b) getting in bed with Trump or (c) please don't conjure that mental image, that is +60% on your investment since Oct 2021, which really isn't that bad, honestly. But you had plenty of options to sell earlier than this, so even though +60% over 15 months isn't horrible, you could have had much more than that. Easily.

By contrast, if you bought it at the bargain basement price on Dec 20, 2022, it went from $15 to $16 and this would be a very good time to pre-market flee. You made 6.66% (repeating of course) profit in just under three weeks. That's also pretty good.

If you are literally any other owner, you're fucked. Because I think I just cited the only two days in the stock's history where it was under $16. And besides the news posted today, there's still upcoming votes that are likely to end in the SPAC's dissolution. Because not only is there not a human being alive who thinks Trump will run for office again but stay off Twitter, but there's also not a human being alive who thinks Trump won't break a contract just because he feels like it.

Edge- you might be kicking yourself, but at least you're not kicking yourself while you're down.

[postman1782]

Trump is shitting his depends on Truth Social. He is scared of Jack Smith, and the death threats to Smith and his family and the families of the investigators, should add a couple decades to his prison sentence.

[Breccia]

Trump is shitting his depends on Truth Social.

I particularly like how Trump calls him a potential criminal and terrorist. I cannot think of any more textbook example of projection than that.

[postman1782]

I particularly like how Trump calls him a potential criminal and terrorist. I cannot think of any more textbook example of projection than that.

Especially after openly admitting to committing a felony.

[Breccia]

Especially after openly admitting to committing a felony.

Well, he didn't admit it under oath. But yes, if you have two different defenses you don't have any. If the FBI planted the documents, it's not because you legally declassified and kept them.

[beanman12345]

So, he is going to violate his FCC contract? Color me shocked. He has an exclusivity contract with DWAC, the company that owns the majority with Truth Social.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63725948

He needs Facebook for the fundraising for his campaign. Twitter he probably don't care too much other than his usual shitposting.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I mean, we already know that Trump tried to declassify these documents found at Mar a Lago on Jan 19th 2021. The request was submitted and denied. So Trump just took them. This proves intent, which is the hardest part of a case. If he's not indicted, our justice system truly is broken beyond repair.

[postman1782]

I mean, we already know that Trump tried to declassify these documents found at Mar a Lago on Jan 19th 2021. The request was submitted and denied. So Trump just took them. This proves intent, which is the hardest part of a case. If he's not indicted, our justice system truly is broken beyond repair.

See, I haven't seen any report of him actually trying to declassify them. And even then, he still cannot have them. Especially some that even he cannot declassify, like SIGINTEL, human intel, and nuclear documents.

[SoulForge]

See, I haven't seen any report of him actually trying to declassify them. And even then, he still cannot have them. Especially some that even he cannot declassify, like SIGINTEL, human intel, and nuclear documents.

This. Declassified or not the documents are not his to just take. Can't seem to get that through some people's thick skulls.

EDIT; Just read Trumps most recent bullshit excuse about folders being cool keepsakes and they were actually empty. This man is beyond stupid and didn't learn a fucking thing while he was president. This new excuse is so unimaginably stupid just like the rest. It doesn't matter if the folders are empty. You treat anything marked with a classification the same. It could be an empty folder, a box, or an actual document with information in it. Until the markings are removed or the item destroyed its handling is the same.

[Edge-]

See, I haven't seen any report of him actually trying to declassify them. And even then, he still cannot have them. Especially some that even he cannot declassify, like SIGINTEL, human intel, and nuclear documents.

What are you talking about? He declassified them WITH HIS MIND

[Breccia]

As the Jan 6th panel is shut down by people who supported the insurrection, we see its effects taper off. Navarro, for example, filed a court motion to have his contempt of Congress charge removed, and with the panel dissolved, naturally the j--

Judge declines to dismiss contempt charges against ex-Trump aide Peter Navarro

Wait, what?

