I think Guiliani misspoke.
It's punishment through process. You know. How trials work
I think Guiliani misspoke.
It's punishment through process. You know. How trials work
Did he just pull a Trump and defame them AGAIN for the exact same thing that he was just found liable for...?
10

That's my take as well, but, it would not surprise me if there was some legal penalty (contempt, perhaps) for accusing another person in court of being funded by a shadowy cabal of Illuminati who are conspiring to End Freedom. Or, maybe Giuliani could be grilled on who's paying his lawyer fees -- because I personally cited that BBQ Trump threw for him, but I have no idea who was there. For all we know, Giuliani's legal bills are being paid by North Korea.
"They obviously aren't."
I have as much evidence as Giuliani does.
https://twitter.com/AccountableGOP/s...84515207897396
“I’m allowed to have these documents. I’m allowed to take these documents…When I have them, they become unclassified."
Lol, he can't control himself.

https://www.abc27.com/hill-politics/...ied-materials/
Trump admits he took the documents, claimed that when he took them, it automatically declassified them, claimed he had every right to them, and claimed his defense was the PRA, which isn't a defense since it says that he is required to give them all back. He also said that there is no declassification process, when everyone knows there is, INCLUDING Trump because his lawyers admitted he didn't declassify anything.
Kelly even pressed Trump about the Iran attack plans he was waving around.
- - - Updated - - -The former Fox News host also asked Trump about an incident cited by prosecutors in which he waves around a document in front of guests at his Bedminster, N.J., property and describes how it is secret and that he could no longer declassify it.
Trump claimed in an interview with Fox News in June that he was holding up a newspaper article, but Kelly asked him why he would describe a news clipping in such a way.
“What were you waving around in that meeting? Because it certainly sounds like it was an attack plan,” Kelly said.
“I’m not going to talk to you about that because that’s already been, I think, very substantiated, and there’s no problem with it,” Trump responded.
Prosecutors in July filed a superseding indictment in Florida in the documents case, bringing the total number of counts facing the former president to 40. The superseding indictment added a charge based on the military documents Trump boasted of having in the Bedminster meeting.
Trump is currently scheduled to go on trial in May of next year, roughly 5 months after the initial December date suggested by the DOJ.
You beat me to it, lol. He is just out here admitting to the crimes he is accused of, and his followers are stupid enough to believe him.
I also don't have Twitter.
Last edited by postman1782; 2023-09-14 at 10:27 PM.
Biggest takeaway: Holy shit Megyn Kelly can afford cameras for her podcast?
This is probably like the fourth or fifth time he's said some variation of this. I believe last week he was saying that the Presidential Records Act allowed him to take them because he's really hoping you'll just accept it and won't ask why or how or what the Presidential Records Act is (because he doesn't know, either).

