Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[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.

[s_bushido]

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.

I see people say that a lot, and while it’s true, there’s also the fact that he doesn’t have to actually be elected (yet) for his political status to be used as a shield. Because right now the GOP is out there desperately trying to weasel him out of it with the excuse that “he could be president!!!” Along with the rest of the shit they’re flinging at the wall…

[Breccia]

Trump lies all the time about everything, such as the RNC debate:

Some of the answers were sooo bad, with delivery even worse. The numbers were less than half what I had in 2016, not a good way to start the fight against Crooked Joe Biden, and his Lunatic Thugs. We will not let this happen. MAGA!

They were not.

First of all, I already did a full write-up that more people watches the RNC debate than Trump's Carlson interview, or Carlson in general back when he was still on TV.

Second of all, the first 2015 debate (the one with Trump) has 20 million viewers. Higher, yes. More than double, no. Trump lied. He could have simply said "my ratings were higher" and been correct, but he chose to make something up when the truth would have been good enough.

And he either can't, or won't, stop doing it.

The Debate on FoxNews had a hard time with the proverbial RATINGS. It was one of the lowest rated EVER, if not THE LOWEST. It showed that many of those participating are “second tier” and merely ‘pretenders to the throne’

Big surprise, this is false. The 2015 debate viewership spiked but the average is about 12 million. The 2020 DNC debate had lower.

Trump should be concerned that the RNC is doing just fine without him. Instead, he's whining about his popularity on a social media platform with a miniscule market share compared to Twitter.

- - - Updated - - -

While experts continue to point out Team Trump has no defense, two names stand out amongst those experts.

Clark has already lost his first battle in federal court when a judge rejected his attempt to forestall his surrender to authorities in Fulton County, Georgia, and he was booked into jail overnight Friday, and a trio of legal experts published a new column for MSNBC slamming his attempts to move the prosecution out of state court and into federal court.

Link to those three additional experts here.

"Both charges [he faces] stem from a letter Clark drafted and circulated within the Justice Department, which was intended to be sent to Georgia officials asking them to consider appointing a false set of electors in light of fabricated 'significant concerns' about the election," wrote legal experts Norm Eisen, Joshua Kolb and Fred Wertheimer.

"The problem for Clark is that, to remove the case, federal law requires him to prove that writing the letter was part of his official duties enforcing federal law," the authors added. "But all the evidence points to Clark’s actions’ being far outside the scope of his official responsibilities — and instead being part of a political ploy orchestrated by Donald Trump to hang on to power and overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election."

Again, backing up what we've already heard from everyone except Team Trump.

"No wonder Clark was also reprimanded by acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, White House counsel Pat Cipollone and deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin for violating Justice Department policy by contacting the president without prior approval to advance his bizarre notions," the legal analysts wrote. "White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told Clark that sending the letter he had drafted would be committing a felony.' In other words, Clark’s bosses and colleagues were telling him that he was acting outside the bounds of his job duties."

That's right: The biggest problem for Team Trump, is Team Trump. When Barr and some of his classic conservative allies balked at overthrowing democracy -- fine line to draw, not defending these fuckwits except they're not technically traitors -- they put on the official record that what Team Trump was doing was illegal, or at the very minimum, not something that was part of official WH duties.

Even if Clark improbably managed to persuade a judge that his conduct was official, he must then successfully argue that he's protected under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which protects federal officials from state prosecution when their conduct is authorized by federal law.

"Clark’s overall argument on removal is of a similar caliber to the kind of legal reasoning that got him indicted in the first place," the analysts wrote. "He will need to come up with far more persuasive positions for the jury if he hopes to avoid conviction in the trial that most likely lies ahead of him in Fulton County — and not in federal court."

Clark was one of the WH's many assistant AGs. If it wasn't part of his WH job, it wasn't part of anyone else's -- including Trump.

