Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

WaPo reports that Trump has begun using "in my opinion" and "I believe" into his posts and statements.

The article's a few days old, and refers to the Newsmax interview I already mentioned. In that interview, Trump used such "everyone is saying"-style distancers six times in one span of 30 seconds. (Newsmax, as I already pointed out, still added their disclaimer at the end)

Trump is being coached.

I don't know what benefit this will have. It's August 2023. Trump has already described the election as rigged or stolen, and other statements of fact, not opinion, for years. I guess they're trying to stem the bleeding.

my lawyers would prefer putting this, I believe, Irrefutable & Overwhelming evidence of Election Fraud

Just a reminder, that not only is time travel an invalid defense in court, his state of mind is not a winning strategy. If I take money from the bank that isn't mine, I'm a thief, even if I thought it was mine. If Trump wants to plead insanity, that's okay, can't wait to see that. But he would rather die. Literally. Because that's the kind of insanity he has.

While it's been signaled that this wil be Trump's defense, it will still fail. A reasonable person would have known the election was fair and legal, because there were many recounts, court cases, and investigations that even Trump launched, all of which failed. And this report he's talking about didn't exist at the time.

The report in question, according to people familiar with the matter, is a document of more than 100 pages that was compiled at least in part by Liz Harrington, a Trump communications aide who is often described as among the true believers in his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him through widespread fraud.

The document focuses on what detractors of the election have insisted are widespread voting anomalies in Georgia during that campaign, the people said. It has been in the works for many weeks, according to one of the people familiar with the matter.

Weeks, not years.

I believe, that this report is just a list of things people have said, with no investigation into those things, no proof of those things, and it's designed to be held up in a rally but not hold up in court. We'll see it eventually, but not introduced as evidence, because it isn't.

[Kaleredar]

WaPo reports that Trump has begun using "in my opinion" and "I believe" into his posts and statements.

The article's a few days old, and refers to the Newsmax interview I already mentioned. In that interview, Trump used such "everyone is saying"-style distancers six times in one span of 30 seconds. (Newsmax, as I already pointed out, still added their disclaimer at the end)

Trump is being coached.

I don't know what benefit this will have. It's August 2023. Trump has already described the election as rigged or stolen, and other statements of fact, not opinion, for years. I guess they're trying to stem the bleeding.



Just a reminder, that not only is time travel an invalid defense in court, his state of mind is not a winning strategy. If I take money from the bank that isn't mine, I'm a thief, even if I thought it was mine. If Trump wants to plead insanity, that's okay, can't wait to see that. But he would rather die. Literally. Because that's the kind of insanity he has.

While it's been signaled that this wil be Trump's defense, it will still fail. A reasonable person would have known the election was fair and legal, because there were many recounts, court cases, and investigations that even Trump launched, all of which failed. And this report he's talking about didn't exist at the time.



Weeks, not years.

I believe, that this report is just a list of things people have said, with no investigation into those things, no proof of those things, and it's designed to be held up in a rally but not hold up in court. We'll see it eventually, but not introduced as evidence, because it isn't.

its important to remember that all of this election fraud/denial stuff trump is trying to claim are somehow mitigating factors isn’t important, either.

Whether trump believes he won the election or not, or if people were convinced (by the lies he spread) is irrelevant.

They’re not saying it was illegal for trump to say the election was stolen, they’re saying it was illegal for trump to try overturn the election.

[The Stormbringer]

Holy shit, they actually got Trump to change how he talks? That is a massive feat in and of itself. He must really be shitting his diapers at this point. And here I thought nothing in the world would get him to do something different.

[Kathranis]

Jesus Christ is it infuriating how this cunt is so sure of himself with the way he repeats affirming words.

I hate the way he always capitalizes words that aren't supposed to be capitalized, but at least you can always tell he wrote it and not one of his aides.

- - - Updated - - -

It also fails to mention that out of all the actual factual instances of REAL voter fraud found while investigating the election, the vast, VAST majority of them were all Republicans doing the deed. Like, 9 out of every 10 instances of discovered fraud were Trump voters.

Also, lets not forget the fact that there were several times Trump literally told people via social media to vote twice in certain areas. Which, you know, is 100% illegal.

