Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Egomaniac]

That was also stupid. FOX News had settled a month before. They haven't been forgiven for that, either.

I'm not defending them here. I'm just saying what they're all doing. They all know that bringing Trump on drives up the ratings. So they bring him on and think that, this time, they'll be able to control him.

[Breccia]

I'm not defending them here. I'm just saying what they're all doing. They all know that bringing Trump on drives up the ratings. So they bring him on and think that, this time, they'll be able to control him.

I mean, you're probably right. I am heartened that only Newsmax and some guy on Twitter bothered asking this time.

[Egomaniac]

I mean, you're probably right. I am heartened that only Newsmax and some guy on Twitter bothered asking this time.

Well, we don't know who all asked...we just know who Trump said "yes" to.

If it's any consolation... I think CNN might have learned a lesson with their town hall. The amount of viewers they lost for bringing Trump in wasn't worth the amount they gained for having him on.

[Breccia]

Well, we don't know who all asked...we just know who Trump said "yes" to.

I'n going to unilaterally declare FOX News didn't ask. Trump stiffed them.

[Egomaniac]

I'n going to unilaterally declare FOX News didn't ask. Trump stiffed them.

They asked him to be in the debate.

[Rasulis]

Donald Trump says he is *checks notes* 215 lbs.

I...

Hm.

In one picture.

[Breccia]

They asked him to be in the debate.

They did, and we'll never know how that would have gone. As I had posted, the moderators were a little more effective this time. But when Trump decided to have a taped interview play over the live debates, I think it's safe to say FOX News was more than a little insulted, plus Murdoch apparently hates him now. I don't think they asked for a one-on-one interview, and if they did, they're stupider than CNN.

[Egomaniac]

I loathe the guy and I’m loving the entertainment surrounding his arrest, but let’s not pretend that many people aren’t entirely truthful about their weight, even in regards to official documents — it’s a trivial thing to focus on and kinda weird.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

- - - Updated - - -

They did, and we'll never know how that would have gone. As I had posted, the moderators were a little more effective this time. But when Trump decided to have a taped interview play over the live debates, I think it's safe to say FOX News was more than a little insulted, plus Murdoch apparently hates him now. I don't think they asked for a one-on-one interview, and if they did, they're stupider than CNN.

Well sure, but, like I said, he's made it his mission to destroy FOX News because they failed their loyatly test.

And as far as hating Trump goes...Tucker Carlson can't stand him either:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64886188

"We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights," he wrote in a text sent on 4 January 2021. "I truly can't wait."

"I hate him passionately," he added.

"That's the last four years. We're all pretending we've got a lot to show for it, because admitting what a disaster it's been is too tough to digest. But come on. There isn't really an upside to Trump."

[Breccia]

And as far as hating Trump goes...Tucker Carlson can't stand him either:

Tucker Carlson is such a whore, Trump paid him $130,000 to be on the interview.

The number of people pretending to be electors now saying Trump told them to rose to three. Now that's some fake news.

Because they were fake electors, and it's news about them.

Three Georgia Republicans who falsely claimed to be electors for Donald Trump — and are now charged alongside him in a sprawling racketeering indictment brought by local prosecutors — say they took the steps they did because Trump, then the sitting president, told them to.

In a series of court filings this week, those false electors, who became part of Trump’s last-ditch bid to subvert the 2020 election, said it was Trump and his campaign lawyers who urged them to sign the false documents, claiming they were necessary to preserve Trump’s flailing court efforts to reverse his defeat to Joe Biden. That exhortation from Trump’s campaign lawyers, they said, amounted to federal government permission to take the actions they did.

The three false electors making the argument are David Shafer, a former state GOP chair; Shawn Still, now a state senator; and Cathleen Latham, a local GOP official.

“Mr. Still, as a presidential elector, was also acting at the direction of the incumbent president of the United States,” an attorney for Still argued Thursday in a court filing seeking to transfer the case against him to federal court. “Trump's instructed Mr. Still and the other contingent electors that they had to meet and cast their ballots on Dec. 14, 2020.”

By the way, this is above and beyond the fake electors that, erm, miraculously not charged with a crime for some reason even though their name was on the page.

Now bear in mind, this is not your standard ratting someone out. Still seems to be claiming "I didn't break the law, because Trump said it was okay". This is an admission of guilt, by the way. He's not saying he didn't do it, he's saying that it was okay that he did. The implication of Trump via Trump's not WH but Trump's lawyers is going to cripple Trump's defense, because what happens when he denies it?

Just throwing it out there, the President of the United States cannot direct state electors. Still has no defense. Still has a mitigating factor to his guilt.

And again, even if he thought the election was rigged (it wasn't) and even if Trump told him to (seems realistic), he still claimed to be the real elector filing for the winning party, which by the election, the audit, and the recount, were all known false for a week. And I don't think there's any "contingent" filings allowed, or more to the point, I don't think the paper they signed officially and filed officially said "contingent". Let me double check.