This is why

The Court principally held that Mr. Clark had not established that the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442, provides jurisdiction to remove the Board’s disciplinary proceeding, or the Board’s action to enforce a subpoena issued pursuant to that proceeding, to federal court,

More specifically, the Court found that the Board’s disciplinary proceeding was neither a 'civil action' nor a 'criminal prosecution' as those terms are used in the removal statutes, and therefore that federal jurisdiction did not lie over its removal.

not only did the GA DA deny his request to have the trial moved, and a judge agreed, but his disbarrment postponement was also rejected. Apparently, Clark tried to get a temporary stay, a "discretionary" stay pending appeal (aka "judge please let me put off the consequences of my actions") and a permanent stay, and had a Trump-like batting average of 0.

Clark is a lawyer and not everyone indicted was, so his multitude of troubles may not be an accurate reflection of the rest of Team Trump, but he should be viewed as a canary in a coal mine. As a lawyer directly connected to many parts of the conspiracy to overthrow democracy, any possible problem to Team Trump's defense will go through him first.

So let's talk about Jeffrey Clark.

He wasn't working as a federal official, and he's fucked.

[Lenonis]

I find Trump's mugshot terrifying.

Honest question - given how often you have expressed that things going on in the world either terrify you or send you into a murderous rage....

How do you function? You sound like someone who is not capable of processing information and current events in a rational manner.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - you really should talk to a professional about your extreme emotions and reactions to things.

[Breccia]

Harrison Floyd denied bond.

Now, there's a...risky way this could go, so instead, I'll point out that
a) Floyd said he could not put his family in that much debt, and cited the $40k-$100k he needs to pay lawyers. Hmm. Another co-conspirator Trump isn't funding. Sadly, it's too late to learn that lesson. Still, this is hardly the only Trump co-conspirator pleading for mercy on the grounds they can't afford to pay a lawyer for all that treason they committed. I'll ask Hank Pym how the multiverse's smallest violin is coming.
b) Floyd was also accused of harassing poll workers on the grounds of "he said Trump won".
c) When Smith's men served a lawful subpoena, Floyd took a swing at one of them, and
d) The judge identified him as a flight risk.

Now Floyd might get bail. That's up to the judge holding the actual trial, not the one overseeing his booking.

While Floyd isn't the only Trump co-conspirator claiming he's broke, and again, should've thought of that before committing treason, I do believe him the most. Willie Lewis Floyd III...yes, apparently, that's his name, I don't get it either...is/was the director of Black Votes for Trump, which can't possibly have paid well, there's only like five of them. I can't find a salary for that job. But as one of the people looked at by both Georgia and Smith, as well as the only one to commit a violent act (well, not counting Jan 6th of course), Floyd being surrounded and broke is not going to be his best asset. He might not be the first to turn on Trump -- I think that ship is sailed and coming back for its second cruise -- but he seems to have the best motive to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

Eastman attempted to delay his disbarrment.

His motion was denied.

Amongst other things, the California Bar took issue with

Prior to this court ruling on the motion to abate, Respondent was indicted in Fulton County, Georgia on August 14, 2023. Thus, on August 15, 2023, OCTC filed a supplement in opposition to Respondent’s August 4, 2023 motion to abate asserting that although Respondent has now been indicted, the prejudice to OCTC and public protection strongly weigh in favor of completing the trial. OCTC also reiterates its contention that Respondent has waived his Fifth Amendment right to self-incrimination on certain topics.

On August 16, 2023, Respondent filed a supplemental brief in support of his motion for abatement. Respondent argues that OCTC’s principal argument that Respondent’s criminal exposure was speculative is no longer applicable as Respondent has now been indicted.

It is firmly established that a witness cannot choose to testify willingly about a topic during a single legal proceeding and then later claim the right to remain silent under self-incrimination privilege when asked about specific subjects.

In other words, it's either on the record for both, or on the record for neither. Pick a lane, we're at war. Disbarrments are on the record. Why would anyone even ask for this? It's just stupid. Or, desperate.

