Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[gondrin]

Ahh yes, what doesn't say the love of a father than one who throws a son under the bus.

KEVIN WALLACE: Mr. Trump, are you currently the person with ultimate decision-making authority for the Trump Organization?

DONALD J. TRUMP: No.

MR. WALLACE: Who would that be?

MR. TRUMP: My son Eric is much more involved with it than I am. I’ve been doing other things.

[Breccia]

Ahh yes, what doesn't say the love of a father than one who throws a son under the bus.

Well...no, that's pretty accurate. Problem is, the conduct reaches back so "current" is not a huge help to Trump here.

Speaking of "not a huge help" here's Laura Ingraham.

Ingraham asked Eastman: “On January 6, what did you want to happen and how was that historically grounded in the history of our country, how would that have taken place? Just so the viewers can understand what would have unfolded, and how that would have ultimately been constitutional?"

Said Eastman: “several things, some people have urged that the Vice President Pence simply had power to reject electors whose certification was still pending,” at which point Ingraham interrupts, saying “I don’t believe that, but go ahead.”

“I don’t either,” Eastman said, “and I explicitly told Vice President Pence in the oval office on January 4, that even though it was an open issue, under the circumstances we had, I thought it was the weaker argument, and it would be foolish to exercise such power, even if he had."

“What I recommended, and I've said this repeatedly, is that he accede to requests from more than 100 state legislators in the wing states, to give them a week to try and sort out the impact of what everybody acknowledged was illegality in the conduct of the election.”

Said Ingraham: “Not everyone acknowledges it, but that was the argument that was being made, obviously. And there were obviously irregularities that everybody had seen. But whether it rose to the level of changing the outcome of the election, again, without a legal proceeding in the states that mattered. The argument ultimately, was a difficult one to make. I mean, hence here we are.”

So...that sure looked like Eastman saying he didn't believe what he asked Pence to do was legal. And Ingraham stood several paces back from "there was election fraud" or any statement that could be viewed that way.

What Eastman says not under oath isn't necessarily evidence, but, what he said does seem to line up with the plan and the communications we have. I'd love to see that interview used against him, on those grounds exactly -- "you believed it at the time and are still saying it now".

[Gorsameth]

Yeah that Trump deposition reads exactly like why his lawyers absolutely don't want him to take the stand whenever possible. Because he will start rambling and when he rambles he ends up saying things that just further incriminate him.

(and we've always known Trump would have 0 problems with throwing his children under the bus the moment he himself gets into trouble)

[Endus]

Ahh yes, what doesn't say the love of a father than one who throws a son under the bus.

It also dodges the question. He's saying which person handles the day-to-day minutiae of running the Trump Org. The question asked who has the ultimate decision-making authority; could Donald overrule Eric on any given decision, if he wanted to?

[Breccia]

It also dodges the question. He's saying which person handles the day-to-day minutiae of running the Trump Org. The question asked who has the ultimate decision-making authority; could Donald overrule Eric on any given decision, if he wanted to?

The answer, as expected, is "Trump screwed up."

Trump sells out Eric at least six more times, for example:

MR. WALLACE: Can you mark this as Exhibit 8.

A. I think you'll find they reduced that number in one of the following statements. I think you'll see that.

Q. The number for --

A. The number of -- the number that you have here. Let's see. You have 291. I think that number was reduced in statements afterwards. They just felt it was too high.

Q. And who is the "they"?

A. Probably my son Eric Trump, I think. But I believe they reduced the number.

"They" did not reduce the number. Prosecution was holding a legally filed form with fraudulent numbers.

So Trump was clear that Eric was, somehow, responsible for all the papers that Trump signed and nobody else looked over.

But you asked about final say, and Trump did admit that:

Hey, I caught Biden making a mistake when he said -- when he said, he's going to close up gas at the end of the debate. I said, that was Perry Mason. Unfortunately, the election was rigged.

Whoops! How did that get in there? That's something Trump said on the stand with no bearing on the lawsuit in any way at all! How awkward. This is what I meant to quote:

Q. I'd like to start with your role in the Trump Organization. So let me start ways in the past. Is it correct that you established the Trump Organization in 1980 as an umbrella organization for all of your real estate development and corporate affiliates?

Objection raised, ignored.

Approximately, yes.

Q. Approximately, 1989?

A. The date, yes.

Q. And is that a fair description of what the Trump Organization is, an umbrella organization?

A. I think so, yes.

Q. Mr. Trump, are you currently the person with ultimate decision-making authority for the Trump Organization?

A. No.

Q. Who would that be?

A. My son Eric is much more involved with it than I am. I've been doing other things. And I guess you could say on something major, final decisions, whatever. But I've been much less involved in it than -- over the last five years, five or six years than ever before.

