Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

Judge demands Team Trump respond to Smith's court filing.

They have until close of business Monday to either accept the proposed gag order, or to offer an alternative version. Considering they've already said "it wasn't a threat" in public, but the judge doesn't seem to agree, I'm expecting the latter, along the lines of "Please give him forty or fifty new chances, don't forget out legal defense is that he doesn't know when he's lost".

[Gabriel]

https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/jo...s-really-like/

Oh boy, I'm looking forward to totally-not-fringe-rightwing-nutjob Joe Rogan, who just recently showed support for Kari Lake's conspiracy theories about voter fraud, to have Trump on so Trump can tell him about the very real DEEP STATE.

Just a reminder that Joe Rogan is a fucking idiot fringe right winger and yes you should be instantly suspicious and judgmental of anyone that still voluntarily listens to the show, or has done so in recent years.

This is a significant departure. Joe Rogan had refused the idea as recently as last year.

And as recently as last week.



Like many people who claim to be Republicans but are really just anti-Democrat and more recently anti-democracy, Rogan might be doing this because he feels Trump, facing at least four indictments and multiple lawsuits, has the best chance to beat President Joe Biden, the man fixing the world's largest economy while drinking Dark Roast coffee.

Or, Rogan could have simply been handed a large amount of money.

Or...Rogan could be trying to screw Trump over on live TV. Er, close enough. If Rogan really does feel he doesn't want to help Trump, and instead wants a classic conservative in play, he might ask Trump direct, harsh questions like "So if it was nice and bigly and yuge that you took all those documents because they were yours, why did you hide them?"

Place your bets. As fun as #3 would be, it's the dark roast. Er, dark horse.

Joe Rogan is a prime example of an idiot that believes that all voices deserve to be herd. I watch his podcasts sometimes, and I don't think he is a right winger, but he has a lot of stupid ideas that stem from him listening to a lot of conspiracy retards.

- - - Updated - - -

There's also that it doesn't fundamentally matter if you're willing to talk pleasantly with decent people. If you're willing to sit down and platform and talk pleasantly with a Nazi, you're a Nazi yourself. One who hides behind false civility to evade responsibility for the explicit and intentional harms they implicitly endorse.

He is more of a moron than a Nazi.

[Endus]

He is more of a moron than a Nazi.

A lot of Nazis are morons. This is a Venn diagram with a lot of overlap.

[Shadowferal]

BREAKING: Judge Orders Trump Response To Jack Smith Amid Crossfire Over Trump Social Media Threat


The Trump campaign later defended the post and denied it was intended as a threat, claiming the message was for “the RINO, China-loving, dishonest special interest groups and Super PACs, like the ones funded by the Koch brothers and the Club for No Growth.” Smith’s team included a proposed order for Federal District Judge Tanya Chutkan to sign if she approves it, which reads, in part:

The defendant and defense counsel shall not disclose the Materials or their contents directly or indirectly to any person or entity other than persons employed to assist in the defense, persons who are interviewed as potential witnesses, counsel for potential witnesses, and other persons to whom the Court may authorize disclosure (collectively, “Authorized Persons”). Potential witnesses and their counsel may be shown copies of the Materials as necessary to prepare the defense, but they may not retain copies without prior permission of the Court.

On Saturday, Judge Chutkan ordered Trump’s team to file a response, as well as their own version of a proposed order. The judge wrote:

MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: It is hereby ORDERED that by 5:00 PM on August 7, 2023, Defendant shall file a response to the government’s 10 Motion for Protective Order, stating Defendant’s position on the Motion. If Defendant disagrees with any portion of the government’s proposed Protective Order, ECF No. 10-1, his response shall include a revised version of that Protective Order with any modifications in redline. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 08/05/2023

----------
Dumb fuck will say or do the wrong thing and go to jail sooner than later.

[Breccia]

On Saturday, Judge Chutkan ordered Trump’s team to file a response, as well as their own version of a proposed order.

UPDATE: Team Trump asked for an extension. The judge refused,

As I posted before, the judge had already given them until 5PM Monday. Team Trump asked for Thursday instead, meaning they wanted double the time they'd been given for their own client's stupid, stupid move. While I don't have the judge's ruling written out, I suspect it says something along the lines of "Trump tweeted a threat within 24 hours of being told not to, you can find a response within 48".