A federal judge declined to dismiss charges of criminal contempt of Congress against former Trump White House adviser Peter Navarro on Thursday, clearing the way for a trial in a case that’s dragged on in court since Navarro refused to comply with a subpoena issued by the now-defunct House Jan. 6 select committee.

Navarro pleaded not guilty in June to two counts of contempt of Congress, one for refusing to appear for a deposition and the other for refusing to produce documents requested by the committee.

He has maintained that he cannot testify because Trump invoked executive privilege, which can allow presidents and their aides to sidestep congressional scrutiny. If convicted, he faces up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $100,000.

Navarro has "failed to come forward with any evidence to support the claimed assertion of privilege," District Judge Amit Mehta wrote in the 39-page ruling.

He has offered "neither a sworn affidavit nor testimony from him or Trump" to back up his claims, Mehta said. "Without actual proof, the court cannot find that there was a formal invocation of privilege."

Mehta further dismissed Navarro's argument that the committee should've reached out to Trump about his invocation of privilege.

Huh. Well, didn't see that coming.

I particularly like that last line. I was under the impression the panel did ask Trump to stop by -- but if they didn't, then Navarro saying they should have sounds like something Trump and Navarro should talk about. Preferably while in adjoining cells.

[Edge-]

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/20/trum...y-clinton.html

A federal judge on Thursday imposed nearly $1 million in sanctions on former President Donald Trump and his lawyer for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and others that claimed they tried to rig the 2016 presidential election in Clinton’s favor.

“This case should never have been brought,” wrote Judge John Middlbrooks in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in his order sanctioning Trump for the suit the judge previously tossed out.

“Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start,” Middlebrooks wrote.

“No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim.”

Trump and his lead lawyer in the case, Alina Habba, are jointly and severally liable for the total amount of sanctions the judge imposed: $937,989.39.

“The amount of fees awarded in this case, while reasonable, is substantial,” Middlebrooks wrote.

I hope they send some repo guys to maralago.

[Breccia]

I hope they send some repo guys to maralago.

Speaking of Trump, remember how he promised the most transparent administration ever?

And lied?

Trump calls for jailing journalists who broke Supreme Court’s draft abortion decision

“They’ll never find out, & it’s important that they do,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social website. “So, go to the reporter & ask him/her who it was. If not given the answer, put whoever in jail until the answer is given."

"Okay, jailing a journalist for printing a story leaked to them is bad. But at least he didn't--"

"You might add the editor and publisher to the list.”

"...did Trump call for the jailing of whoever found Hunter Biden's laptop?"

No.

"Did Trump call for the jailing of the journalists who printed the story?"

No.

"Didn't he claim there was sensitive information on that?"

I mean, he lied, but yes.

[Cthulhu 2020]

See, I haven't seen any report of him actually trying to declassify them. And even then, he still cannot have them. Especially some that even he cannot declassify, like SIGINTEL, human intel, and nuclear documents.

I forget where I read it, but Trump did attempt to have the documents declassified the day before he lost his power and he was declined. Mere possession itself isn't necessarily criminal, and an indictment for this hinges upon proving intent to knowingly keep as well as deceive. That's the whole reason Biden isn't in trouble, or at least won't be. There's zero reason to believe there was any intent on his part and he didn't even need to "comply" with requests to return them, they were found and returned before there was even a request.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump to be the keynote speaker at CPAC. But hey, that's just the "fringe" and not the main stream conservative movement, right?

[postman1782]

Coming across breaking news right now on my phone, Judge in Trump VS Clinton case sanctions Trump and his lawyer $1 million for the frivolous lawsuit.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...inton-00078700

[Breccia]

Coming across breaking news right now on my phone, Judge in Trump VS Clinton case sanctions Trump and his lawyer $1 million for the frivolous lawsuit.

Between the times you and Edge- posted this, I had time to read the judge's ruling. I understood maybe 20% of it, maximum, but there is one key takeaway that stuck out.