Just a reminder: the fraud cited goes back till 2011. The "last five or six years" are not the only issues.

But, yes, Trump is claiming Eric did all the stuff that Trump signed and that was never double-checked. He's also claiming numbers were changed after they were officially submitted into something legal, somehow, and that the prosecution didn't get those forms despite all their subpoenas, somehow. But it's still his company, and even if he's telling the truth that Eric did everything and he was an absentee CEO who did nothing, the lawsuit is aimed at the company, and Trump is treating it like a criminal trial.

Probably because he knows it will be.

[noidentity]

Yeah that Trump deposition reads exactly like why his lawyers absolutely don't want him to take the stand whenever possible. Because he will start rambling and when he rambles he ends up saying things that just further incriminate him.

(and we've always known Trump would have 0 problems with throwing his children under the bus the moment he himself gets into trouble)

For someone who doesn't have time to prepare for his trials he sure is able to find time to post 31 videos of his inane rants in a single night.

[Breccia]

For someone who doesn't have time to prepare for his trials he sure is able to find time to post 31 videos of his inane rants in a single night.

Ah, thanks for the lead-in!

One of those 31 was about this WSJ OP ED which, in turn, is about Trump's proposed 10% tariff.

"On which items?"

Yes.

The WSJ, correctly, reminds everyone that tariffs are paid by the importer and that cost is moved to the consumer. The foreign company does not pay them. The WSJ also correctly points out that Trump already tried this, and it didn't work. Specifically, it cost the US $80 billion and 166,000 jobs.

Trump also tried to defend himself by claiming he closed the trade gap. Which was an objective lie. He cherry-picked a few quarters that happened to line up with favorable year-over-year, but even ignoring COVID (which, again, he can be directly blamed for) it is trivial to find a dot-dov site that says
1) the trade gap was more in 2017 than 2016
2) it was more in 2018 than 2017
3) it did drop from 2018 to 2019, that's fair, however, it was still more in 2019 than 2017, and
4) the increase from 2016 to 2019, yes 2019 I'm still not counting COVID, was 4.75% [EDIT: annually] and well above the rate of inflation and salary growth

By the way, the 2023 trade gap is projected to close from 2022. The six months of 2023 posted from that dot-gov site are all lower than their 2022 counterparts. Six, not five, so even by Trump's own cited metric, Biden still wins.

[Edge-]

I wonder how Eric is taking the fact that his father has been throwing his ass under the bus over this.

It'd be pretty funny if one of Donald's kids ends up flipping on him because he keeps trying to throw them...well Eric, under the bus.

[Breccia]

I wonder how Eric is taking the fact that his father has been throwing his ass under the bus over this.

It'd be pretty funny if one of Donald's kids ends up flipping on him because he keeps trying to throw them...well Eric, under the bus.

Eric should be offended, but let's be honest here, where else is he going to go?

The trial in question is a civil trial against Trump Org. Right now, Team Trump knows they are objectively guilty and are circling the wagons and trying to not admit they personally committed crimes for which they would go to jail. The company being fined or even shut down is something they can accept, and passing the buck like the world's least honest hot potato ("I thought XXX did it, it's not my fault") should have been a pre-arranged strategy.

Having read the entire thing...and it was not an easy read, Trump is just like the worst witness...I don't see how the result is anything other than "Trump Org broke multiple laws and is being heavily fined and at least partly shut down". NY has objective proof, as their court motion yesterday claims, that filings by Trump Org were fraudulent. I also think there's reason to bring Trump, the person who signed everything, up on charges, but I'm not the NY AG.

- - - Updated - - -

"We're speeding toward assassination, obviously, and no one will say that."

"I don't know how you can’t reach that conclusion."

(sighs)

So, Carlson is doing at least one of a few things here.

1) He's making a prediction that, if right, he thinks will make him famous. Trump is a horrible human being, and yes, there are people with solid reasons to see him dead -- the Russians, for example, since Trump did not deliver enough; the Taliban he directly negotiated with; or the murderous insurrectionists (known violent terrorists) he abandoned to their fate. But Trump is also a fat sad recluse who travels with a giant motorcade to/from his court appointments. Killing him would actually be pretty difficult. Also, most of the people who despise him are people like Democrats and European countries, not typically prone to violent terrorism. No matter what gun alt-rights people say, a middle-aged urban schoolteacher is highly unlikely to, say, grab a gun and storm a federal building. They're far more likely to simply teach people the ideas of courtesy, information, and logic, while waiting for Trump to be convicted and die of five concurrent heart attacks when Kushner serves Melania's divorce papers during visiting hours.
2) Carlson is making wild, unsubstantiated claims with no evidence, because he knows his audience, and more importantly, knows his audience is small and wants to grow it.
3) Carlson is speaking in code. He knows Trump is finished. He also knows the only way this ends without Trump dying broke in prison is if the charges are dropped during the autopsy. Trump is going to damage, maybe destroy, Republican 2024 hopes as long as he refuses to stop hosting rallies in between his sentencing hearings. Carlson could be telling his followers that Trump would better serve as a martyr -- not convicted for his crimes, but instead, someone "they" took out because "they" are coming for "you".