Team Trump also suggested a hearing would be necessary if they and the DoJ could not reach a deal. Because everything to Trump is a deal. I don't believe that's been ruled on yet, but I'm going to make a prediction:
1) the reason a deal would fall apart, is because Team Trump would come to the table saying "look, Trump really wants to keep threatening witnesses and court officials on social media, so please let him keep doing that, and in return, we offer nothing."
2) the DoJ would respond "that's fucking stupid, so no"
3) the judge would agree, and slap on some harsh restrictions that Trump's lawyers know Trump can't adhere to because he's insane

So, it's really in Team Trump's best interest to not let the deal fall through. But they're in an unwinnable situation. They need an offer that the DoJ will agree to, but also Trump would actually follow. That is a narrow-ass path to tread. And yeah, I don't know if I could come up with it by Monday, either.

Well, too bad. They asked for this job.

[Edge-]

Well, too bad. They asked for this job.

Surely it doesn't take nearly a week to explain a single social media post consisting of a single sentence.

Or is the play going to be, "Your honor, my client is genuinely too stupid to understand what he agreed to and what his post meant. It's not his fault." or something. Which would be weird and unexpected but hey, maybe they'll get desperate.

[Breccia]

Surely it doesn't take nearly a week to explain a single social media post consisting of a single sentence.

Well they're trying to stall, so there's always that hanging over every single request they make.

But, honestly, for them it might. Trump publicly and flagrantly violated the court's direct, personal instructions. And Trump's lawyers know they will be fired and not paid if Trump goes to jail, whether it's for this public threat or the next one. And let's not forget, these aren't exactly top-quality lawyers here.

It would take them a week for the restrictions they put on themselves by taking the job they knew would be this bad.

Again, not defending them. This is their fault. If I volunteered to be the brake pads of a full-loaded dump truck, don't cry at the 400 yards of bloody streaks on the pavement that becomes my funeral.

- - - Updated - - -

So, Trump has apparently either read or been told what was in the indictment. Specifically, this part:

It also lays out calls and meetings, some of which were also mentioned in Pence's memoir "So Help Me God," where the pressure campaign continued: In the days before Jan. 6, 2021, when Pence called Trump to wish him a Merry Christmas, the conversation turned to his coming role overseeing the electoral vote count. The special counsel also describes a New Year's Day phone call where Trump allegedly "berated" Pence about his opposing a lawsuit that Trump hoped might deliver a favorable outcome related to rejecting or returning votes to states. Pence argued that he did not have a constitutional basis to either return or reject the votes, and Trump allegedly said, "You're too honest."

I could have sworn that came up in this thread, but I looked and didn't see it. If you posted this before, good, sorry I didn't credit you.

Trump took that with his usual quiet, dignity, and grace.

WOW, it’s finally happened! Liddle’ Mike Pence, a man who was about to be ousted as Governor Indiana until I came along and made him V.P., has gone to the Dark Side.

I never told a newly emboldened (not based on his 2% poll numbers!) Pence to put me above the Constitution, or that Mike was ‘too honest,’. He’s delusional, and now he wants to show he’s a tough guy.

"How does Trump know Pence was the one who told the DOJ this, under oath?"

He doesn't. He's guessing. And quite frankly, I think he's probably wrong. I think someone else in the room detailed the conversation, and Pence has in fact been very reluctant to testify on the grounds that Trump supporters will murder him.

(reviews own posts from the last 48 hours)

Well, that didn't work. But the evidence pre-dates those last two posts I made on the topic of Pence being threatened by Trump and Trump supporters.

I also think it's possible that Smith has a recording of the call. As always, what Trump says in public can be disregarded as worthless. He can lie all he wants until his giant fat ass hits the stand, probably cracking it. Until that happens, his public testimony can be summarily handwaved.

[Masark]

They need an offer that the DoJ will agree to, but also Trump would actually follow. That is a narrow-ass path to tread.

I think the width of that path is negative.

