Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

So earlier today I said the May 2024 trial date just set by Cannon is an insult to justice and an invitation to skirt consequences, as Team Trump will use every one of their tricks (and Cannon will allow them) to push the date back closer to the election, then push it back after the election because the election is in the way.

I stand by that.

But it would be hypocritical of me not to point out that not everyone agrees.

1) Experts: Judge Cannon just set the “worst possible” Trump trial date for the Republican Party

Yeah, this date is after the RNC nomination. Meaning, the Republican Party will have a fun choice to make.

They can continue with Trump as their front-runner and hope that his multiple criminal court cases don't do to them in 2024 what Trump did to them in 2020, and 2022, and 2018.

Or, they can try to eject Trump, the front runner of their party to this day, watch in horror as Trump runs third-party, splits the vote, and does to the RNC what H. Ross Perot did to them in 1992.

Again, to be clear, the third option is "Trump gets the nomination and also never goes to trial". The Republican Party has to make a decision before that happens. They have to decide, before this trial, if they think Trump will escape justice or not. And yes, the smart move is to take Trump aside and promise him a pardon in exchange for his fat ass stepping aside. He will never do that. Man doesn't even trust his wife anymore.

I do recommend this article. It's filled with quote from actual experts, not me, expressing solidarity that this date just sucks for the Republican Party. But it also points out something else worth mentioning:

Trump's attorneys also noted, in addition to his campaign schedule, Trump will be embroiled in other legal battles in the near future. He is facing criminal charges in Manhattan in connection to hush money payments made to an adult film star with a trial slated for that case in March 2024, and civil lawsuits scheduled to go to trial in New York this fall and next year. He's also the subject of two other criminal investigations — one in Georgia and the other a federal probe — in connection to his alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

That's right. Trump's lawyers said, under oath, that a reason to push Trump's trial back, was because they, Trump's lawyers, were too busy defending Trump from all those other crimes he committed.

Once, in an old book, I read about a lawyer who objected to a high bail amount for his client, a serial thief, by saying "Your Honor, this is my client's first murder." That....okay that might still be the worst defense I've ever heard, but this is pretty bad, too. "Your Honor, my client can't make that trial date because of all his other trials".

Wow.

Now I do recommend reading the article. The fact that I disagree with the core premise doesn't change the fact they have actual experts discussing the matter, and bring up a good number of related topics.

But.

You also all know I'm a vindictive motherfucker. So....

2) That Sound You Hear Is Donald Trump Screaming, Crying, and Throwing Up in a Mar-a-Lago Bathroom

Yeah, no chance in Shadowlands I was going to pass up that headline.

Trump received some no good, extremely bad legal news on Friday, when The Guardian reported that Fani Willis, the Fulton County district attorney criminally investigating his attempt to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia has “developed evidence to charge a sprawling racketeering indictment next month,” according to people familiar with the matter. Obviously, being charged with racketeering would be exactly as bad as it sounds—and yet somehow, that wasn’t even the worst news the ex-president received today.

Now, this article goes on to say that Trump is paying for his legal bills with donation money, and justifies it under the guise of "Biden is bigly witch hunt biased hoax JOBS!" In fact, his campaign manager Cheung even admitted it was all based on the image they crafted.

They see another political indictment or target letter and they know this is just the weaponized Biden Justice Department going after Trump. It solidifies in their mind what Trump has been saying for all these months. So much of the legal messaging is political messaging and so much of political messaging is legal messaging.

Aww, they feel Trump is being persecuted by Biden. Fuck their feelings. Cry into your single scoop of ice cream, you cultists.

And he's doing so openly, so apparently it's all legal to do that. Certainly he did a lot of it in his previous campaigns.

But spending all their money on keeping Trump out of jail for all those crimes he committed comes at a cost. When was the last time you saw a Trump ad?

Just over half the money Trump raised last quarter went to a campaign-affiliated political action committee that is covering his legal bills. According to the latest report to the Federal Election Commission, of the more than $35 million raised between March and June, the campaign received $17.7 million. The remainder went to the Save America PAC, which will report its latest finances on July 31 but had reportedly been spending millions on attorneys for Trump and his allies amid his bevy of ongoing cases, FEC disclosures show.

"A lot of money is going to legal and people who don't do much, and not a lot is left over to do marketing and advertising," one anonymous Trump advisor told the Post. "A lot of the money we're raising is just going to legal."

Trump has no shortage of bills, either. He's losing money to a federal settlement and Trump ORg settled out of court with Cohen for an undisclosed amount.

At some point, Trump might actually have to spend his own money.

- - - Updated - - -

Team Trump declares that there's no reason for Trump to go before the grand jury, because Trump did nothing wrong.

No, really.

There’s no need to appear in front of any grand jury right now. Trump did absolutely nothing wrong. He’s done nothing criminal.

Trump's lawyer went on to say that he wants his appearance on Trump's behalf in the courtroom broadcast.

"Is that how grand jury testimony works?"

No. It's how you run a disinformation campaign with the intent to play the victim card. "Oh, they wouldn't let cameras in the grand jury, that's so corrupt, that's so biased, that's not in any way textbook at alllllllllll".