"That sounds like a conspiracy theory."

Well, yes, we're talking about Tucker Carlson. Why wouldn't it?

4) Carlson is simply insane. His clifflike drop of viewers and relevance has his verbal filter off and he's just saying random shit without any logic, reason, or thought. He might be ready for his close-up (super dated reference).

Could be any, could be all. Personally I think it's mostly 1 and some 2, but I admit the others are possible.

- - - Updated - - -

Kemp responds to calls to throw out the GA DA, firing her on the grounds that Trump is clearly innocent despite all that evidence, because Trump said so, and let's be honest, probably some *ahem* colorful statements in there as well.

Kemp's response was simple.

No.

"He did not say that."

Fine.

There have been calls by one individual in the General Assembly and echoed outside these walls by the former president for a special session that would ignore current Georgia law and directly interfere with the proceedings of a separate but equal branch of government.

Up to this point, I have not seen any evidence that DA Willis’s actions or lack thereof warrant action by the prosecuting attorney oversight Commission, but that will ultimately be a decision that the commission will make.

A special session of the General Assembly to end-run around this law is not feasible and may ultimately prove to be unconstitutional.

He may as well have added. "I mean, come on, we're not Florida."

- - - Updated - - -

Enough about that, let's talk about Trump skipping his Sept 6 Georgia arraignment hearing.

"Wait, he can do that?"

UPDATE: He just did.

But um...

Trump's lawyers also asked the judge to sever his case from some of his co-defendants who have sought a speedy trial in the case. This would put Trump's case on a different schedule from that of his co-defendant, Kenneth Chesebro, a lawyer for Trump's 2020 campaign, who is set to go to trial beginning in October.

Trump's lawyers argued that they did not have sufficient time to prepare for the October trial date set for Chesebro.

I mentioned this, too. I think Chesebro is turning on Trump.

Forbes reports that not only has Trump tried to block Chesebro's legal motion -- and I have no idea if he has legal grounds for that, it's Team Trump, "I have legal grounds to do this" isn't in their vocabulary -- but also, filed to separate their cases, which would make them have even less legal grounds. I don't understand how you file to have your cases separated when you're both accused of a RICO conspiracy together. It's not like they have the same lawyer.

...do they? If Trump wants to split lawyers, that's pretty much proof Chesebro is turning on him.

It has been a solid forever and Team Trump has not had a ruling go their way pretty much at all. I still think Chesebro is not volunteering to go first to find out where all the traps are. I think he's volunteering to go first so he can sell out Trump. I think Trump knows this and I think the separation of trials/lawyers will allow each to point the finger at the other and go for reasonable doubt.

See, this is why RICO exists. To block exactly that. Chesebro needs to cut a deal, not just testify on the stand, or the evidence against Trump becomes evidence against him. Throw in Eastman, he's making the rounds on the headlines today, too.

[Gorsameth]

I assume Carlson is laying the groundworks for the next conspiracy. Trump dying at some point in the near future is a reasonable bet considering his age and lifestyle even before you add in the stress he is under from more lawsuits then I cba to remember, when he inevitably falls over the GOP needs a story conspiracy to keep his cultists pulling the wagon and a Democratic assassination plot is right up their alley.

[gondrin]

I wonder how Eric is taking the fact that his father has been throwing his ass under the bus over this.

It'd be pretty funny if one of Donald's kids ends up flipping on him because he keeps trying to throw them...well Eric, under the bus.

I figure Eric will just live with it because, at least to him, his dad finally acknowledges him.

[Resurgo]

All this tells me is that I want trump cross examined on the stand and watch this on TV…
Even more funny is if trump fires all his lawyers and goes pro se…

[Breccia]

All this tells me is that I want trump cross examined on the stand and watch this on TV

I am like 80% sure that's the plan in Georgia. So, fingers crossed!

[Kaleredar]

I assume Carlson is laying the groundworks for the next conspiracy. Trump dying at some point in the near future is a reasonable bet considering his age and lifestyle even before you add in the stress he is under from more lawsuits then I cba to remember, when he inevitably falls over the GOP needs a story conspiracy to keep his cultists pulling the wagon and a Democratic assassination plot is right up their alley.

I think it’s a simple matter of “I lost my big viewerbase, so I need to say the most insane nonsense to generate headlines and drive people to me.”

[Paranoid Android]

People the mask mandate is on the table again.

