Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Redwyrm]

Isn't it a national security risk to have someone with a lot of political power be in so much debt?

Just asking for a "friend"

Oh, and this

The Uniform Code of Military Justice requires that service members pay their debts. Failure to do so could result in bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of pay and allowances, and even confinement for six months. Service members are held to the highest standards.

[bladeXcrasher]

Isn't it a national security risk to have someone with a lot of political power be in so much debt?

Just asking for a "friend"

Oh, and this

Why would we want to hold members of our highest offices to the same standards as a lowly E1?

/s

[Ivanstone]

Judging by his term in office, I said all the clowns between Polk and Lincoln and also Harding were still worse. Since then, partly as his shenanigans come to light and partly as he is becoming openly more unhinged and more dictatorial every day, I'm not so sure.

He could be a worse person than any of them. By a large margin even. It could also be that his incompetence kept him from executing his and his party's worst ideas.

Trump's presidency was very unproductive. The few things he did get done (tax cuts, SCOTUS picks) would've been rubber stamped by any GOP president. Dubya by comparison stole his first election, started two wars and finished his term with a massive recession.

[Gorsameth]

I still think Dubya was worse. James Buchanan too.

Did either of them attempt to overthrow the government and end democracy in the US?

Because if they didn't then I'm pretty sure Trump wins by default.

- - - Updated - - -

Canon tries to help Trump yet again with a stupid ultimatum for Smith, either let the jury see national secrets or let Trump go. Sounds like this is just another delay tactic by her as this sounds easily appealed, but hopefully this is another step to get her removed.

Wow... I don't even know where to begin. No way your giving random citizens off the street the highest security clearance available in the US, because that is what we know is needed to actually see these documents.

I purpose an alternative, if the Judge wants the jury to see these files then the only way to do that is to have said jury be comprised of people who already have the required clearance levels. I'm pretty sure anyone with top levels of security clearance takes one look at the selection of what Trump took and shouts "ah hell no, he is going to jail".

And yes this Judge is asking to be removed and face disciplinary charges. The only reason she is still on the case is because I assume the DoJ doesn't want to take the extraordinary step of having a Judge removed for clear partisanship.

[Kaleredar]

Did either of them attempt to overthrow the government and end democracy in the US?

Because if they didn't then I'm pretty sure Trump wins by default.

- - - Updated - - -

Wow... I don't even know where to begin. No way your giving random citizens off the street the highest security clearance available in the US, because that is what we know is needed to actually see these documents.

I purpose an alternative, if the Judge wants the jury to see these files then the only way to do that is to have said jury be comprised of people who already have the required clearance levels. I'm pretty sure anyone with top levels of security clearance takes one look at the selection of what Trump took and shouts "ah hell no, he is going to jail".

And yes this Judge is asking to be removed and face disciplinary charges. The only reason she is still on the case is because I assume the DoJ doesn't want to take the extraordinary step of having a Judge removed for clear partisanship.

The higher courts have slapped down Cannon’s inane rulings before. I see no reason to expect a different result now. I further suspect there’d be ample precedent for prosecuting people who have leaked or mishandled national secrets without revealing to the jury what said secrets were.

I’m guessing this is all part of the “stall indefinitely and hope the case gets tossed” delay tactic.

[Gorsameth]

The higher courts have slapped down Cannon’s inane rulings before. I see no reason to expect a different result now. I further suspect there’d be ample precedent for prosecuting people who have leaked or mishandled national secrets without revealing to the jury what said secrets were.

I’m guessing this is all part of the “stall indefinitely and hope the case gets tossed” delay tactic.

Sure, its 99.99% sure to get tossed. The problem is that trying to fight a case against a absolutely blatantly biased judge.

[Flarelaine]

Bianco feels betrayed by Habba, who was one of her Bedminster regulars until, her lawsuit says, Habba posed as a concerned friend giving legal advice about how to address alleged sexual harassment by a supervisor—only to abuse that relationship and “fraudulently induct” her to “quickly agree to unconscionable and illegal terms.”

Can she lose her license over this?

- - - Updated - - -

He could be a worse person than any of them. By a large margin even. It could also be that his incompetence kept him from executing his and his party's worst ideas.

Oh, we know those for a fact.

[Odinfrost]

Sure, its 99.99% sure to get tossed. The problem is that trying to fight a case against a absolutely blatantly biased judge.

She is doing her best job to secure a Supreme Court seat in the event that Trump wins and another justice croaks.

[Rasulis]

It is currently the worst time to own the type of real estate Trump does, major real estate companies are selling property at 50-60% discounts. The name Trump being attached to it downgrades its value even further, any offer on the table Trump would consider insulting due his ego and how bad his sector is doing right now.

We have had to put up collateral to obtain construction bond for our projects in the past. So, I am somewhat familiar with the process. Here are some additional reasons by bonding companies don’t like to use real estate assets as collateral.