[Gabriel]

A lot of Nazis are morons. This is a Venn diagram with a lot of overlap.

I'm just so exhausted to see how people I sort of like slip into the Lawful Evil far-right camp just because they are too Chaotic Stupid to understand what they are doing...

[Dontrike]

A lot of Nazis are morons. This is a Venn diagram with a lot of overlap.

It's practically one circle.

[gondrin]

Well, Trump is going back to one of his greatest hits, Under Pressure. Err, I mean complaining about water pressure, specifically from shower heads.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...72077437&ei=11

'I Want Water To Pour Down On Me': Trump Has Cold Words For Showers At GOP Dinner

Former President Donald Trump called for more water flow as he slammed showers and suds in a familiarrant at a South Carolina GOP dinner on Saturday.

The Republican frontrunner, in the dinner’s keynote speech, took aim at regulatory costs under President Joe Biden and claimed his administration “cut the cost of job-killing regulations” in U.S. households before sailing into his bathroom talk.

“You know I have this gorgeous head of hair – when I take a shower, I want water to pour down on me. When you go into these new homes with showers, the water drips down slowly, slowly,” Trump said.

“You have suds, beautiful nice wonderful suds, a lot of money, Procter & Gamble, all that crap that they sell they say is good, probably costs ’em about two cents and they sell it for $10. It takes you 10 minutes to wash your hair. You know what you do? You just stay in the shower about 10 times longer than you would have, it’s the same, you probably use more water. I broke all that up.”

Trump, who has railed about water conservation efforts in the past, took aim at the Biden administration reversing his Department of Energy’s easing of showerhead rules.

The rule aimed to dramatically increase the amount of water that flows per minute out of each nozzle.

Users on X (Twitter’s rebrand) mocked the former president for returning to one of his old hits about water flow on Saturday.

Tweet 1

[Breccia]

Well, Trump is going back to one of his greatest hits, Under Pressure.

I'm sure he'll get his Second Wind eventually.

But not today. It is not a good day to be Donald Trump.

"It's like 10:30 AM."

Yes, but it's also Sunday.

1) FOX News hosts are going on FOX News and telling FOX News viewers that Trump needs to attend the debates, or he's a pussy.

“Thinking of the big debate coming up, and I’m not saying this to sell the debate, it’s a great debate and would be great if the president and all the candidates could make it, but if you’re Donald Trump and this is all everyone is talking about and you own all the oxygen in the room, wouldn’t you want to be in that room?” Fox News host Neil Cavuto said during his 4 p.m. show on Thursday, where Trump’s arraignment on charges related to his efforts to stay in power dominated the coverage.

Days earlier, pundit Piers Morgan, who host a show on Fox’s streaming service, made a direct on-air appeal to Trump, telling him to “show us what you’re made of,” and participate in the first primary debate.

“So, if you’re watching, Donald, come on,” Morgan said.

The New York Times reported that Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott and network President Jay Wallace had dinner with the former president at Trump’s Bedminster, N.J., Golf Club on Tuesday, where they asked him to consider attending the debate.

Obviously, FOX News will get a boost if Trump attends, so there's some self-serving going on. But FOX News is making it clear: they'll host the debate either way, and they'll ask different Trump-related questions based on whether Trump is in the room or not.

Maybe Trump wants to punish FOX News for what he feels is their disloyalty. But, again, he's desperate to get re-elected to avoid the consequences of all those crimes he committed. As we've talked about for years, Trump believes in the zero-sum game. He cannot win, unless soeone else loses, and that might be how he'd normally view FOX News. THis must be a difficult concept for him, because if he stiffs FOX News and bails on the debates, someone who is not Trump will go up in the polls, and Trump's chances of a self-pardon get smaller.

Too bad. This is his own fault. He made this problem.

2) Pence went on Face the Nation and, while he said he didn't really want to testify, he is a member of the Party of Law and Order stop laughing dammit

I have no plans to testify, but people can be confident we’ll obey the law. We’ll respond to the call of the law if it comes and we’ll just tell the truth.

He also confirmed that he did take notes during some meetings, and yes, those meetings.