Trump has not been subpoena'd by Smith, but we all know how grand juries work -- even if Trump either doesn't, or does and is lying. Trump gains nothing by testifying, true, and only risks perjury, but you don't admit that on FOX News. You claim innocent people handwave being invited to their only chance to avoid trial for charges, one of which could carry the death penalty. No, I'm not done bringing that up.

[Odinfrost]

Looks at the bottom part of the above post.
Hehehehehehe ahahahahahahahahaha! That might be the funniest thing in this shitshow yet.
How can anyone claim that stuff with a straight face?
Yeah, I'm not gonna show up in court because I did nothing wrong. Ahahahahahahahahahaha! Comedic gold!

[Breccia]

For Trump and Allies, a Waiting Game as Georgia Indictment Decisions Loom

The NYTimes sounds off on the Georgia racketeering issue.

Two indictments of Donald J. Trump are already in the books, but the outcome of a Georgia investigation into the former president and a number of his allies promises to be strikingly different.

While the cases filed by the Manhattan district attorney and the Department of Justice have focused mostly on Mr. Trump himself, a long-running investigation into election interference by prosecutors in Atlanta has cast a far broader net, with nearly 20 people already warned that they could face charges.

Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., is leading the investigation and has indicated she will seek charges by mid-August. A special grand jury that heard evidence for roughly seven months recommended more than a dozen people for indictments, and its forewoman strongly hinted in an interview in February that Mr. Trump was among them.

The Trump aides and allies whose conduct has been closely scrutinized in the inquiry include Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer; Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff; John Eastman, a legal architect of Mr. Trump’s efforts to stay in power; and Jeffrey Clark, a former high-ranking official at the Department of Justice who sought to intervene in Georgia after the 2020 election.

Yeah, it's a clusterfuckwits.

Remember, Georgia is being extra slow and extra careful. The GA DA already had a "special" grand jury, the one Trump tried to throw out like it was a 2020 election, which only advised but advised "yes, charge them". The next move is a standard grand jury.

It's not over yet, of course. As Trump's lawyers said in court:

It is one thing to indict a ham sandwich. To indict the mustard-stained napkin that it once sat on is quite another.

"What the fuck does that even mean?"

I think it means, that they're going to say, in court, "okay one of the 20 people involved is guilty, but just because the other 19 helped doesn't make us guilty". Otherwise the first sandwich sentence doesn't make sense.

"It's a sloppy variation of an old legal analogy."

You again!

"The phrase 'A DA could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich', most often attributed to Sol Wachtler, refers to the low burden of proof that's necessary to get a charge through a grand jury. The point of a grand jury, after all, is to ask if there's enough evidence to require a trial, not to convict. So unless the evidence is miniscule or exculpatory, when used, they tend to recommend trial. Otherwise the DA would drop the case as too weak. The Trump lawyer's version appears to be saying 'well a DA can get a grand jury to proceed even in a weak case, but this is a double weak case that happens to have once been related to the weak case'."

Wait, Trump's lawyers saw the testimony and evidence in the special grand jury?

"Probably not. I don't know if they were ever even in the room. He certainly made it clear he won't be in the room next time. They're grandstanding for their client, arguing the case in the court of public opinion, which holds no weight here. Besides, the judge in question knows full well how the judicial system works. They're part of it. They won't dismiss a case simply because the defendant's lawyers says it's a weak case."

Ah. Well in any event, racketeering against the Trump mafia seems highly appropriate. Trump already tried "I think you should throw out the DA, special grand jury, and judges because I'm losing" and it didn't work. He'll have to face the charges on the merits.

- - - Updated - - -

One other thing: DWAC stock price went up 50%.

"Yeah! MAGA!"

To $20.

"...okay but percents matter when you're desperate for good news."

Apparently, the stock price jumped on word that the SEC was going to settle for $18 million dollars, but in what feels like a miscarriage of justice, DWAC can avoid the payment if the deal falls through. That sure sounds like "Nobel Prize for Attempted Chemistry" level logic, but that's the deal.

"Isn't that a good reason for DWAC to walk away?"

Yes.

"...then why did the stock price go up?"

Well, the SEC could potentially have said "no, this deal is illegal, fuck all y'all" and ended it. They didn't. Some people are taking this as a glimmer of hope the deal might actually go through.

Also, the SEC is charging Florida Man and his two colleagues, Florida Man and Florida Man, for insider DWAC trading. I guess the burden of guilt went from the company to those individuals. More info here.

DWAC is still technically looking at buying out CyberTrump 2077, as Trump is battered by a variety of indictments and lawsuits. Without him on his own social media platform, it becomes effectively worthless. Why people would invest now is somewhere between "Hail Mary" and "I don't live in reality anymore".

[Odinfrost]

Uhm.... Don't think this has been shown but... Yeah, uh... With what Trump is being indicted for, does he really think shit like this is gonna help him... Or not be noticed?
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/...20890824179713
And before anyone asks why I use a guy who tweeted a recording of the video from Truth Social instead of the Truth Social link instead. I... I mean... Do you blame me for not wanting to give it traffic?