Cash, bond and stock have face values. Real estate requires appraisal. The appraisal for $500M worth of real estates costs (a lot of) money and takes time. Six days are not enough.

There is no cost associated with keeping and selling cash, stock and bond. There are all kind of costs associated with keeping real estate assets - property and business taxes, maintenance, lease and event management, etc. Cashing out takes time because you have to sell the properties. You also ended incurring more cost (commissions and more appraisals, etc.) To break even, the bond company would likely require $750M of real estate asset as collateral.

Also, in the case of Chubb, apparently many Chubb's investors were not happy with company underwriting the $92M bond. Greenberg ended up having to send a company-wide letter to explain himself. He was not going to stick his neck out for $500M bond.

Before saying "no," Chubb had been the closest to saying "yes" out of some 30 insurance carriers the former president approached, Trump's lawyers said in Monday's filing.

Chubb had been the only carrier willing to even consider letting Trump post real estate before ultimately declining to do so, the filing said.

From the filing, apparently Chubb wanted $1B in real estate collateral.

[Ivanstone]

Did either of them attempt to overthrow the government and end democracy in the US?

Because if they didn't then I'm pretty sure Trump wins by default.

Yes as a matter of fact they did.

Bush stole his first election. And then started installing more Federalist goons as judges. The Tea Party started under his watch as well.

Buchanan’s actions in part led to the civil war. Which is a bit worse than whatever Trump did.

Trump’s actions had little chance of succeeding. Trump is loudly very stupid but pick anything dumb he did and you’ll realize almost any other GOP POTUS would’ve done the same. You’ll also that at the state level there’s a GOP governor being even worse and displaying more competence while doing it.

[Edge-]

Canon tries to help Trump yet again with a stupid ultimatum for Smith, either let the jury see national secrets or let Trump go. Sounds like this is just another delay tactic by her as this sounds easily appealed, but hopefully this is another step to get her removed.

Fine, as long as it's only shown to members of the jury with the appropriate security cleareance.

Get a fucking special master to verify the contents and report on it or what the fuck ever. Jesus fucking christ how is Canon still a fucking judge this is pathetic rofl.

[Shadowferal]

Can she lose her license over this?

She has several bar complaints against her already. But I think it depends on how many strikes against her in a single state it takes before "enough is enough!" (At the moment I think it's NY, NJ, and FL)

[Edge-]

Can she lose her license over this?

If it's possible, it'll probably take a few years. But the Bar, and most professional organizations that license practictioners, seem incredibly hesitant to bring literally anyone up on review for literally anything. I mean shit, how much insane shit did Rudy need to get into before the NY Bar decided to hold hearings? Shit, that demon semen lady still has a medical degree and I saw her adverts on Twitter not too long ago.

[Shadowferal]

Reference 8.4 and 8.5

Rule of Professional Conduct 8.5 states that a lawyer is subject to disbarment, or any disciplinary action, under the rules of the jurisdiction where that lawyer is admitted to practice, "regardless of where the lawyer's conduct occurs." What conduct? The commentary on Rule 8.4 proposes that, "Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category." Rule 8.4 itself states clearly that "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to ... commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer ... [or to] engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation."

[Breccia]

It is currently the worst time to own the type of real estate Trump does, major real estate companies are selling property at 50-60% discounts. The name Trump being attached to it downgrades its value even further, any offer on the table Trump would consider insulting due his ego and how bad his sector is doing right now.

the reason why Trump is handling this second demand for cash worse than the first one; he literally just doesn't have the money.

If you mean liquid assets, then yes, that is quite reasonable. Even outside sites like Forbes agree he has the value, but not the cash.

And you know what? I think Trump agrees with both of you.

Nobody has ever heard of anything like this before. I would be forced to mortgage or sell Great Assets, perhaps at Fire Sale prices, and if and when I win the Appeal, they would be gone. Does that make sense? WITCH HUNT, ELECTION INTERFERENCE!

Judge Engoron actually wants me to put up Hundreds of Millions of Dollars for the Right to Appeal his ridiculous decision. In other words, he is trying to take my Appellate Rights away from me when I have already won at the Appellate Division, but he refuses to accept their already made decision.

Obviously, most of that is false. People having to sell things for court costs is an all-too-common reality in the USA. He has not won at the Appellate Division, at least, not in the context he's talking about. Judge Engoron is only following the letter of the law, the fact that it applies to Trump isn't the exception, it's the rule. And, of course, it is not election interference to hold a criminal accountable for their crimes. Trump Org committed fraud before/during/after Trump was in the WH. His crime is not political, neither is his trial.

He's right that he'd have to fire sale, however, and that's what several posters here and myself have said. He's claiming it's unfair, when it's the fairness that's the issue -- the law is simply being applied to Trump like it applies to everyone else. If he can't afford the fine, he probably shouldn't have committed so much fraud in the first place, then threw Cohen who knew about it under the bus.

