Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCring...ces_and_exits/

Anyone bored and want to watch a supercut of Trump talking about all the "best people" he hired and then shitting all over them when he fired them? It's pretty long since he did this with literally everyone he hired and then subsequently fired.

But it's sure fun and paints a picture of a very stable and clear thinking individual.

[Breccia]

So if two thirds of the US population votes, and just over a third of that is Republicans, and almost seventy-five percent of Republicans believe Trump, that means.... what, 15% of the population buys into what he says, at least? God fucking dammit. I used to think that the majority of people were decent, but now I'm just disgusted at the number of hateful bigots, stupid sheep, general assholes, and willfully ignorant people that exist. Sigh.

The only good news is that number is down.

A recent Iowa poll said that 51% of Iowa Republicans believe Trump won 2020.

Yes, that's deplorable. Yes, that's sickening. For the record, I think most of them were lying, they might literally rather die than admit they made a mistake, not that it would change their vote.

But it is also a very slim majority, of only the party most likely to agree, in a state that seems to be pretty Trump-favorable.

The GOP being the Party of Trump is teetering on the edge, which is very dangerous...for the GOP.

If it was a vast majority, then the party would be aligned. The RNC would just cancel the debates, name Trump the nominee right now, and be done with it.

If it was a tiny minority, then the party would be aligned. The RNC would heave his fat ass over his Wall, oh wait it doesn't exist, stick to the rules they've set up and it becomes a DeSantis-Christie showdown while Pence continues to physically exist.

It's a 50/50 split.

What happens to a divisive group when it's a 50/50 split?

You might not like that so much of the country is at least pretending to be racist stupid conspiracy theorists, and you shouldn't, it's horrifying to think the US has even a slim chance of installing a nuclear despot. But the good news for now, is they are going to have their hands full eating each other.

[Endus]

I agree but they are all brain broken for the wrong reasons.

They see Trump as an antagonist to own the Libs. They have become a party or cult of grievance and reactionary. No matter all the flaws of Trump they just want him mainly to piss off the so called Left or Democrats.

I've said it before, I'll say it again; you cannot call these people on on "hypocrisy", because hypocrisy requires that you be inconsistent in your application of principles, and these people do not have principles. None. Legitimately, zero. They do not have a stance they will insist on, because their only objectives are hurting their enemies, defined however vaguely they wish. Owning the libs or whatever other phrasing you like (that's certainly a factor, but it's broader than just anti-social-liberalism).

They don't believe in any issue on principle; they take oppositional stances, and the moment that stance doesn't work for them they will flip in a heartbeat. This is why the same person can go from chanting "LOCK HER UP" at Hillary Clinton to condemning the Trump indictments as "weaponizing the DOJ in a politicized prosecution to hurt Trump's electoral chances". You can challenge them on the inconsistency, and they'll laugh in your face, because their reasoning does not delve deeper than "must hurt Clinton" and "must protect Trump". Everything else is just dressing to avoid admitting their unthinking allegiance and support for horrors.

[Edge-]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...wpisrc=nl_most

Free link, it appears.

But do you remember that time Scott Walker negotiated that YUGE Foxconn deal for Wisconsin? And then Trump showed up with a golden shovel for the groundbreaking and made a YUGE to-do about it?

Spoilers: Nothing has come of it outside of an off-brand Epcot sphere and a bunch of broken promises.

[Breccia]

Jeffrey Clark files for emergency hearing.

"On what grounds?"

That he doesn't want to go to jail.

This Notice will have the legal effect of removing the entire civil-criminal
hybrid case to this Court and preventing the State of Georgia (“State”) from
proceeding any further with the Fulton County Action unless and until (1) a remand
order is issued by this Court; (2) 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) is complied with; and (3) the
interlocutory appeal applicable to federal-officer removals as specified in Section
1447(d) is taken and all follow-on appellate process is completed. See 28 U.S.C. §
1446(d) (automatic stay upon any civil-based removal).

So it's 45 pages and I'm not a lawyer, but here's what I got from it: Clark thinks he can't be arrested by Georgia at all. Yep, you guessed it, it's another serving from the all-you-can-eat bullshit buffet of Absolute Immunity.

Clark says because he was a federal official at the time, state laws don't apply.

"So he admitted it?"

Uh, no, that's why it's 40+ pages. There's a lot of "the law can't be applied this way" and not much of "I did and/or didn't do it". Clark is not the first to use this general approach, but it's a bold move, because many of the people arrested can't do it. This is a giant legal declaration of "You're on your own, suckers!"