[Poopymonster]

Uhm.... Don't think this has been shown but... Yeah, uh... With what Trump is being indicted for, does he really think shit like this is gonna help him... Or not be noticed?
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/...20890824179713
And before anyone asks why I use a guy who tweeted a recording of the video from Truth Social instead of the Truth Social link instead. I... I mean... Do you blame me for not wanting to give it traffic?

That's the thing. The cultitsts?
They. Do. Not. Care. In the slightest.
To them, it's not real.
It's all a false flag operation carried out by the Deep State Soros funded Woke Feminazis who want to turn my poor 17 year old, innocent and pregnant with their second child, girl into a degenerate who thinks they are a ferret who shits in a box.
Only Donald-J-By God-Trump can save us!

[Edge-]

Uhm.... Don't think this has been shown but... Yeah, uh... With what Trump is being indicted for, does he really think shit like this is gonna help him... Or not be noticed?

He doesn't care because there are basically no consequences.

This plays well with his base and makes the trained seals clap on command and that's all it's supposed to do. He was probably feeling a little bit down and needed an ego boost from his friends on the internet, the poor guy.

[gondrin]

So, I guess now the DOJ is at fault for not bringing charges against Trump years ago for things that didn't yet happen. I mean, who doesn't want to live in a Minority Report world.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...72e4cd40&ei=36

Trump complains DOJ didn’t charge him 'years before' then demands Senate Republicans 'act' against Biden

In a wild rant that ran from late Sunday afternoon until nearly midnight, then continued Monday morning, Donald Trump attacked U.S. Dept. of Justice officials ahead of what is widely believed to be the lead-up to a grand jury indicting the ex-president for alleged crimes related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election he lost, including the January 6 insurrection. Trump also blasted GOP Senators for not acting against what he called “Crooked Joe Biden and the Radical Left Democrats, Fascists, and Marxists.”

According to Trump, one week ago Sunday he was notified he had four days to testify before the Special Counsel’s federal grand jury investigating him. It appears he declined. Legal experts suggest an indictment could be handed down any day now, with former Acting Solicitor General of the United States Neal Katyal telling MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Pskai” it’s “likely something will happen this week.”

Despite – or because he is “likely” to get indicted shortly, Trump on Sunday went after Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Special Counsel appointed to investigate him, Jack Smith.

“Do you think that A.G. Garland, and Deranged Jack Smith, understand that we are in the middle of a major political campaign for President of the United States?” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “Have they looked at recent poll numbers? Why didn’t they bring these ridiculous charges years before – Why did they wait to bring them NOW – A virtually unheard of scenario.”

And then, in all-caps, he falsely claimed: “Prosecutorial Misconduct! Election Interference!”

After calling President Joe Biden a “criminal,” Trump also falsely stated, “Joe Biden is the most corrupt President in the history of the United States, which is being undeniably proven in the House of Representatives every single day.”

Then he asked, “Why hasn’t Republican ‘leadership’ in the Senate spoken up and rebuked Crooked Joe Biden and the Radical Left Democrats, Fascists, and Marxists for their criminal acts against our Country, some of them against me. How long does America have to wait for the Senate to ACT?”

In a nearly-all-caps rant, Trump also appeared to suggest another indictment is imminent.

“How many times can Crooked Joe Biden’s Department of Injustice, together with their local Democrat D.A.’S & A.G.’s, indict his political opponent during the course of the campaign? Do they understand the damage being done to America? It will only get worse. We must stop these ‘monsters’ from further destroying our country!”

One year ago this month Vanity Fair reported, “The former president is reportedly banking on a White House bid to stave off criminal charges.”

Trump on Sunday also falsely claimed his “trials and tribulations” presumably including the Special Counsel’s investigations into his actions and the E. Jean Carroll sexual assault and defamation lawsuits are “a coordinated hoax, just like Russia, Russia, Russia, the ‘No Collusion’ Mueller Witch Hunt, the Fake Dossier, FISA Fraud, and all of the rest, in order to steal another election through prosecutorial misconduct at levels never seen before in the U.S.”

Special Counsel Jack Smith is currently prosecuting Trump on federal Espionage Act charges, and is investigating Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election to illegally remain in office. In a separate investigation, Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis is examining his actions to overturn the election. Willis reportedly is considering RICO charges against Trump in what some believe is a probe that spans several states.

Trump on Sunday also “retruthed” several memes his supporters had posted, including two that falsely claimed “the government” on January 6, 2021, “staged a riot” to “cover up” a “fraudulent election.” One of those was first posted by far-right extremist Ted Nugent, who reportedly is a member of the Oath Keepers.

[Edge-]

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...mith-rcna95335

Judicial Watch is at it again.

Tom Fitton, president of the conservative activist group Judicial Watch and an informal adviser to Donald Trump, has a new talking point: Special counsel Jack Smith lacks the authority to prosecute the former president because he wasn’t confirmed by the Senate.

Yes, I hear everyone scratching their head right now and asking themselves, "Wait, is that a requirement?"

No, it's not.