Yeah, I've been thinking back to all the fun times between November 2020 and February 2021 watching MAGA continuously cope over "evidence" and "strategies" that either made zero sense or never materialized.

Pretty sure all of the recounts Trump had done actually put more votes in the Biden column, widening his lead (albeit only marginally).

- - - Updated - - -

WaPo reports that Trump has begun using "in my opinion" and "I believe" into his posts and statements.

His lawyers are babysitting him, they've said as much already. Actually I think one of them literally did say that.

Regardless, he's not being charged with lying so it doesn't really help his defense that much. He's allowed to lie about the election under the first amendment. What isn't allowed is criminal conspiracy.

[Sunseeker]

His lawyers are babysitting him, they've said as much already. Actually I think one of them literally did say that.

I have to imagine there are two conflicting lines of thought in the minds of these attorneys:
"Oh boy! I get to be the chosen one who is right next to him and gets to have his ear most of the time!"
"I can't believe I went through law school just so I could baby sit an overgrown toddler."

[Breccia]

Regardless, he's not being charged with lying so it doesn't really help his defense that much. He's allowed to lie about the election under the first amendment. What isn't allowed is criminal conspiracy.

That's true.

Which is why the fact that his lawyers are telling him to add that caveat, and the fact Trump is doing it, even more significant. Trump would not have changed so dramatically so quickly if it wasn't important to his lawyers, who either tricked him or threatened him.

So I'm going to say that he hasn't been charged with lying yet. Fraud requires deceit.

[cubby]

@cubby does it matter if court filings have been ruled on in previous cases elsewhere? Is there some sort of punishment for filing that? Or is it like other bullshit where you can keep submitting it until someone decides to agree with it?

You can resubmit filings in the hopes that another judge might reconsider. However, there is an immense bias towards NOT overruling what another co-judge has already put into place, or, in this case decided has no merit. Co-judge being the same level, not appellate, etc.

However, if the filings are so egregiously frivolous, as apparent from the initial filing, there could be sanctions and fines.

[Kaleredar]

That's true.

Which is why the fact that his lawyers are telling him to add that caveat, and the fact Trump is doing it, even more significant. Trump would not have changed so dramatically so quickly if it wasn't important to his lawyers, who either tricked him or threatened him.

So I'm going to say that he hasn't been charged with lying yet. Fraud requires deceit.

And if evidence of the criminal conspiracy is predicated upon what trump said, then there’s already tons of instances written, spoken, and tweeted of Trump unequivocally claiming the election was stolen.

This is basically a “you’re on trial for murdering someone and said they deserved to die many many times, so stop continuing to say it”

[Breccia]

This is basically a “you’re on trial for murdering someone and said they deserved to die, so stop continuing to say it”

If Trump is lucky, you are right.

If not, there's another reason, and I can't wait to see what it is.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, Kaleredar, you sound a lot like Chris Christie.

No, I'm not surprised by it, because what he now knows is, he's facing jail time.

And he can't make his situation much worse, and expect his lawyers to do anything to help him.

What he should have done, is listen to his lawyers back in the White House between November of 2020 and January 20 of 2021, when they told him, if you continue with this election interference activity, you are going to spend the rest of your life dealing with the criminal justice system.

Bill Barr said that yesterday, that that's what he was told not only by Bill Bar his attorney general and other members of the justice department, but he was told that by his White House counsel as well, Pat Cipollone.

He should have listened to those words, and maybe he wouldn't be under indictment in four jurisdictions today, and he wouldn't be putting the country through this.

He's not doing this for us. He's doing it because he can't help himself.

[Breccia]

We know there are 30 unindicted co-conspirators, and not a ton else.

There is some evidence, however.

1) The first mention in the indictment of Trump's post-election racketeering is his victory speech Nov 4. Like any other major speech, there were drafts, and Trump almost certainly ordered it written but did not write it himself.

2) Trump's campaign had other staffers involved with coordinating the fake electors, as shown by email recipients.

3) Bernie Kerik, as shown here, has turned on Trump. His lawyer admitted he's one of the 30.

4) Waldron and Epshteyn, as shown here.

5) Stefanie Lambert, as shown here.

6) People who helped Powell break into voting machines.