Which, and I'm going to say this more and more I'm sure, is a stupid fucking thing to publicly announce to your co-conspirators.

Oh, and of course, he didn't say "move it to federal court" he said "drop the charges, and maybe later the feds will arrest me". That may or may not be how the law works, but it screams Rich White Privilege.

There were a few other things my not-a-lawyer-but-I-play-one-on-TV mind found.

1) This:

Mr. Clark and undersigned counsel have not seen any of the arrest warrants, let
alone the arrest warrant issued re Mr. Clark in particular. The District Attorney is
apparently relying on news media announcements to alert defendants to her arrest
warrant threats. This is inconsistent with due process. Defendants should not have
to watch the news or search for press stories to try to track down all legal papers in
this case.

In any event, Mr. Clark does not and has not voluntarily placed himself under
Georgia state jurisdiction by any means in the Action

Clark says he and his lawyers have not seen the arrest warrants. For the record, I don't believe that's honest. I think he's been screening his calls (etc). Also, arrest warrants are issued all the time without the criminal in the room. The cops bring it with them when they are there to slap the cuffs on. Willis was giving Clark a better option, one he's apparently not taking, and an option he actually quoted.

And the follow-up sounds a lot like "I do not recognize the court's authority over me". Party of Law and Order, everyone, apparently appropriately filled with *dung dung*.

By the way, "I found out through the news so it doesn't count" is a really stupid thing for a Trump supporter to say. Trump has fired people by the news. Trump refused to answer his phone Jan 6th and people had to figure it out by the news. Clark should know that.

2) "First Amendment" is mentioned a few times, of course. Taking a call from a co-conspirator was just First Amendment.

3) This part:

Moreover, it relates to a mere one-week period from December 28, 2020 to January 2, 2021. No conduct lasting
for multiple years is alleged against Mr. Clark.

First of all, 2020 and 2021 are two years. Fuck you, Clark, I can use technicalities better than you.

Second of all, "I was only a criminal for a few days" is a stupid fucking defense.

Now I know he's referring to the fact the GA DA calls out a multi-year conspiracy and therefore he couldn't be involved if he was only in the last few days of it. Which is...a take, I suppose.

4) Part of the evidence he cited that he was a federal officer, was his own resignation letter. No really, it's Exhibit C.

5) And the big one, for me at least. Clark says he was "Acting Assistant Attorney General [of the Civil Division]" emphasis mine, and therefore, everything he did was nice and bigly and yuge because he was part of the DoJ. Okay.

WaPo says he took that offer Jan 3, 2023.

"Wait, didn't he--"

Yes. After the timeline that he himself admitted he was charged for.

And he still wants immunity for being not just federal, but DoJ. Which Trump appointed him to, after he was already part of the conspiracy, and he's using that unilateral appointment as defense in court that he can't be charged for his actions before that.

You want to see weaponization of the DoJ? You're seeing it. Team Trump just said, under oath, that someone who commits a crime could be appointed later, by just the President, to the DoJ (if they weren't there already) and become absolutely immune to state crimes.

And they admitted they did that, and they admitted they did that on purpose.

From now on, any Trump supporters on MMO-C accusing Biden of weaponizing the DoJ can simply point to this and say "You are okay with it". Them having me on ignore is not a defense.

Clark was a federal official, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and therefore had no official reason to be involved.

The "throw everything at the wall, see what sticks" he's trying, "I didn't do it and it would be fine if I did and if it wasn't I'm immune" is filled with bullshit. But bear in mind, re-election campaigns are not official WH business. States run their own elections. Nothing Clark claims is valid.

I would love to see what happens when Clark pushes this idea and chooses not to surrender. Man, if only there was some image of what that might look like.

Oh, wait.

[Edge-]

Man it's been a while since that happened, I forgot.

Really, the Trump administration is the gift that keeps on giving.

[diller]

Yeah, 7 out every 10 republican voters believe that trump tells them the truth, and they are more likely to believe him than their own family and friends.

Most likely because their friends/family have disowned them.

[Gorsameth]

Federal officials are immune to state laws sure is a take I haven't heard before.
Seems.... unlikely.

[Breccia]

Federal officials are immune to state laws sure is a take I haven't heard before.
Seems.... unlikely.

I've been making the rounds since, and most of the articles agree with you. Unless Clark was somehow magically a Senator debating on the floor, there's not a lot backing this argument. FOX News might dig someone up eventually, I guess, but I don't think they'll be able to do so in such speed or with such confidence.