He's conflating a few different legal matters and attempting to flood the field with shit in an effort to confuse folks and push the same narrative that was pushed after the Mueller investigation, except that now there's actually an AG who isn't a stooge and won't misrepresent the findings of a report before they can be made public.

One really important thing to note about all of this -

Fitton, who isn’t a lawyer, doesn't have an impressive track record of providing against-the-grain legal advice to Trump.

[Breccia]

I start off by Posting this Washington.

For years now, some Republicans — and, to a large extent, the mainstream media — have harbored the notion that the GOP eventually would come to its senses. Surely, it would eventually dump the unhinged, disloyal, undemocratic and unfit Donald Trump, right?

But if Republicans did not wake from their slumber after the first impeachment or the second, after a jury decided he had lied about sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll, after an indictment accusing him of obstruction and violating the Espionage Act (set out in shocking detail), and after replete evidence of his alleged role in an attempted coup, it is hard to imagine what would bring them to their senses. There is scant evidence that Trump would flee the race to focus on his legal defense; to the contrary, the worse his legal position, the more desperate he becomes to regain power.

Elected Republicans and right-wing media figures have contributed to the predicament as they have minimized, rationalized and denied jaw-dropping allegations against Trump. They have made it easy for Republicans to cling to Trump. Listen, stealing and bandying about top-secret documents isn’t so bad, is it? And, after all, he didn’t do all that much on Jan. 6, 2021, did he?

This is what results when a party, its pundit class and millions of followers cut themselves off from reality, fall into a world of paranoid conspiracies and refuse to simply acknowledge they were very, very wrong to side with him.

WaPo is leaning far closer to "classic conservative" than "Trump cultist" as you can see.

I love this part:

The GOP could very well be saddled with a nominee who has been indicted multiple times and perhaps convicted more than once. They would be betting that millions of voters who didn’t vote for him last time would vote for an indicted or possibly convicted nominee who spends most of his time railing about his plight.

There's more to the story. There is never an end to the story when the story is "Trump is a horrible human being".

1) Pence is 'nakedly lying' about Trump's intent on Jan. 6: Former Homeland Security aide

And we all know, the only person who's allowed to see Pence nakedly lying is his wife.

Yeah, Pence has been trying to absolve Trump for...I don't know why, Trump tried to have Pence torn apart by a lynch mob. But he has said he doesn't know if Trump's actions were criminal, because he doesn't know what Trump's motive was.

Okay. Three things.

One, for some crimes, motive isn't really that big of a deal. The only "good" reason Trump would have had, was if the election was actually rigged. By Jan 6th, everyone knew it wasn't. Including Pence.

Two, for someone who has no spine, it took a lot of spine to say "Even I, his Vice President, didn't know what Trump was thinking for the last few months of our shared tenure." Seriously, he just admitted he didn't know why Trump brought the attention of the world to what he was doing.

Three:

I was very confounded by Mike Pence's comments this morning because in almost the same answer. We said that he was very clear with Donald Trump that it was wrong to try to overturn the election. That Pence didn't have the power. And then shortly after, he said he is not sure what Donald Trump's intent was. Literally, I am confounded by that. He just said it was clear Trump's intent was to try to obstruct the transfer of power. But he is just nakedly lying.

-- yet another book from yet another "last sane person in the WH"

2) This QuinniPoll says that Sen. Tim Scott leads the GOP runners in net favorability.

At +3%.

I suspect the low results are due to Trump supporters being unfavorable to everyone who isn't Trump. Like, there are names in that poll which I've never cited once, and they have an ugly negative result.

3) Trump wants to return to Erie, PA to campaign for 2024.

He still owes them $35,000 from last time.

4) And finally for tonight, it's time to play Guess the Speaker! If not by name, then by role.

He was much better than Hillary and Biden & I'm glad he won.

But Trump and his endorsements have been losing since 2017. Trump did not fulfill his promises on the wall, he shut down the country during covid and kept Fauci, he grew the deep state & didn’t reform the FBI/DOJ, let out criminals, added massive debt.

We have primaries for a reason, and I believe our best nominee is a fellow veteran and principled lifelong conservative. That’s why I am supporting Ron DeSantis, a true conservative winner that will get things done.

The answer is Jim Lamon.

An Arizona Fake Elector.

Lamon is now running anti-Trump ads and rubbing Kari Lake's nose in Trump's words, actions, and failures. Lake disagrees and says Arizona loves Trump, but based on her other words and actions, her ability to judge what Arizona feels is highly suspect.

- - - Updated - - -

What's "criminal solicitation"?

Georgia may have a lesson to teach on the topic.

Among the state election law charges that prosecutors were examining: criminal solicitation to commit election fraud and conspiracy to commit election fraud, as well as solicitation of a public or political officer to fail to perform their duties and solicitation to destroy, deface or remove ballots, the people said.

That bolded is that phone call. Asking a state official, such as Raffensperger, to fail to perform their state official duties, such as holding a free and fair election, is an example of criminal solicitation.

Cornell Law, my go-to that isn't a poster here, adds some...interesting details.