Also:

While the evidence from the Fulton County case may assist in determining the outcome of this proceeding, the Respondent and other witnesses have already provided extensive testimony on many subjects relevant to the Fulton County criminal counts against Respondent. If this case is put on hold for an extended period, there is a risk that evidence might become unavailable due to fading memories of witnesses, causing potential harm to both Respondent and OCTC

I hadn't seen this one used yet, but it's worth pointing out. "Hide until it goes away" is great for pats in Mythics if you're not worried about the timer. The California Bar wants to two-chest this fucker.

There were other callouts, like

The factors outlined in rule 5.50 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar do not weigh in Respondent’s favor.

But I'm not digging into California-specific law codes. Only that I assume the CBA knows and I CBA to double-check.

I don't think Eastman is representing himself, but pretty soon, it won't be a choice, it'll be a requirement.

[Drutt]

Names of the grand jurors in Georgia who indicted Trump have been posted online. And surprise surprise, QAnoners and 4channers, among others, are engaging in harassment and worse.

https://www.salon.com/2023/08/26/hit...-qanon-forums/

One user referred to the grand jurors' names as a "hit list," prompting another user to reply with, "Based. Godspeed anons, you have all the long range rifles in the world."

Really is past time these wannabe terrorists were treated as such.

[Breccia]

Really is past time these wannabe terrorists were treated as such.

It's all fun and games until you get arrested for being a terrorist.

[Nastard]

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.

Kid is already facing an uphill battle by having shitty parents. He doesn't need death threats on top of everything else. I mean, this is how you create a new Donald Trump to replacement the old one once he croaks on the toilet eating hot pockets.

[Egomaniac]

Kid is already facing an uphill battle by having shitty parents. He doesn't need death threats on top of everything else. I mean, this is how you create a new Donald Trump to replacement the old one once he croaks on the toilet eating hot pockets.

Yeah, right now the kid is, as far as I know, "innocent". When he turns 18 he might want to consider cutting ties with daddy dearest and staying with his cousin Mary.

[Breccia]

Yeah, right now the kid is, as far as I know, "innocent". When he turns 18 he might want to consider cutting ties with daddy dearest and staying with his cousin Mary.

We keep hearing...well I do and I keep posting about it...rumors that Melania is extorting Trump, demanding he hand over more money and more power to their son or she walks. She files for divorce, his 2024 hopes drop to 0.

This was posted four days ago and I never got around to it.

In a screenshot obtained by <who cares>, it shows Donald posted a photoshopped pic of his youngest child Barron Trump, whom he shared with Melania. In the social media post, we see Barron photoshopped as a president, saying: “In an effort to level the playing field, Barron Trump will debate Joe Biden!"

I've seen Trump supporters spread this.

Not only did this shock a lot of his followers, but insiders say Melania is beyond angry for breaking a major promise about keeping Barron out of the public eye as much as possible.

“Melania has been incredibly protective of Barron and has told Donald she would not stand for him to be exploited by anyone, even his father!” an insider said to RadarOnline. “He made a promise to protect their son — and he broke it. There’s a good chance she won’t forgive him, and the next time we see them together may be in divorce court.”

“Despite Donald’s denials, Melania has already had to endure an indictment in New York that suggests he had an affair with a porn star while she was pregnant with Barron,” a source added to the same outlet. “Now, she’s livid after he’s broken his promise of keeping their son out of the spotlight.”

She's a gold digger, adulterer, she helped Trump into the WH the first time when the proof of his infidelity should have ended it, and horrifying interior decorator, especially around the hoildays. But if she actually snaps and leaves, which I don't think she has the courage to do, she'll at least be the Operation: Valkyrie to Trump's Rise of the Thrid Right.

[Egomaniac]

We keep hearing...well I do and I keep posting about it...rumors that Melania is extorting Trump, demanding he hand over more money and more power to their son or she walks. She files for divorce, his 2024 hopes drop to 0.

I don't see how her leaving him lowers his chances at all. It's not like it would be the first time a wife divorced him.