(a few moments later)

Please refer to my earlier post. They did not use terms in any way like "if it turns out you need this". They claimed to be the duly elected EC voters. They lied.

Oh, did I say "he"? I meant "they".

Latham similarly argued that she was acting “at the direction. of the President of the United States.” And Shafer in a similar petition seeking to move the Fulton County case to federal court contended that he “and the other Republican Electors in the 2020 election acted at the direction of the incumbent President and other federal officials.”

Yeah, Shafer is trying to claim he is a federal employee, it seems, because Trump asked him to commit a crime and he did it. Good luck with that. The WH isn't part of any election campaign, everyone here already knows that. Trump got in trouble for that already, so he knows it too. If Shafer didn't get the memo, that's on him. Maybe he should follow me here, like and subscribe, brought to you by Raid Shadow Legends oh god no But just in case you missed, experts are still talking about it.

Georgia State Law Prof. Clark Cunningham told CNN on Wednesday that Shafer's argument "could be devastating for the former president."

"Shafer explicitly places the entire responsibility for the fake electoral scheme squarely on Donald Trump," he told the network. "He says, 'I was acting at his personal direction.' He does that because he's trying to get into federal court under a law that says even if you're not an officer of the United States, if you are acting under the officer's direction, you can get to federal court. He is making that statement to get to federal court, but at the same time implicating Trump directly in the fake elector scheme."

The Hatch Act does the rest -- no, if he was acting for a political campaign, he was not acting for the White House. Full stop.

Even FOX News knows this, they've dinged Biden for saying MAGA.

So, yes, Trump is going to have a hard time claiming these people acted on their own. If he tries, they'll realize Trump is trying to scapegoat them, and...well, remember how I said earlier this wasn't a standard ratting out? It would immediately become so. They're already on the record saying Trump told them to do it, Smith and/or Willis probably have communications, possibly handed over by those three in their asserted defense attempt. (If there are no communications then those three are probably good and fucked, but with the RICO charge, I don't think that's true) Trump can, at best, try to claim his lawyers did all that for him, but again communications are seized, RICO was charged, those claims may fall on blindfolded eyes.

I will admit, "we did it but it was okay" might be the only option these traitors to the United States of America have left. It was a perfect phone call! I honestly believed there was fraud! I weigh 215 pounds, everyone lies to the police!

It better not be a defense that works.

[Egomaniac]

Tucker Carlson is such a whore, Trump paid him $130,000 to be on the interview.

At least Trump is consistent. THats the same amount he paid Stormy Daniels...

[Breccia]

So here's a timeline of the garbage Trump got into of his own free will.

Week of Sept 5, formal charges, formal arraignment.

Oct 2, NY civil fraud case against Trump and his children.

Jan 2, proposed court date by Agent Smith.

Jan 15, Carroll defamation suit.

Jan 29, federal class-action lawsuit for promoting a pyramid scheme, filed in 2018. Trump managed to get that one pushed off, probably not realizing how full his calendar would be.

March 24, criminal trial for fraud, the $130,000 whore case.

Right about now, Trump probably wishes he only weighed 215. Between being morbidly obese and the stress, he might literally be in court for the rest of his life.

- - - Updated - - -

At least Trump is consistent. THats the same amount he paid Stormy Daniels...

...that...that was the joke.

[Egomaniac]

...that...that was the joke.

Maybe you should have leaned in a bit more on the Stormy Daniels part

[Edge-]

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news...mp-son-barron/

I think we can all agree that death threats aren't ok and that we're all pretty cool with this crazy lady who threatened to kill Trump and his son Baron. Let the legal system work, lady. This shit ain't worth going to jail over, but if you do engage in this kinda shit you should go to jail.

[Breccia]

Let the legal system work, lady. This shit ain't worth going to jail over.

Hard agree here. Trump is a criminal charged with a crime, arresting him is how it works. Threatening to kill someone and their child is not okay, and while she didn't give a reason, this smacks of terrorism (killing someone with the intent to cause political change is literally terrorism). It's not okay, even if a Democrat does it.

- - - Updated - - -

An expert sounds off on Meadow's "I was only following orders" defense.

"Uh, Breccia? That's Team Trump filing a letter under oath that admits Biden won the election, when talking about the NARA case, which torpedoes their defense but...it's not about Mark Meadows."

But...it's from August 23!

"Last year. You want this article."

Oh...yeah I see, same source, legal experts quoted ripping Trump's defense to shreds, both have "Yikes" in the headline. Huh. What are the odds?

So as we've all seen, Meadows is trying to move the case to federal court, since he was acting as a federal employee doing his job. Again, I've already skewered that, but that's why quoting this is so satisfying. Because, turns out, I was actually right a little.

University of Texas law professor Lee Kovarsky in a thread on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter, notes to move the case to federal court, Meadows would need to convince a judge that the conduct for which he was indicted “was no more than ‘necessary and proper’ to his official duties.”