It is not a defense to a prosecution under this section that the person solicited could not be convicted of the crime because he lacked the state of mind required for its commission, because he was incompetent or irresponsible, or because he is immune from prosecution or is not subject to prosecution.

If Georga laws follow this, then oh snap. Trump, or anyone else I guess, cannot say "I asked Georgia officials to have an illegal and unfair election, but I thought I was doing the right thing". Nor can they say "I asked Georgia officials to have an illegal and unfair election, but I have absolute immunity". Because no, you don't. Hell, they can't even plead insanity, apparently.

TheGuardian continues with more details, but the short version is, this is a straightforward case but not a slam dunk.

For a criminal solicitation charge, prosecutors would have to show that Trump persistently requested another person to engage in certain illegal conduct that are “likely and imminent” as a result of the solicitation. The fact that the solicited acts were not carried out is not considered a defense.

Yeah, just bolding that for futre reference. We've heard the "nothing happened therefore there was no crime" before. Solicitation is asking someone to commit a crime. If they agree, that's conspiracy, but asking alone is a crime.

The threshold question there is whether Raffensperger would have failed to perform his duty as the state’s top election official if he had done what Trump wanted, according to the Brookings Institution – for instance, if he actually went and “found” 11,780 votes to reverse Trump’s loss.

The statute for soliciting the tampering of ballots, meanwhile, could apply to Trump when he pressed Watson to go beyond protocol to go back “two years, as opposed to just checking, you know, one against the other” in conducting signature checks during ballot audits.

The critical issue in that call would come down to whether Trump was effectively asking Watson to use a non-standard method to invalidate legitimate ballots that he hoped would benefit him because it would whittle down the number of legitimate votes for Joe Biden, Brookings found.

Georgia is considering multiple different charges for Team Trump's many crimes. Trump is a mafia boss and might not be charged directly, but hopefully, the ringleaders of this get squeezed enough to either rat out Trump, or just get long prison sentences for their roles to serve as a warning to anyone out there still willing to work with Donald Trump.

Georgia- and Smith-based indictments still lurk out there in the shadows. Trump should be more than nervous, he should be terrified.

[Edge-]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...ilin-rcna96228

Eight search warrants and affidavits were filed in connection with the federal case involving former President Donald Trump's mishandling of classified documents that resulted in a slew of criminal charges against him, according to recently unsealed court motions.

The motions were filed in connection with the ongoing efforts by media organizations, including NBC News, to obtain access to much of the information in the search warrant served on Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Fla., last year.

Prosecutors filed a motion in June with the federal court overseeing the case, requesting permission to disclose the warrants and accompanying documents to the legal teams representing Trump and his aide Walt Nauta as part of disclosure requirements now that both men have been charged.

In that motion, which was unsealed on Tuesday, prosecutors said they have not disclosed the contents or locations or devices sought by those search warrants publicly and they asked the court to keep the details of those warrants under wraps.

The existence of one of those warrants was already known because it was executed on Trump's estate last year and he announced that it happened on his social media website. The indictment in the case also made clear that prosecutors had obtained other information — including photos and messages off of cellphones — but the prosecution did not indicate who it had obtained that information, whether voluntarily or through warrants.

MANY WARRANTS, HANDLE THEM

[postman1782]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/24/polit...020/index.html

Trump knew the 2020 elections were going to be safe in February of 2020, right before covid hit. He knew Covid was coming though back in December. He was bragging so much about them, he wanted to put a press release out for it. He started lying about the election by April though, when states started passing lenient reasons for mail in ballots to have an election in November.

[Edge-]

https://www.ajc.com/politics/giulian...G2LY7DGOFZM7U/

Giuliani admits that he lied about the Fulton County election workers who went on to face months of harassment and death threats.

But he pwomises he has good legal defenses for why this isn't defamation and why he shouldn't pay any damages because don't you know who the fuck he is?

[Breccia]

In the ongoing effort to make himself as big of a joke as possible, Trump declares UFC to be his running mate.

Well, since that's just garbage, what else is going on?

1) Giuliani won’t contest Georgia election workers’ claims that he falsely accused them of manipulating ballots

In a two-page statement filed in federal court just before midnight Tuesday, Giuliani said he “does not contest” that his statements, which fueled a torrent of public attacks on the workers — Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss — were “false” and “carry meaning that is defamatory.”

In the heavily couched statement, Giuliani also conceded that his statements meet the “factual elements of liability” for Moss and Freeman’s claims that his attacks amounted to “intentional infliction of emotional distress.”

But Giuliani is not abandoning his effort to fight the lawsuit altogether. An aide, Ted Goodman, said his concessions and acknowledgments were an effort to bypass the fact-gathering stage and move on to legal arguments about whether he can be held liable for the damages Moss and Freeman are seeking.

“Mayor Rudy Giuliani did not acknowledge that the statements were false but did not contest it in order to move on to the portion of the case that will permit a motion to dismiss,” Goodman said. “This is a legal issue, not a factual issue. Those out to smear the mayor are ignoring the fact that this stipulation is designed to get to the legal issues of the case.”