7) The remaining Georgia fake electors.

8) Anyone at the craziest meeting ever held in the White House, Friday Dec 18.

Trump's private schedule hadn't included appointments for Powell or the others: former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, and a little-known former Trump administration official, Emily Newman. But they'd come to convince Trump that he had the power to take extreme measures to keep fighting.

- - - Updated - - -

The author of this Slate article has clearly been following everything and taking notes.

He has a list of five reasons why Trump will, not could be, will, be held in contempt.

1) Chutkan knows Trump is trying to delay long enough to pardon himself. And isn't a fan.
2) While all four cases share some facts and evidence, the DC case is built for speed, and those facts and evidence will be made public there first.
3) Smith's case is likely overwhelming and airtight.
4) DC juries have a history of being objective. Trump wants a hung jury, and wants one of his cultists to do that for him. He won't find one there.
5) Therefore: because a DC conviction seems all but assured, Trump can't win on the facts. He has no choice but to attack the system itself and pray the voters believe him.

We all know Trump wants to portray himself as the victim in an unjust system he not only is only benefitted from for 70-plus years, but also, has used unjustly to benefit himself and his friends already, and will do again given the chance. Speaking out against everyone who isn't Trump is part of it.

Which is where this next part comes in.

Trump cultists are insane. Trump supporters, well, I believe @Endus already put you on notice that your silence is not just acceptance but affirmation, so you're just as bad. But other classic conservatives are going to see Trump, who is not only found objectively guilty of those crimes, attack the Party of Law and Order, and blame them for not stepping in to protect him from the fair and just consequences of all those crimes he committed. Trump's support is already slipping. He threatened to skip the debates again in the last 24 hours, because he sucks at debating, but also, because everyone will ask him "so, how's the trial going?" to his face on live TV. Continued attacks reinforce the base, but they cost him the mandatory support to win the election and pardon himself.

Which is why

“you’re on trial for murdering someone and said they deserved to die many many times, so stop continuing to say it”

is a great analogy, so of course, I'm going to steal it. Trump is on trial for murdering democracy, but is claiming it's self-defense. And a lot of Republicans like democracy, that's why they gerrymander so much. He needs to stop saying democracy deserves to die.

- - - Updated - - -

You know what sounds like fun? Looking at Trump's fundraising websites. Boy, I bet they have some really interesting things to say about now, huh?

Let's try...this one.

Hey! America is already great.

...what?

In our country, everyone has to follow the rules, no matter who they are. Our Constitution, the big rule book of our nation, says that we're all equal. Nobody gets special treatment.

I want to talk a bit about lying. A lie is when someone doesn't tell the truth on purpose. It's like saying you ate an apple when you really ate a cookie. Lying is bad because it breaks trust. Imagine if your friends didn't believe you anymore because you lied a lot.

In some cases, like when people lie to the courts or the police, it's not just bad, it's a crime.

Wait a minute, this doesn't look right at all! And there's a link to donate to the ACLU!

Oh, wait, looks like the Patriot Legal Defense Fund (https://patriotlegaldefensefund.com/ if you hurry) got taken over by hackers.

Now, there's something else we should think about. Asking people to give money to your political campaign is okay when it's for the right reasons, like getting support to try to make the country better. But asking your friends do donate money to the Patriot Legal Defense Fund and then using that money to defend yourself from crimes? That doesn't seem right. It's like if a friend kept asking for lunch money but didn’t buy lunch. People give their money to people who want to be president to make things better for everyone, not just to help one person with their problems.

We've talked about that before. Granted, I should have mentioned the Support Donald Trumps Patriot Legal Defense Fund earlier--

"You missed the apostrophe."

No. I didn't. And I no longer know if that was a typo by the bottom of the barrel people still working for Trump, or if the hackers had one foot in the door and were testing the response time. Or...they're supporting the legal fees of all the Donald Trumps in the world. It could be any of them.

It's the first.

But several posters including myself so you know who I'm going to link have mentioned that Trump is just taking PAC funds, supposed to be political, and paying Trump's legal bills, on the grounds of "it's political because Trump can't get elected if he's convicted of all those crimes he did".

And, well, someone took offense to that.