Yep, its really short, and it basically states that he is required to give all documents back as soon as he is out of office, it doesn't say anything about him declassifying anything or being able to keep them. I have heard some morons say he has 5 years to review them and then give them back, but that is no where in the PRA.
In a move that would totally be made by a sane, innocent man, Trump sues the NY judge.
The basis seems to be, Trump's stalling tactics aren't working so he's picking new ones. They've already said in court they won't be ready on time because there's so much evidence that Trump is objectively guilty, so it's hardly a secret. So, under the guise of "some of Trump's crimes are too old to charge him with", they're suing the judge on the ground that he hasn't thrown any of the older crimes out yet.In an emergency court filing Thursday morning, attorneys for Trump and his associates cited an “urgency” that required New York’s higher courts to step in. They want an appellate judge to commence an “Article 78 special proceeding” against Justice Arthur F. Engoron, one that would force him to decimate a case brought by Attorney General Letitia James.
“Although he has yet to perform his lawful duty, Justice Engoron plans to proceed with the trial of the Attorney General’s claims on October 2, 2023—just nineteen days from the date of this petition,” attorneys Clifford S. Robert and Michael Madaio wrote.
It’s a rare move of aggression—particularly this close to trial, which was set to start on Oct. 2. But this has become Trump’s preferred strategy in recent months, a far-fetched gamble he’s currently trying against federal judges in Washington and West Palm Beach who remain utterly unswayed by his relentless attempts to violate their orders and delay cases.
They also specifically said they didn't like the tone with which the judge dismissed their last meritless claim.
So, yeah, these are the floundering splashes of a drowning man who bumps into a piece of flotsam. Naturally, Trump celebrated the temporary pause by lying.
Yes, this is the same interview.Trump opened up about his 2020 covid response and his time in office during a sit down interview with Megyn Kelly
Obviously, every single word of that is a lie. Especially "I think" but there are others. Most of it is the usual Trump "everyone is saying it, people I know but you don't are saying it when you didn't hear it". Also, can't help but notice he said "I'm not going to talk about it" during an interview.for the Thursday edition of SiriusXM’s The Megyn Kelly Show.
“As far as the vaccine is concerned, you had the original Covid and the vaccine had an impact on that,” Trump said. “There are some people, I will tell you, some friends of mine that are Democrat, I think they voted for me. But they’re Democrat, very smart people, top people. They say, ‘You know, I don’t understand one thing. Why don’t you talk more about the vaccine? It was one of the greatest things you’ve ever done. Now think of that. And I say, ‘I’m not going to talk about it one way or the other.'”
Then he spent some more time bragging about how quickly "he" made the vaccine he didn't want anyone to take.

Part of me is wondering if this is laying the groundwork for a, "Your honor, just look at what my client has said in public against the advise of his legal team. Clearly this man is too stupid to have understood the crimes he was committing and could not have done so with any malign intent." defense.
I mean...it might unironically be his best shot?
Over and above that he'd never, "being too stupid to know better" isn't actually a defense. Ignorance does not count in your favor. He'd have to legitimately have a psychiatrist assess him and officially declare that he's so brain-damaged as to be literally incompetent. Among other things, this would require someone (likely one of his kids) being given power of attorney over Donald and everything he owns. It wouldn't automatically remove him from his candidacy, I think, but it MIGHT be one step too far for Trumplicans to support a man who's just admitted to being an incompetent moron who shouldn't be allowed to make his own choices.
They'd more readily believe that a quack liberal fake news doctor falsely diagnosed Trump just to declare him insane. Or, conversely, that Trump just did that to "con the libs" out of a conviction and that having himself declared insane was some 27-dimensional chess move. Or they doublethink both things at once; That the libs tried to smear Trump as insane, but that what his plan all along so he could get out from underneath their fake news witch hunt.
For the Trumplicans that haven't jumped ship even now, there is nothing besides support Trump in their political ideology, because if Trump is incompetent, then why did they all support him so readily? Why was he able to tell them what they wanted to hear?
If there is no Trump, then who will save them from woke? Who will stop Obamacare from putting them on death panels? Who will stop the drag queens from putting nonbinary litter boxes in the classrooms? Who will stop AOC and Bernie Sanders from stealing their guns? Who will arrest Biden and Hillary for the crimes? Who will stop the socialist teachers from teaching their children to be atheist muslims? Who will stop all the wellfare queen whores from aborting their fetuses at 8 months and 29 days? Who will make Mexico pay for the border walls to stop all the drug dealing rapists? Who then, Endus, who will make America MAGA again?
Last edited by Kaleredar; 2023-09-15 at 04:54 AM.
“Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
Words to live by.