"I don't get it. He admitted he was liable. What's left?"

I'm not sure either. I suspect the "legal issue" boils down to "Yes, Giuliani did all four required steps for defamation, but..." then some legal loophole like "but not in this state"? The admission of liability seems pretty damning to me.

EDIT: @Edge- ninja'd!

2) Has anyone seen Melania?

As the NYTimes reports, Melania has mostly retreated into a small circle of friends and hairdressers. While some people, such as Kellyanne Conway, say she's fully on board with the 2024 run, Melania's lack of rally appearances, or even that many Trump club appearances, say more by her actions than anyone does with their words.

3) Slate points out yet another problem for Trump.

The 2:24 Tweet, as it's being called, in which Trump basically ordered Pence to block the free and fair election and let states appoint their own, now known to be fake, electors.

It could legally be construed as a threat.

Let’s focus now on how the June 27 Supreme Court ruling bears on this potential way to charge the civil rights statute. In Counterman v. Colorado, the court held 7–2 that “a mental state of recklessness” for threatening violence is sufficient to prove “true threats,” words that “lie outside the bounds of the First Amendment’s protection.” Recklessness means that the person issuing the threat “consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

That shoe fits Trump like custom footwear measured and made in Milan. Indeed, in Watts v. United States, the leading case on what takes a threat out of the realm of free-speech protection, the court identified three factors to determine whether a threat was real or hyperbole: 1) the context in which it was issued; 2) whether there were conditions attached; and 3) the reaction of listeners or the recipient.

The context on Jan. 6 made absolutely clear that Trump’s words were meant to put a target on Pence’s back. With the raging Capitol mob already inside the halls of Congress, Trump’s ripping Pence for lack of courage was reckless beyond imagination.

As for conditionality, the tweet included none. It was unlike the defendant’s statement in Watts, in which a war protester said that if he were inducted into the Army (an event he said would never happen) and if he had President Lyndon Johnson in his sights (he wasn’t armed), he would shoot.

The Jan 6th panel has already heard testimony of at least one Trump employee who admitted, under oath, he read that Tweet and resigned.

4) WinRed is backing Chris Christie.

5) Agent Smith has talked to Chris Krebs. If you missed his name earlier, he was one of Trump's top election security officials. Not only was he around at the now famous Feb 2020 "the elections are safe" discussion, Trump fired him after fairly and legally losing the election, when Krebs told him he lost fairly and legally.

Krebs can, and surely has, testified directly to Trump's knowledge and state of mind on the issue. Trump knew he lost.

6) Smith also has notes about Rosen, Trump's AG at the time, who--

"He didn't exist."

Trump's acting AG at the time, who flat-out told Trump to his fat orange face "I won't use the DoJ to change the election results". As Forbes reports, Trump wanted to fire Rosen for that, too, but did not because it would have led to a cascade of DoJ resignations in disgust, which in turn, would have been taken as evidence that he didn't really win the election. For him, silence was better.

7) If you do a Goggle search for "incandescently stupid" you will find this quote:

This fifty-page memo that we would normally give to any other president about what his options are is something Trump literally can't read. The man doesn't read. We've gotta boil this down into a one-pager in his voice. And so I had to write this incandescently stupid memo called something like, 'Afghanistan, How to Put America First and Win.' And then bullet by bullet, I summed up this highly classified memo into Trump's sort of bombastic language because it was the only way he was gonna understand.

I mean, I literally said in there, 'You know, if we leave Afghanistan too fast, the terrorists will call us losers. But if we wanna be seen as winners, we need to make sure the Afghan forces have the strength to push back against these criminals.' I mean, it was that dumb and that's how you had to talk to him.

That's Miles Taylor, yet another DHS official and yet another "only sane person in the WH" but to be fair, he started DHS work under Dick Cheney in 2007 and was pulled into Trump's orbit by John Kelly in 2017. He was not a direct Trump hire and his frustration is valid.

Evidence mounts, as it has for years, that Trump is incompetent, that Trump is a criminal, and that Trump betrays and ruins the lives of everyone he's ever met.

[Edge-]

Evidence mounts, as it has for years, that Trump is incompetent, that Trump is a criminal, and that Trump betrays and ruins the lives of everyone he's ever met.

Sorry for ninjaing while you wrote a much larger post.

But I enjoy that he apparently continues to struggle to find legal representation because his years of ignoring his lawyers advice, getting his lawyers in trouble, and not paying them are starting to catch up to him and not even the clout chasers who will work for "exposure", who aren't very good to begin with, are too inclined to work for him.

I don't think he qualifies for a public defender either, which is great.

[Sunseeker]

I don't think he qualifies for a public defender either, which is great.

I don't think public defenders get paid enough to deal with his shit. And I'm fairly certain they can turn down potential clients/cases anyway.

[D Luniz]

I don't think public defenders get paid enough to deal with his shit. And I'm fairly certain they can turn down potential clients/cases anyway.

It requires the judge's or the client's permission. Otherwise they are stuck with the client they were appointed to

[Kaleredar]

Sorry for ninjaing while you wrote a much larger post.