[Shadowferal]

Mark Meadows tried something similar

Meadows is begging the federal court to rush their ruling on whether or not to take over his case. He's got a preliminary hearing on Aug. 28, but that's three days after the deadline set to turn himself in.

So, Meadows' lawyer asked Willis for an extension on the self-report deadline until after the hearing.

Willis isn't interested.

"Good Morning Mr. Moran," Willis writes in a reply to Meadows' lawyer's email. "I am not granting any extensions. I gave 2 weeks fo people to surrender themselves to the court. Your client is no different than any other criminal defendant in this jurisdiction. The two weeks was a tremendous courtesy. At 12:30 pm on Friday I shall file warrants in the system. My team has availability to meet to discuss reasonable consent bonds Wednesday and Thursday."

Meadows' motion explains to the state of Georgia, "...the Court can effectuate relief by issuing an order to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis— who is a party to the matter before the Court—prohibiting her from arresting or causing the arrest of Mr. Meadows before the Monday hearing."

The motion also says:

"Absent this Court's intervention, Mr. Meadows will be denied the protection from arrest that federal law affords former federal officials, and this Court's prompt but orderly consideration of removal will be frustrated."

The motion goes on to cite his reasons for moving his case to federal court, claiming that because he was being paid by the federal government he was acting as a federal official and thus his case should be in federal court.

Speaking to MSNBC about the matter, former senior prosecutor for special counsel Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, explained that it isn't how the law works. If Meadows robbed a Georgia bank, he used as an example, Meadows couldn't claim he should be tried in federal court because he's a federal official.

[postman1782]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jack-s...ng-maga-lawyer

Posted about 40 minutes ago. A maintenance worker was proven to have lied under oath back in July, has now dropped his Trump Attorney, and has now flipped. This was the guy that was told to delete the security camera footage by Walt Nauta.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/22/geo...-elector-trump

This is getting fun. Indicted ex-GOP says the fake electors were acting at Trump's direction.

[Shadowferal]

Smelling blood in the water...

[Kaleredar]

I've been making the rounds since, and most of the articles agree with you. Unless Clark was somehow magically a Senator debating on the floor, there's not a lot backing this argument. FOX News might dig someone up eventually, I guess, but I don't think they'll be able to do so in such speed or with such confidence.

I also find it hard to believe that in the entire history of the United States that a federal official, as broadly as that title can apply, has never once run afoul of state laws, thus settling this issue .

[Edge-]

Is it time to gas up the fleet of Greyhound busses so that they're ready and waiting for people to be thrown under them?

[Breccia]

A maintenance worker was proven to have lied under oath back in July, has now dropped his Trump Attorney, and has now flipped.

Indicted ex-GOP says the fake electors were acting at Trump's direction.

Party's over. Last one out is stuck with the check.
@Shadowferal is right, these people knew that time was running out for them to do anything other than 25 to life. Trump wasn't helping them in any way and the evidence against them was objective.

So the next question is, can they prove it? There are four options here.

A) They can prove Trump ordered the hit, and so can prosecutors.
I'm guessing the offer will be taken because it turns a slam dunk into the Harlem Globetrotters, and Trump gets Generally stomped in Washington.

B) They can't prove Trump ordered the hit, but prosecutors can
Basically, they'd be corroborating with spoken testimony only. Team Trump will try to fight back with the "you can't prove it" and hope for the best. Not a great deal for prosecutors against Trump, but at least it's some guilty pleas and reduced sentences.

C) They can prove Trump ordered the hit, but prosecutors couldn't until now
The prosecutors offer a sweatheart deal for the objective evidence, Trump's lawyers remind him that loyalty goes both ways on most sane people before snatching their last paycheck and hitting the unemployment line.

D) They can't prove Trump ordered the hit, and prosecutors can't either
Then the headline does not exist. Without proof, they wouldn't have brought charges, so someone had to have some. Ruling this one out.

I don't put a lot of faith in either Smith or Willis bringing up charges without some kind of objective proof, so I'm not liking C so much. I admit it was possible to start arresting people and hope someone flipped, but I don't think that's what happened here. Honestly, I'm kind of going with B. I don't think these criminals intentionally kept secret proof of their crimes as blackmail material for the rest of them, and I don't think therefore they have much left to offer except their word on the stand.

- - - Updated - - -

This just in: everything Trump touches dies. Today's example: Giuliani.