Bravo Kalredar that was beautifully written. I need to see that read aloud on live TV...
In the ongoing "Trump says things that are false because he's not under oath" he went on Meet the Press and said false things on purpose.
First of all, I think it's pretty clear by now the employees that dumped Trump lawyers are going to rat Trump out. At least one unindicted Trump employee has.Trump in a new interview said he would be willing to testify that an allegation by prosecutors that he acted with an alleged co-conspirator to delete security footage is false.
Asked about the charge by Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Trump called the allegation “false.”
“Would you testify to that under oath?” Welker asked.
“Sure, I’m going to — I’ll testify,” Trump said.
Trump also called it a “fake charge” brought by a “deranged lunatic prosecutor,” referring to special counsel Jack Smith, who is overseeing the documents investigation and the federal case against Trump for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and remain in power.
“And, they were my tapes. I could have fought them,” Trump continued. “I didn’t even have to give them the tapes, I don’t think. I think I would have won in court. When they asked for the tapes, I said, ‘Sure.’ They’re my tapes. I could have fought them. I didn’t even have to give them. Just so you understand, though, we didn’t delete anything. Nothing was deleted.”
But that's just an educated guess on the very public evidence. Trump's depiction of turning over the video surveillance is flat-out false. The video footage was subpoena'd, twice. Once in May, then a second time in June which led to the search warrant.
Trump did not say "sure". He did fight them.
I admit it is physically possible for several Trump employees to try to delete footage, and then lie and say Trump asked them to. I admit it's possible. Obviously, I don't believe that. One of the un-indicted non-criminal Trump employees would have told Trump, who when confronted with his employees trying to delete security footage and blame him, would have fired them. Also, I think it is likely Agent Smith has text messages or other communications that back his charges. However, it is indisputable that Trump claiming he would have turned them over without asking, and that he didn't have to, that's just flat-out false.
"We would have won in court" is also false. If that was true, Trump would have challenged the seizure of the tapes, and won. He did not.
Trump lies all the time about everything. Based on what he's done so far, I think it's reasonable to believe he won't take the stand and won't answer that question as emphatically as he did on TV.
- - - Updated - - -
Here's something I didn't see coming: a conspiracy theory with a grain of truth to it.
Could Trump have pardoned himself, and then never told anyone?
Apparently, this question got enough traffic that Harvard's Lawrence Tribe was called in, and responded seriously. The answer is "it is technically possible, but not reasonable".
1) Of course, self-pardons remain an untested theory. So already it's a risky move.
2) If Trump were to jump up and say "I pardoned myself Jan 19th, 2021" the obvious response is "prove it". Without an official record, which does not exist, Trump will have to prove what he says is true.
2a) If Trump had done this, someone would have come forward by now.
2b) We've heard from "the only sane person in the WH" many times that they had to talk him out of a self-pardon. It seems unlikely that Trump knew enough about Constitutional law to take the next step of somehow creating a hidden secret self-pardon nobody knows about that will work. I mean, have you seen his lawyers? One of them is literally garden-variety.
3) Pardons can't be done for crimes that haven't happened yet, like obstructing justice at Mar-a-Lago.
4) Trump can't pardon himself for the Georgia crimes. Old news, still true.
5) Generally, pardons have to be public and filed. There's questions as to if that's mandatory, but there are just as strong questions as to if the pardons are valid if they weren't.
6) Pardons don't erase convictions. Trump could still be tried, even if a guilty finding has no sentence.
6a) And during such a trial, Trump could not take the 5th.
6b) And following a conviction, he could be sued into the poorhouse. Well, further into the poorhouse. You can't pardon a lawsuit.
7) Of course, the big one: pardons are expected to carry the admission of guilt. Trump has done no such thing.
So, if Trump were to honestly or dishonestly claim he'd done this, it would involve a massive legal house of cards that would take too long, and it would not prevent the trials he's in from continuing. It would also immediately bring up the question "why doesn't every President, or other official with pardon power, always issue a secret pardon for themselves and their family and friends?"
In a related story, Tribe believes that, if Trump had pardoned himself, he would immediately have been impeached. It would have been a public statement of his own guilt, and enough Republicans would have joined the fight against such an admitted act of terrorism. You also can't be pardoned of crimes that lead to an impeachment, so, it would have made things worse, not better.