Being honest is really important. If a leader isn't truthful, it's hard to trust them and that makes them dangerous. Our Constitution helps us when things get tough and when we're not sure about our leaders. We need to make sure everyone tells the truth and does the right thing.

We should care about what's right and good for our country, not just one person. As we watch what's happening with Trump, let's remember to always look for the truth. That's what being an American is all about.

Thanks, and let's always do what's right for our country.

[Kaleredar]

Oh, wait, looks like the Patriot Legal Defense Fund (https://patriotlegaldefensefund.com/ if you hurry) got taken over by hackers.



We've talked about that before. Granted, I should have mentioned the Support Donald Trumps Patriot Legal Defense Fund earlier--

"You missed the apostrophe."

No. I didn't. And I no longer know if that was a typo by the bottom of the barrel people still working for Trump, or if the hackers had one foot in the door and were testing the response time. Or...they're supporting the legal fees of all the Donald Trumps in the world. It could be any of them.

It's the first.

But several posters including myself so you know who I'm going to link have mentioned that Trump is just taking PAC funds, supposed to be political, and paying Trump's legal bills, on the grounds of "it's political because Trump can't get elected if he's convicted of all those crimes he did".

And, well, someone took offense to that.

I'm afraid that might be too subtle. Some of the people going to donate to Trump's "save my ass" fund might read that and think "what a coherent and cogent sentence from good boy Trump! And Trump is right, donations should only be done to help better the country, and not try and fund a legal defense fund to cover up for blatant lies! So I'm sure Trump will stand valiantly in the way when the Biden Crime Family tries to siphon money from filthy liberal donations to pay for their legal battles! Anyway, here's my entire monthly social security check, Mr. Trump, hope meals on wheels can see me through to next month!"

[Breccia]

"Anyway, here's my entire monthly social security check, Mr. Trump"

I mean, if they do that right now, they might not be able to donate to Trump directly, all the links go to "librul leet" recipients.

[Egomaniac]

Anyway, here's my entire monthly social security check, Mr. Trump, hope meals on wheels can see me through to next month!"

Which brings us right back around to what I said earlier...remember when Trump said he was so rich he didn't need any donations?

[Kaleredar]

Which brings us right back around to what I said earlier...remember when Trump said he was so rich he didn't need any donations?

Well, clearly, every true, red-blooded American patriot should feel honored that their hard-earned money has the privilege of going to the true patriot cause of helping Trump take down the Soros socialist Biden crime family deep state!

[Egomaniac]

Well, clearly, every true, red-blooded American patriot should feel honored that their hard-earned money has the privilege of going to the true patriot cause of helping Trump take down the Soros socialist Biden crime family deep state!

Well sure, I can't deny these people their patriotic right to donate money that would just be wasted by putting food in their kids bellies... but what about Trump saying he didn't need or want any donations? What happened to that guy?

[Kaleredar]

Well sure, I can't deny these people their patriotic right to donate money that would just be wasted by putting food in their kids bellies... but what about Trump saying he didn't need or want any donations? What happened to that guy?

Again, clearly, he's so rich that it makes it all the more of a privilege that he's allowing such patriotic Americans to help him.

[Egomaniac]

Again, clearly, he's so rich that it makes it all the more of a privilege that he's allowing such patriotic Americans to help him.

Again, not talking about the people donating to him...I'm sure they feel very blessed. I'm talking about him, the guy who was so rich he did not want donations. The guy who scoffed at his Republican rivals that took donations for being "bought".

[Corvus]

The rich stay rich by never spending their own money.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that the seriousness of the situation penetrated trumps sociopathic narcissism would seem to be a clue just how terrified he is.

[Odinfrost]

Again, not talking about the people donating to him...I'm sure they feel very blessed. I'm talking about him, the guy who was so rich he did not want donations. The guy who scoffed at his Republican rivals that took donations for being "bought".

I think you're missing the point. He does not want the donations. But he's not going to say no to anyone sending money his way.
That or he's lying, but how can it POSSIBLY be that?

[Egomaniac]

I think you're missing the point. He does not want the donations. But he's not going to say no to anyone sending money his way.
That or he's lying, but how can it POSSIBLY be that?

That is my point