There was from time to time, particularly at important moments, I had a practice of scribbling a note or two on my calendar just to memorialize it and remember it and I did that in this case.

And it got worse.

Former Vice President Mike Pence refuted the notion that Trump only asked him to delay the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, to allow for audits of state election results, disputing the characterization of their interactions made by some members of Trump's legal team.

"That's not what happened," Pence said.

"From sometime in the middle of December, the president began to be told that I had some authority to reject or return votes back to the states," he continued. "I had no such authority."

"From very early on, the very first time the president raised the issue with me, that he was being told that I had the right to overturn the election to reject or return votes, I told him, I knew I had no such authority," Pence said.

"I truly do believe that, you know, no one who ever puts himself over the Constitution should ever be President of the United States," Pence added.

"There was no discretion ever given to the vice president in history, nor should there ever be," Pence said, "I had no right to overturn the election and Kamala Harris will have no right to overturn the election when we beat them in 2024."

Interesting bit at the end, there, throwing that notiong around like that. Hmm. In any event, Pence is spent that hour trying to dig out of the hole he spent four years digging and two and a half years burying himself in. He let Trump destroy his party and his country, and only balked when Trump crossed his only line. Yes, Pence could have been worse for the country. He's not a fucking hero for only being 95% fucking useless coward.

3) Speaking of FOX News, they made it hard for me to count points by citing CNN.

Former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said Friday that a recent social media post from Trump was "chilling."

"You know, legally, it doesn’t seem like it’s very smart. But how is that not intimidation?" she asked. "And, you know, what other people are going to take a message from that? As we have seen and heard, people really believe that Donald Trump sent them to the Capitol and people really felt like, you know, hours later when he said to stop, they listened."

"I just don’t understand, does somebody have to get hurt before people take this kind of online intimidation seriously?" Grisham continued Friday.

"The people – and I know he’s pointing out prosecutors – but you know, as somebody who gets death threats every other day, it makes me nervous. It should make anybody who’s ever spoken out against him nervous. And that’s a lot of people," she added, referring to a campaign add he had posted that identified prosecutors in the indictments.

Grisham was one of Trump's revolving-door press secretaries. I'm lumping her with Pence, she's no hero for walking out of the job Trump offered her that she took just because Trump crossed the line, but she's one of the many many many Trump hires who are screaming to the country "Trump is a bad choice, don't follow him".

4) Has Trump posted anything on Truth Social in the last 12 hours?

5) Has anyone seen or heard from Mark Meadows? The WSJ's paywall is annoying, but they think his silence on, well, everything could be a sign he's (a) going to testify against Trump, if he hasn't already, and (b) knows this will make him a target for Trump supporters willing to kill him (see #3 above, plus Jan 6th of course).

6) For some stupid reason, not-yet-fired Trump lawyer Lauro went on Meet the Press, and tried to push the self-defeating narrative "it's political when Biden's DOJ goes after Trump, but it's not political when Trump campaigns and runs off prosecuting Biden and Clinton, oh by the way I'm not being political, I'm just saying".

It went exactly as expected.

At the start of the clip, he's shown a video of Trump attacking Jack Smith, calling him deranged, and asked if Jack Smith is deranged. Lauro is stunned for 3.5 seconds, then tries to change the subject.

42 seconds into the clip, Lauro is asked if innocent people attack prosecutors. This time, he's stunned for 3.5 seconds, then tries to change the subject.

"Everyone's due their day in court," he basically stammers and stutters, "even people as objectively guilty and evil as my client."

Not even noon and several of the people Trump picked to work with on purpose have turned on him (yes, telling the truth counts), neither Trump nor the people currently paid to defend Trump can defend Trump, and he's being called a coward by the largest news source his own followers watch.

So, yeah, it's not looking great for Donald Trump. Again.

- - - Updated - - -

Ah, there it is.

TRUMP SHOUTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA that he will be asking for a new judge and a new venue.

"On what grounds?"

VERY POWERFUL GROUNDS

"And they are...?"

He would not get a fair trial.

"Why not?"

He did not elaborate.