That said, did anyone catch the key phrase Trump used?

and if and when I win the Appeal, they would be gone

if and when I win

if

Trump rarely uses that phrasing in public. In public, he's always right about everything and the best at everything. For him to suggest he would lose the appeal...yes, in the same breath as saying he already won the Appellate Division, he's either jumping back and forth between cases or lying...seems to be a first.

I think he's not just worried he's going to lose. I think his lawyers have told him he already has. And I think that speck of truth managed to escape his tiny tiny fingers and make it onto his social media platform, despite his best efforts.

Unrelated: Trump sues ABC News for defamation

"On what grounds?"

Trump filed a defamation lawsuit against ABC News on Monday, arguing that the anchor George Stephanopoulos had harmed his reputation by saying multiple times on-air that Mr. Trump had been found liable for raping the writer E. Jean Carroll.

He's hanging his figurative hat on the narrow line in New York law that separates the sexual assault he was found liable for, versus the legal definition of rape he wasn't. Basically, Stephanopoulos will take the stand, say "I was using the more general meaning of the term" and walk. Let's also remember the four stages of defamation, we all know them by heart at this point, the defamer must have said something that damaged the victim. So, not only will Stephanopoulos walk, Trump will have to show how his reputation was damaged by this one interview because of the word "rape" above and beyond the damage he did to his own reputation for the $83 million plus he was found liable for. Like...everyone knows he's a horrible human being and a sexual predator. Most people, again using a less specifically legal term, call him a rapist. Trump will have to show, specifically, how that interview/claim damaged him.

And yes, that comes at the end of a post about how Trump doesn't have enough money. Funny how life comes full circle. ABC News, do the world a favor and don't settle out of court. Trump is fishing for cash. Leave him stuck with worms.

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/0...miami-00147790

“I’m pissed. That’s what I’m feeling right now,” Navarro said, standing in a parking lot across from a Papa John’s and a pawn shop. “But I’m also afraid of only one thing: I’m afraid for this country because this, what they’re doing, should have a chilling effect on every American regardless of their party. They come for me, they can come for you.”

Republicans keep saying this like a threat or something and like, my dudes the fact that senior officials can be held accountable for breaking the law or failing to comply with lawful subpoenas is a fucking great thing. Republicans don't realize that this is actually a win for accountability and should be celebrated, they're just afraid of the fact that they may face consequences for their actions.

Navarro’s trial judge explicitly rejected Navarro’s claims of victimhood when he issued the sentence in January.

“In all of this, even today, there is little acknowledgement of what your obligation is as an American to cooperate with Congress, to provide them with information they are seeking,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said. “They had a job to do. And you made it harder. It’s really that simple.”

“You are not a victim. You are not the object of a political prosecution,” the judge added. “These are circumstances of your own making.”

Because as much as Peter says he's a victim, every court he's offered that argument to has rejected his claims because they're untrue.

Navarro spent the bulk of his remarks accusining investigators, judges and even jurors of “partisan weaponization” and said he shouldn’t have been compelled to testify given the experience of past White House officials.

But Navarro’s explanation also omitted key facts: Judges at every level concluded that Navarro had failed to show Trump ever intended to prevent his testimony to the Jan. 6 committee — and that even if he had, Navarro’s decision to entirely blow off the committee’s subpoena would still have been inappropriate. In addition, while many former White House officials have been afforded protections from compelled testimony to Congress, the Justice Department had never staked out a similar position regarding a former adviser to a former president. And only months before his subpoena, a fellow ex-adviser, Steve Bannon, was criminally charged for defying a Jan. 6 committee subpoena in a similar manner.

Navarro also falsely claimed that his fate was determined entirely by Democratic-appointed judges, omitting that just a day earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts made the final decision to deny his bid to remain out of jail pending the appeal of his conviction.

Just more crybaby Republicans thinking that if they repeat their fictionalized view of reality enough times they can force that fiction into being.

[s_bushido]

People in Trump's orbit has been playing this "they're not coming after me, they're coming after YOU!!!" card for a while now. They know they have no actual defense for their bullshit, and they know that their base is gullible and stupid enough to believe them.

[Myradin]

They want to normalize it so when they come after 'the libs' and people don't like, their base can go 'its only fair after what they did to us!'.

[Surfd]

Can she lose her license over this?

When you go over the details about how this particular case went down, she 1000% should. What she did was completely and unquestionably a massive breach of legal ethics in her capacity as a lawyer, to the point where any review panel put together by the Bar Association would throw the book at her instantly.

Thankfully, the woman she fucked over has the full receipts if I remember right (she has complete text records of the conversations between herself and Habba), so whenever this does finally hit the courts, Habba is well and truly fucked.

[Breccia]

Finally, some consequences!

On his way to prison, Navarro stopped and held a news conference.

FOX News cut away from it to fact-check his claims. Specifically, that yes he was convicted, and no there was no evidence of a reason that stopped him from testifying. *ding*

I'm sure four months for refusing to answer "are you a violent terrorist?" is better than the 10-30 he would have gotten from answering "yes".