Defendants request $1,058,283.50 in fees and costs. See generally Defendants’ Joint
Motion for Sanctions (DE 280-2) (hereinafter “Application”). The Application is a 304-page
document filed in support of Defendants’ fee request. See id. The Application contains eleven
exhibits in support of the requested fees for each set of lawyers/law firms representing (some
jointly) the Defendants in this case. Each exhibit contains (1) a declaration attesting to the
authenticity of the hours and rates billed, with a corresponding summary of fees based on stages
of the case; (2) background information on each timekeeper that describes professional experience
and credentials; and (3) time entries

Now, the judge will go on at great length to discuss how much the defence, Clinton's lawyers, are due and why. Like, it starts at page 34 and goes on until page 45, hardee har har. And see the bolded above -- they submitted over three hundred pages detailing exactly how much they were due, and why. After reading that, I was still confused, but at least I know what "block billing" is.

I mean, I don't blame them -- it's not like they had any legal arguments from Team Trump to smack down.

But.

The literal very next line is

In response, Plaintiff filed largely indecipherable objections.

No really, it's page 35, check for yourself.

I think @cubby needs to sound off on this, because he actually knows what he's talking about and I don't, but to me at least, this looks like the single biggest difference between Trump's lawyers, like any/all of them, and...like, the entire rest of the profession. You know, competent lawyers.

Allow me to extend the judge's depiction of, what appears to be in legalspeak, "a fucking trainwreck of a clownshow and a shitshow".

. For instance, in raising line-by-line objections to Defendant
Joffe’s attorneys’ fees, Plaintiff failed to multiply the hourly rate by the number of hours billed,
making the total amount objected to uncertain. I doubt that
this was intentional because nowhere else in the Corrected Objections does this appear to happen.

Like, what the fuck, my students would have caught that by the third week in class -- if they didn't catch it in high school or before.

Allow me to extend it again.

Plaintiff

That's Trump, I should have made that clear earlier.

’s objections for “duplicative” time entries are not presented in a way that allows
this Court to properly review and analyze them. Plaintiff’s table simply points out entries that he
believes are “duplicative” but does not say what it duplicates. Instead, Plaintiff leaves it up to the
Court to piece together a cogent series of objections. I refuse to do so. But even when I reviewed
the relevant time entries with an eye for duplicative billing, I did not find any unreasonable billing
that merits a cut in hours.

Again.

I considered whether to offer Plaintiff yet another opportunity to cure his objections. Without a motion, however, I did
not find it to be a fair exercise of this Court’s discretion. In almost every area of law, a party
waives an objection for failing to properly raise it. So too here. Thus, to the extent that Plaintiff’s
objections were not clearly identifiable, I did not consider them.

Again!

The Plaintiff does not even attempt to respond with respect to most of the legal failings of
his claims.

Like, holy fucking shit, the judge goes on for pages and pages about how much Trump's lawyers just flat-out suck at their job.

And that wasn't even the main issue! The main issue was Trump abusing the legal system! Speaking of which, hey @cubby what's "shotgun pleading" as shown starting page six? I think I get the general idea, but I keep envisioning what a staggered demon does just before Doomguy turns them into a fine red mist.

We've more or less all been saying for years, that Trump is out of competent legal help, as shown by Powell and Giuliani and whoever it was that stood on the balcony texting while the FBI went through Trump's stolen stuff. But this might be the single best documented evidence of this, bringing it from a reasonable conclusion through educated opinion to basically objective fact.

Wow. Just...wow.

[Cthulhu 2020]

300 pages of why Trump and his lawyers owe Clinton and her lawyers a million dollars?

I expect the Trump response to be something along the lines of "no u" given his history.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, given Trump's history of not paying... well... anyone who works for him, who wants to bet that his lawyers are going to be left holding the bill for this one?

[Breccia]

Also, given Trump's history of not paying... well... anyone who works for him, who wants to bet that his lawyers are going to be left holding the bill for this one?

I mean, it's possible Trump's lawyers took the case on contingency...but, like, why would anyone? The case had no chance of success.

But then I read the judge's ruling and was all "oh, because they're incompetent".

So I'm with you on this one. I don't think Trump paid them -- even if he was supposed to.