So, yeah, this is bluster. His lawyers will try, their only goal is to delay the inevitable at this point, but I haven't seen anything to even Devil's Advocate this. Yes, the judge has ruled against Trump's interests in the past, but what do you expect, they're violent terrorists, they're supposed to go to jail when found guilty. Yes, the judge called out Trump for threatening people on social media when he did it. These are not unfair actions. In fact, these are very fair actions. It would be strange if they didn't happen.

"What about the sentencing thing?"

I covered that a couple days ago. Also, I shouldn't have to point out that putting violent terrorists in prison for multiple years isn't unfair, eitther.

"Are judges typically removed from trials due to bias?"

Well again, I don't think a judge who sentences violent terrorists to prison time counts as biased. But since you asked, rarely. I found a 2015 article that said it happens a few times per decade. And I found a 2020 article that found thousands, plural, of judges acting improperly but who weren't acted against. While this is a high-profile case, the rules of baseball don't change just because the cameras are on. If you swing, and you miss, you're going to get a strike called on you.

I do not expect Trump's lawyers to file a successful motion. But I do think this was an announcement, and not one they want to broadcast.

Remember how their client threatened people openly, in direct defiance of this very judge's orders to his face in person, and therefore they have 22 hours from now to find a better option than "gag order slammed down"? And remember how I said that was going to be a nearly impossible task?

I think they tried. I think Trump hates the idea of being told what to do by...well, to keep this post moderately civil, let's just say "anyone" rather list options the judge happens to fit...and I think he posted this because he views what's about to happen as unfair. Because he's a narcisistic sociopath and incapable of understanding how other people's rules apply to him.

I think Trump just announced to the world that his lawyers came to him with an option that involves him not threatening people, and he announced he wasn't going to do it.

In other words, if you haven't sold DWAC stock yet, Monday at opening-of-market-o'clock dump that shit. Trump just announced his imminent departure from social media.

[Paranoid Android]

I read Trump's Truth Social about DC and I give him credit in his rants to hold off on the racial slurs

In fact the restraint of the right to signal the biggest Dog Whistles and have restraint is a discipline.

[s_bushido]

I read Trump's Truth Social about DC and I give him credit in his rants to hold off on the racial slurs

In fact the restraint of the right to signal the biggest Dog Whistles and have restraint is a discipline.

You realize that them simply talking about "filthy crime-ridden Democrat cities" is itself the racist dogwhistle in the first place, right?

[Breccia]

That Lauro guy, the one I posted a video of like a deer in headlights, claims in public that Trump can't be prosecuted because he has absolute immunity.

“A technical violation of the Constitution is not a violation of criminal law," Lauro contended, saying it was "just plain wrong" to suggest that Trump had pressed Pence to break the law.

"And to say that is contrary to decades of legal statutes,” he continued.

“These kinds of constitutional and statutory disagreements don’t lead to criminal charges," Lauro said. "And one thing that Mr. Pence has never said is that he thought President Trump was acting criminally."

"Does Team Trump know he's been charged with conspiring with other, non-Pence people?"

I'd hope so, but based on their public defenses, it's hard to tell.

"Did he suggest that you can just break the Constitution without consequences?"

He suggested that Trump could, yes.

"They need a good lawyer."

Well it won't be his former AG Barr. Barr is offering in public to testify against Trump.

[Edge-]

Well it won't be his former AG Barr. Barr is offering in public to testify against Trump.

It really is funny to me that people like him think they have a redemption arc in their story.

[Kaleredar]

It really is funny to me that people like him think they have a redemption arc in their story.

If their trying means that Trump gets taken down, then I'm for letting them at least try.

[Gorsameth]

What happened to Barr's fervent belief that a President cannot be prosecuted for his actions?

[Odinfrost]

It really is funny to me that people like him think they have a redemption arc in their story.

Oh they will be seen as redeemed.
Not by Trump supporters who will call this act treasonous or something.
Nor by Democrats who blames him for being an enabler and coward.

It will be by that tiny pocket of non-Trump-following Republicans who hopes this thing will be the final straw to bring the party back to 2008

[Dontrike]

What happened to Barr's fervent belief that a President cannot be prosecuted for his actions?

Likely comes with the idea that if he does this he can get a book deal.