But I enjoy that he apparently continues to struggle to find legal representation because his years of ignoring his lawyers advice, getting his lawyers in trouble, and not paying them are starting to catch up to him and not even the clout chasers who will work for "exposure", who aren't very good to begin with, are too inclined to work for him.

I don't think he qualifies for a public defender either, which is great.

I would feel bad for the poor public defender stuck with it

[Gorsameth]

I don't think public defenders get paid enough to deal with his shit. And I'm fairly certain they can turn down potential clients/cases anyway.

There was a thing back in the 2016 election about "Clinton defended a rapist" which was her as a public defended being assigned to the case, requesting to be removed and a judge denying it.

[Breccia]

Sorry for ninjaing while you wrote a much larger post.

Well with that said, there's more I didn't cite earlier.

Giuliani attorney Joseph Sibley emphasized in an accompanying filing that Giuliani was not "admitting" to the allegations but would stop contesting them, which he said should end further efforts to obtain additional factual evidence, including emails, texts and other communications, according to Politico.

In other words, this seems like a desperate move to stop anyone from finding out how bad this was. It sounds like his lawyer flat-out said "if he didn't admit fault, the punishment he's already going to get would be much worse".

Former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said Wednesday it was "remarkable" to see someone in a defamation lawsuit "admit 'yes, what I said was false.'"

"This is a sort of desperate, last-second gasp to try to limit his liability here," he added. "It's really an astonishing concession."

National security attorney Bradley Moss also predicted the move would fail.

"This is horribly written, contradicts itself and will not suffice," he tweeted.

"The real question in this case was always about what level of fault attaches," explained Georgia State University Law Prof. Anthony Michael Kreis, "but even then, it's hard to see how Giuliani and the entire Trump team showed any more care than a reckless disregard for the truth."

Of course, just because this is a horrible move doesn't mean there aren't other horrible moves.

Such as claiming defamation falls under Free Speech.

"Didn't we just get done with this?"

We did, yes. Team Trump refuses to admit objective defeat.

In another filing, his lawyer Joseph D. Sibley IV says Giuliani “does not admit to Plaintiffs’ allegations” but that he is conceding the argument so the case can move forward. Giuliani’s team has indicated that, rather than defending the content of the statements, it could instead argue that they were First Amendment-protected speech and/or that Freeman and Moss might not have actually suffered damages.

"Didn't they get death threats?"

Yes.

"Wouldn't those count as damages?"

Yes.

"Why is Guiliani following a path so certain to lead him to failure?"

Because he has no choice. He was caught black-headed, I mean red-handed, making up false claims he knew were false (see also: Trump was told in February) about innocent people. The fight he's fighitng has flat-out not been working.

But the tactic surely reflects Giuliani’s legal jeopardy. Making the concession appears aimed at concluding what has been an arduous discovery process for him. Earlier this month, the judge in the case ordered him to pay $89,000 to Freeman and Moss for delays. U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell said Giuliani had “no one to blame but himself for ignoring plaintiffs’ pending motion.”

Separately, a committee of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals this month recommended that Giuliani be disbarred for claims that were “utterly false” and “recklessly so.” (The full circuit has yet to decide on whether to do so.)

Regardless of whether this is simply strategy, it’s still a major concession — granting that your statements were false and defamatory in a defamation case. Falling back on the idea that the women weren’t damaged by Giuliani’s comments — a requirement to prove defamation — would also seem difficult to argue, given the pattern of threats they have described.

- - - Updated - - -

I would feel bad for the poor public defender stuck with it

I don't think public defenders get paid enough to deal with his shit. And I'm fairly certain they can turn down potential clients/cases anyway.

It could be worse.

Things Are So Bad For Trump That Lawyers Are Calling Working With Him A ‘Suicide Mission’

Some attorneys who’ve discussed the investigation with Trump and his close associates believe the case is a certain loser for the defense, arguing, among other things, that Trump’s loss at the initial trial is a foregone conclusion in Washington, D.C. The district is a deep-blue area and still carries the memory of the January 6th attack. And in the past several weeks, some of Donald Trump’s top legal and political advisers have been privately calling the job of defending Trump against an indictment in the election 2020 case a “suicide mission.”

- - - Updated - - -

Trump, truly a visionary, takes aim at the greatest threat facing America First:

EU visa fees.

No, really.

Wow! “U.S. CITIZENS WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR A VISA TO TRAVEL TO EUROPE STARTING IN 2024."

Think of this. We give them everything, including military protection and trade, and now we have to pay them to go there.

NO RESPECT FOR THE UNITED STATES. I WILL, AS PRESIDENT, NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. IT WILL END VERY QUICKLY!!!

"How would he end it very quickly?"

He didn't say.

"How could he end it very quickly?

Well, based on the criminal charges he's likely facing, by extortion, solicitation, threats of violence, or banging a porn star.

"How much does a EU visa cost?"

About eight dollars.

"How much are federal fees on an airline ticket?"

Well the excise tax is 7.5%, and there is an additional

"So, more than eight dollars."

Probably. I booked a hypothetical trip from NYC to Paris for $800.