Rudy Giuliani still hasn’t found a Georgia-based lawyer and is getting help from former New York Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Fulton County election subversion case, to help him find legal representation, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.

Kerik, who is not a lawyer, has agreed to assist Giuliani at no cost throu--

"Um...Kerik? Isn't he--"

Yes.

Though he is not charged in the sprawling indictment out of Fulton County, his attorney confirmed to CNN that Kerik is the unnamed individual listed in the indictment as co-conspirator 5.

According to the indictment, co-conspirator 5 took part in several meetings with lawmakers in Pennsylvania and Arizona — states Trump was contesting the 2020 election results — including at least one meeting at the White House.

"Wait, so, Giuliani has no lawyer, is no lawyer, and is asking someone who may have already turned?"

Correct. Kerik is not a lawyer, therefore, none of the ethical rules of acting as someone's lawyer apply. If you come to me to have your spleen removed, it's your own fault if you get disemboweled by a math teacher-slash-Tauren Protection Warrior-slash-Fallout 76 fan fiction writer-slash-slash-slash-dead.

Earlier I suggested that Giuliani's self-imposed problem might be staged, hoping he can get a trial pushback or something. I honestly don't know what will happen if he can't get a lawyer in time. Just kidding. They'll cuff him. Giuliani had it done to tens of thousands of NYC criminals who didn't have laywers onhand, he knows that's the result.

For the record, I 100% get no lawyer wanting to represent Giuliani. Leaving the "he's objectively guilty" issue behind, the crimes he's accused of are deplorable and treasonous, they won't get paid, and if they represent him they risk not only alienating reasonable people with standards, but if Giuliani tries to turn, alienating the Party of Trump as well.

Or, he could get a public defender.

- - - Updated - - -

Not entirely sure I'm reading this right.

The NYTimes reports that Meadows may have, um, maybe ratted out Trump a little?

This winter, after receiving a subpoena from a grand jury investigating Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election, Mark Meadows commenced a delicate dance with federal prosecutors.

He had no choice but to show up and, eventually, to testify. Yet Mr. Meadows — Mr. Trump’s final White House chief of staff — initially declined to answer certain questions, sticking to his former boss’s position that they were shielded by executive privilege.

But when prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, challenged Mr. Trump’s executive privilege claims before a judge, Mr. Meadows pivoted. Even though he risked enraging Mr. Trump, he decided to trust Mr. Smith’s team, according to a person familiar with the matter. Mr. Meadows quietly arranged to talk with them not only about the steps Trump took to stay in office, but also about his handling of classified documents after he left.

The episode illustrated the wary steps Mr. Meadows took to navigate legal and political peril as prosecutors in Washington and Georgia closed in on Mr. Trump, seeking to avoid being charged himself while also sidestepping the career risks of being seen as cooperating with what his Republican allies had cast as partisan persecution of Trump.

His high-wire legal act hit a new challenge this month. While Mr. Meadows’s strategy of targeted assistance to federal prosecutors and sphinxlike public silence largely kept him out of the 45-page election interference indictment that Mr. Smith filed against Mr. Trump in Washington, it did not help him avoid similar charges in Fulton County, Ga. Mr. Meadows was named last week as one of Mr. Trump’s co-conspirators in a sprawling racketeering indictment filed by the local district attorney in Georgia.

Interviews and a review of the cases show how Mr. Meadows’s tactics reflected to some degree his tendency to avoid conflict and leave different people believing that he agreed with them. They were also dictated by his unique position in Mr. Trump’s world and the legal jeopardy this presented.

So, we already know Meadows was mostly quiet when the plan he conspired with Trump to seize dictator control of the country, failed. We have a recent story that he knew of no special telepathic disclosure either. It may be that he was trying to defuse the situation, convince Smith this wasn't something anyone needed to be charged over. And then Georgia didn't get the message.

The plan by Mr. Meadows to be quietly cooperative with prosecutors without agreeing to a formal deal was hardly a novel strategy. It is what many subjects of investigations do when they are facing exposure to serious criminal charges. But in this case, the stakes are especially high for both Mr. Meadows and Mr. Trump.

Mr. Meadows’s goal was to give investigators the information they requested when he believed he was legally obliged to provide it. But he also used the law to push back when he considered the requests to be inappropriate or potentially dangerous to his own interests, the person familiar with his legal game plan said.