“CRUCIALLY, he has to have (a) subjectively believed the indicted conduct was necessary and proper and (b) reasonably believed it,” Kovarsky writes.

Kovarsky notes that court documents show Meadows “sort of admits this in passing,” but that he neglects to mention the "necessary and proper" standard.

“YIKES,” Kovarsky writes. “He gets very distracted with arguing that there's no "political exception" to the immunity. This is sort of transparent re-framing of the issue. Willis will say (correctly) that she's not seeking an ‘exception.’

“She'll say that the immunity doesn't exist for that activity in the first place. The reason is that indicted conduct cannot be necessary and proper to the federal office - and therefore can't be covered by the immunity if it's unlawful under the Hatch Act, which bars many federal officials from engaging in political activity. But even if there's not a Hatch Act violation, Meadows *still* makes no attempt to show that (1) he REASONABLY believed the indicted conduct was (2) NECESSARY AND PROPER to his office.”

Bolded for victory lap.

But the main issue is not the Hatch Act, it's once again what appears to be an affirmative insanity-like defense. Meadows needs to show that he thought what he was doing was part of his job. Meadows was Chief of Staff, and oddly enough, he did exist, but there is nothing in the job description that fits what he was doing. He would have the same problem arguing that the sky was red -- his state of mind isn't a factor. It wasn't part of his job, and he could not have reasonably believed that.

Worth noting, of course, the call-out that Meadows is pulling the Team Trump approach of arguing in the court of public opinion. The case isn't there. But they have no defense for where it is, so that's what they're going for. It's what I would do, if I thought the issue could be resolved by an election, or if I wanted to start a riot to spring the defendants. And, yes, Trump has done both.

Meadows is also going with the "I did it, but it was okay that I did it" defense. Again, no choice, the GA DA has everything. Claiming it never happened wouldn't work.

And I'll sign off with one more round of Guess the Speaker! Who said the following about Trump's mug shot?

I did see it on television. Handsome guy.

The answer is, of course, Dark Brandon himself.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump has profited from being a loathesome human being for some time. He intends to continue. Trump campaign throws itself on the ground bawling and pounding its fists because other people are profiting off the mug shot without their consent.

"Isn't the mug shot State of Georgia property? Trump can't claim ownership."

He cannot, no. The law in Georgia is beyond even Reuter's ability to find so I'm sure not going to try. But both the Trump campaign and the Lincoln Project are selling it on a T-shirt and Trump would like everyone who is not Trump to stop. In fact, the Lincoln Project has already dared Trump to try to sue them. For one, again, Trump doesn't own the image. For two, parody is protected speech. For three, Trump has much bigger problems than starting another lawsuit.

If anyone would like a Trump "Fuck around and find out" mug shot, you can find them on the Lincoln Project website here.

[Egomaniac]

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news...mp-son-barron/

I think we can all agree that death threats aren't ok and that we're all pretty cool with this crazy lady who threatened to kill Trump and his son Baron. Let the legal system work, lady. This shit ain't worth going to jail over, but if you do engage in this kinda shit you should go to jail.

Especially against Barron. I mean, I don't know shit about the kid... but it seems like he's being targetted just because Trump's his dad. That's superduper uncool. It would still be uncool if she was just targetting Trump and his adult sons...just not as superduper uncool.

[Breccia]

I don't know shit about the kid

Kid,yes. He's seventeen. What kind of messed-up adult threatens to kill a child?

[Poopymonster]

In one picture.

Someone with a more, ahem, eye witness perspective.

[Breccia]

(a few moments later)

Green Day selling Nimrod-45 shirts to fundraise for the victims of the Hawaii fires.

Proceeds from this shirt will be donated to The Giuliani Legal Defense Fund Greater Good Music, a grassroots organization bringing food to the Maui fire victims

Yes, the strikethrough is on their site, go ahead and check. Shirts available for 72 hours.

[YUPPIE]

I'm late to comment on this, but whereas most people find it laughable, I find Trump's mugshot terrifying. He can still be re-elected, after all. And the murderous disposition he gives in the shot illustrates the terror he might inflict on those he perceives as wronging him; this might be all of America for that matter.

This makes it urgent he doesn't rise to power, technically, but he is still somehow the most likely to win on the Republican side. Because people think this is a circus and Trump is "funny."

[Gorsameth]

Worth noting, of course, the call-out that Meadows is pulling the Team Trump approach of arguing in the court of public opinion. The case isn't there. But they have no defense for where it is, so that's what they're going for. It's what I would do, if I thought the issue could be resolved by an election, or if I wanted to start a riot to spring the defendants. And, yes, Trump has done both.

Trump can argue this case in the court of public opinion because he just wants to buy time until he can get elected again and use the office of the President as a shield.

No one else caught up in this case can do that, none of them are running for President with a snowballs chance in hell of winning. If they try to argue about it in public they are just going to piss of their judge and end up suffering for it.