Government Imposed Travel Taxes and Fees:

September 11th Security Fee: $5.60 USD applies per one-way trip. There may be multiple one-way trips on the same itinerary.

Passenger Facility Charges: Up to $18.00 USD depending on the itinerary.

Travel Facilities Tax: Up to $17.80 USD per round-trip for domestic flights beginning or ending in Alaska or Hawaii.

Federal Domestic Flight Segment Fee: $4.00 USD per flight segment. A flight segment is defined as one takeoff and one landing.

U.S. International Departure Tax: $17.80 USD per departure applies to international tickets departing from the U.S.

U.S. International Arrival Tax: International flights arriving into the U.S. are assessed the following taxes - US International Arrival tax of $17.80 USD, US Customs fee of $5.50 USD, Immigration (INS) fee of $7.00 USD and Animal and Plant Health Inspection fee (APHIS) of $5.00 USD.

"Has Trump ever complained about any of those?"

To the best of my Google search, no. When I looked, I found "Private Jet Costs, Sketchy Deductions Among Red Flags in Trump Taxes" and "The rise and fall of Donald Trump's $365 million airline". Y'all are free to look, good luck.

"So the issue is the much smaller amount of money that another country is charging for security, not the larger amount Americans are charging for security."

Yes.

"And he's upset because..."

Because Europeans are not paying as much for another country's security.

"...why did he pick this hill to die on?"

Oh, he's not. Trump can't make it up a hill, we all know that.

"Why is he picking this issue to make a big deal about?"

Well, the options are threefold. I'll let everyone decide on their own.

1) Someone said it was a tragedy and Trump would be nice and bigly and yuge if he fixed it, then smiled while saying "I think Trump is a good man."
2) A family member booked a ticket out of the country and he saw the bill.
3) He's so blinded by rage at being indicted for all those crimes he did, he's lashing out at anything and everything he hears about.

Bear in mind, the average Trump cultist is as likely to visit Paris as they are to star in an animated television show. I do not think that complaining about $8 is a productive way for Trump to serve his time. Fuck. Spend his time. But, he's the one who raged about it on his social media platform, so here we are.

What do you think?

[Muzjhath]

Well with that said, there's more I didn't cite earlier.



In other words, this seems like a desperate move to stop anyone from finding out how bad this was. It sounds like his lawyer flat-out said "if he didn't admit fault, the punishment he's already going to get would be much worse".



Of course, just because this is a horrible move doesn't mean there aren't other horrible moves.

Such as claiming defamation falls under Free Speech.

"Didn't we just get done with this?"

We did, yes. Team Trump refuses to admit objective defeat.



"Didn't they get death threats?"

Yes.

"Wouldn't those count as damages?"

Yes.

"Why is Guiliani following a path so certain to lead him to failure?"

Because he has no choice. He was caught black-headed, I mean red-handed, making up false claims he knew were false (see also: Trump was told in February) about innocent people. The fight he's fighitng has flat-out not been working.



- - - Updated - - -





It could be worse.

Things Are So Bad For Trump That Lawyers Are Calling Working With Him A ‘Suicide Mission’



- - - Updated - - -

Trump, truly a visionary, takes aim at the greatest threat facing America First:

EU visa fees.

No, really.



"How would he end it very quickly?"

He didn't say.

"How could he end it very quickly?

Well, based on the criminal charges he's likely facing, by extortion, solicitation, threats of violence, or banging a porn star.

"How much does a EU visa cost?"

About eight dollars.

"How much are federal fees on an airline ticket?"

Well the excise tax is 7.5%, and there is an additional

"So, more than eight dollars."

Probably. I booked a hypothetical trip from NYC to Paris for $800.



"Has Trump ever complained about any of those?"

To the best of my Google search, no. When I looked, I found "Private Jet Costs, Sketchy Deductions Among Red Flags in Trump Taxes" and "The rise and fall of Donald Trump's $365 million airline". Y'all are free to look, good luck.

"So the issue is the much smaller amount of money that another country is charging for security, not the larger amount Americans are charging for security."

Yes.

"And he's upset because..."

Because Europeans are not paying as much for another country's security.

"...why did he pick this hill to die on?"

Oh, he's not. Trump can't make it up a hill, we all know that.

"Why is he picking this issue to make a big deal about?"

Well, the options are threefold. I'll let everyone decide on their own.

1) Someone said it was a tragedy and Trump would be nice and bigly and yuge if he fixed it, then smiled while saying "I think Trump is a good man."
2) A family member booked a ticket out of the country and he saw the bill.
3) He's so blinded by rage at being indicted for all those crimes he did, he's lashing out at anything and everything he hears about.

Bear in mind, the average Trump cultist is as likely to visit Paris as they are to star in an animated television show. I do not think that complaining about $8 is a productive way for Trump to serve his time. Fuck. Spend his time. But, he's the one who raged about it on his social media platform, so here we are.

What do you think?

I think the EU should make a visa to the EU should cost as much for American citizens as a US visa costs for EU citizens if Trump becomes preseident agian if that is the case.
Aka 185 USD for tourists.