In one instance, when Mr. Meadows was subpoenaed by the House committee for documents and testimony, he provided them with an explosive trove of text messages from the period leading up to Jan. 6. The messages showed Mr. Meadows communicating with everyone from Fox News hosts to Virginia Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas. They were embarrassing to both him and Mr. Trump.

But Mr. Terwilliger determined that since the messages were not related to Mr. Meadows’s communications with the president, they were not protected by executive privilege.

Meadows may have been trying to cool things down and drag them out, but it doesn't seem to have worked.

- - - Updated - - -

Meadows is about to have company.

The Fulton County district attorney’s office, meanwhile, issued subpoenas Tuesday to two people who had listened in on Trump’s January 2021 call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger as prosecutors plan to counter Meadows’ bid to get the case tossed.

According to court filings, the subpoenas issued to two lawyers – Kurt Hilbert and Alex Kaufman – requested that they appear to testify in federal court on Monday at a hearing on Meadows’ request.

The subpoenas do not spell out why they are being called to testify at the hearing. However, the Raffensperger call is key to the case that Willis has brought against Meadows.

The grand jury indictment alleges that Meadows, along with Trump, unlawfully solicited the violation of oath by a public officer with the call. The call also was listed as an overt act in the racketeering conspiracy charge that has been brought against Meadows, Trump and the other 17 defendants in the case.

Hilbert spoke on the call about data he claimed showed that thousands of votes in Georgia were cast illegally, while asking for the secretary of state’s office to provide its internal data that could speak to the claims.

The term for this is "lying to a government official", so Hilbert could be arrested. Hilbert has no such data. The votes were not cast illegally. Also, if you had data which proved they were illegal, why not just go to court? Why would you need the SecState to show you proof you already had?

Kaufman appeared to be referred to as “Alex” by Trump on the call, and confirmed to the Atlanta Jewish Times that he was listening to the call – but didn’t speak – in his capacity as general counsel for the Fulton County Republican Party.

US District Judge Steve Jones, who is presiding over Meadows’ request to move the prosecution against him to federal court, has said Monday’s hearing on the request will be an evidentiary one.

Not sure what's going on with Kaufman. Seems like he's just a witness, but, considering the trouble Shafer is in, it would not surprise me if Kaufman's role as a Republican Party lawyer meant he was actually involved.

[Kathranis]

It's going to be a real delight watching all these co-defendants roll over on Trump.

[Edge-]

https://www.ajc.com/politics/first-m...GE6EYCY3D2OPQ/

First mug shots of the indicted co-conspirators are starting to roll out.

[s_bushido]

First mug shots of the indicted co-conspirators are starting to roll out.

Trump's going in on Thursday, right? I wonder how many pathetic fundraising emails they're going to send out to the sheep once they have that picture to use.

[Poopymonster]

Trump's going in on Thursday, right? I wonder how many pathetic fundraising emails they're going to send out to the sheep once they have that picture to use.

Probably with a Swole Donny image saying he's 180 pounds.

[Corvus]

Given the way bail conditions work in Georgia, trump only has to fork up 10% of it. 20K is nothing when he has the MAGA grifting fun. However the rest of the conditions are spicy.

STATE OF GEORGIA V. DONALD JOHN TRUMP

CONSENT BOND ORDER FOR DEFENDANT DONALD JOHN TRUMP
[...]

Defendant may post bond as cash, through commercial surety, or through the Fulton County Jail 10% program.

(2) The Defendant shall not violate the laws of this State, the laws of any other state, the laws of the United States of America, or any other local laws. Ayala v. State, 262 Ga. 704, 705 (1993).

(3) The Defendant shall appear in court as directed by the Court. Id.

(4) The Defendant shall perform no act to intimidate any person known to him or her to be a codefendant or witness in this case or to otherwise obstruct the administration of justice. Id. This shall include, but is not limited to, the following:

a. The Defendant shall make no direct or indirect threat of any nature against any codefendant;

b. The Defendant shall make no direct or indirect threat of any nature against any witness including, but not limited to, the individuals designated in the Indictment as an unindicated co-conspirators Individual 1 through Individual 30;

c. The Defendant shall make no direct or indirect threat of any nature against any victim;

d. The Defendant shall make no direct or indirect threat of any nature against the community or to any property in the community;

e. The above shall include, but are not limited to, posts on social media or reposts of posts made by another individual on social media;

(5) The Defendant shall not communicate in any way, directly or indirectly, about the facts of this case with any person known to him to be a codefendant in this case except through his or her counsel.

Shall we open a poll on how long before trump starts breaking those conditions?