In a rant Trump says that the left is about to close and issue mask mandates due to Coviid again, which is the new right wing 'boogey man". Ironically he says they, the left want to restart the Covid hysteria and goes on a rant that is crazy. Threatening to defund federal funding from schools, to anyone who makes mask mandates.

https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status...555429249?s=20

Link above is crazy Trump thread but funny it got Community Noted that Trump did implement Covid policies, which is true.

So as we know they love milking this mask, vaccine stuff and bleed it dry. I think most Americans don't care anymore or at least they are so tired of hearing about it. Covid is still around, but for most part we just put in way far in back of our mind. But Republicans this will get their sheep excited i guess, but I don't think the general public cares.

[Shadowferal]

I wonder how Eric is taking the fact that his father has been throwing his ass under the bus over this. It'd be pretty funny if one of Donald's kids ends up flipping on him because he keeps trying to throw them...well Eric, under the bus.

Ivanka...I wouldn't be too surprised if she threw her father under that bus first. She knows what daddy does.

[Breccia]

Trump says that the left is about to due lockdowns again.

I get people ignoring an uncomfortable truth that isn't trying to kill them. Trump must remember that, the last time he mocked COVID, he nearly died. So this is about making sure the 2024 election is based on restricted polling places and not the actual freedom to vote.

He'll regret this if he's not the nominee.

[gondrin]

I am like 80% sure that's the plan in Georgia. So, fingers crossed!

You ask and you shall receive, somewhat. It will be on their YouTube channel.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...9d2cb62b6&ei=8

Trump's Trial May Have to Move, Judge Announces

Former President Donald Trump's criminal trial in Georgia may have to move to a larger courtroom to accommodate more attendees, the judge presiding over the case said on Thursday.

During a hearing addressing whether or not the trial would be televised to the public, Judge Scott McAfee said that if the number of attendees for the proceedings grows, a larger courtroom may be requisitioned.

The judge also announced that all the proceedings involving Trump and his 18 co-defendants would be broadcast on the Fulton County Court YouTube channel, following the precedent set by Fulton Judge Robert McBurney.

"In line with the spirit of transparency here," McAfee said on Thursday. "We have followed Judge McBurney's model, and we have been livestreaming all of our major proceedings on a Fulton County-provided YouTube channel. And our plan was to do that with this case as well. So there's going to be a YouTube feed the entire time."

Newsweek reached out to Trump's lead Atlanta attorney Steve Sadow via email for comment.

The question of whether or not the criminal trial brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis would be televised has been hanging over the sweeping racketeering case. Media experts have predicted that a televised Trump trial could rival Super Bowl viewership and speculated about whether or not having the proceedings broadcasted would work in or against Trump's favor.

James Haggerty, a communications consultant specializing in high-profile litigation, previously told Newsweek that Trump is a "master of the medium.

"Televised court cases are the ultimate reality TV—and Donald Trump, above else, is a reality TV star," Haggerty said earlier this month.

But others have said broadcasting the proceedings will put a face to the charge, much like his mug shot from last week did. While federal criminal trials are closed, Georgia has a longstanding history of allowing cameras in the courtroom to promote access to the judicial process.

McAfee said to make the trial available to the media, the best way would be to stream it and allow some outlets into the room with their own cameras. He also said he'd be open to an overflow room for journalists, should the members of press exceed the room's capacity.

Georgia's courtroom transparency is one of the key reasons the defendants named in the RICO indictment want to try to move their cases to federal court. On the contrary, when former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows made his case to transfer his case to the U.S. District Court on Monday, journalists were barred from bringing even their cell phones into the federal building where the hearing was held.

Earlier on Thursday, Trump pleaded not guilty to the 13 charges handed to him by a Fulton grand jury while waiving the right to an arraignment, meaning he won't return to Atlanta next Wednesday.

He also asked a judge to delay his trial until after the October 23 start date that has already been set for one of his co-defendants, asking to be severed from former Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro, who is demanding a speedy trial.

Last week, Trump surrendered to Fulton County officials and had his mugshot taken before being released on a $200,000 bond.

[Odinfrost]

I love that Trump pleaded not guilty to the Georgia charges.
Because the Gergoia phone call exist.
Trump has publically admitted it's real.
It was rhe perfect phone call after all.
Just not perfect for him.

[Breccia]

I love that Trump pleaded not guilty to the Georgia charges.
Because the Gergoia phone call exist.
Trump has publically admitted it's real.
It was rhe perfect phone call after all.
Just not perfect for him.

Team Trump knows they can't go with "it never happened", even though they tried like hell to hide it. It's in the open now. Their only choice, now that they were caught doing what they know is wrong, is "it was not a crime that I did it, and also, nobody else is allowed to do it".