Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

And in Trump's case, he's leveraged basically everything already, iirc.

Hey, didn't Trump comment on exactly this? Hold on.

Trump claims he has $500 million in cash, undercutting lawyers' claims on bond money

There we go. Issue of liquidity resolved.

Now following @Twdft this would be like having $5,000 in the bank and being unwilling to pay $1.30 Proportionately that's better, but still bad.

"But wasn't Trump lying?"

Yes he was, both times. Know what else he was lying about?

Welcome back to 2018.

Trump acknowledged a $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels on Thursday, but said a non-disclosure agreement was "used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair."

Contradicting previous statements that he knew nothing about any sort of payment, Trump tweeted that these agreements are "very common among celebrities and people of wealth."

Trump also tweeted that campaign funds "played no roll in this transaction" — misspelling the term "role" — though some legal analysts said the previously unreported payment could be considered an in-kind political contribution subject to federal law.

Giuliani, appearing Thursday on Fox & Friends, to discuss the non-disclosure agreement, said: “Imagine if that came out on October 15, 2016, in the middle of the last debate with Hillary Clinton?"

Later, in an appearance on Fox Business Network, Giuliani said, "this was never about the campaign. This was about personal reputation. The money wasn’t paid to help the campaign or hurt the campaign."

Wow. A lot of that aged really badly.

But yes, Trump said it was a completely fine thing to do. Which is why he hid everything behind someone else's bank account. And yes, those interviews/that article came out because Cohen was singing to the cops about his role in what he flat-out admitted was illegally paying off Trump's whore.

He should have just paid directly with a business check, if he was telling the truth about it being a completely fine and normal and common and bigly and yuge thing to do. He didn't. He was lying.

Or, he could have paid nothing and said "Stormy Daniels is a liar, do not believe her." Which...he did, didn't he? Could have saved the money entirely. He didn't, he want to risk that people would believe her, which yes in 2016 they would have. So it became "pay her off, push the laptop which turned out to be nothing".

The big thing on the way is Cohen's testimony. Everyone knows what Cohen did was illegal. Cohen will say, on the stand, "I did so on behalf of my client, Donald Trump, who knew this was illegal because I told him it was illegal." We all know that's coming. It will be followed with "Can you prove you told him?" And that's what I want to see the most.

[postman1782]

Looks like at the end of court today, they got 7 jurors seated. Who knows how big of a jury pool they have left or if they have to call in more.

[masterhorus8]

Looks like at the end of court today, they got 7 jurors seated. Who knows how big of a jury pool they have left or if they have to call in more.

Based on my own experience in a jury, I have no faith in a jury system.

- - - Updated - - -

I just heard a story on ABC World News about SCOTUS taking up a case about the DOJ misusing a law they're charging for obstructing Congress. One of the fuckwit judges actually tries to compare this to that congressman that pulled the fire alarm, as some sort of attempt to stop them from voting. Holy shit, I'm so tired of these political hacks.

[Breccia]

I just heard a story on ABC World News about SCOTUS taking up a case about the DOJ misusing a law they're charging for obstructing Congress.

Yes. The issue is "corrupt intent". Directly attacking the fair and legal vote with the specific motive to stop the fair and legal vote, apparently, is not "corrupt intent".

[masterhorus8]

Yes. The issue is "corrupt intent". Directly attacking the fair and legal vote with the specific motive to stop the fair and legal vote, apparently, is not "corrupt intent".

Yeah, that part baffles me, too. One of them specifically questioned "stopping the vote" as being different from "changing the vote". Like, what? Making a vote not happen is indeed changing the results.

[Breccia]

Yeah, that part baffles me, too. One of them specifically questioned "stopping the vote" as being different from "changing the vote". Like, what? Making a vote not happen is indeed changing the results.

I mean, even if that was somehow true, "obstruct" means "stop".

[Kaleredar]

Based on my own experience in a jury, I have no faith in a jury system.

Maybe, but Trump's lawyers don't exactly come off as competent showmen that can charm a crowd. They, and their client, are coming off as petulant, stubborn, and whiny.

Also, in most criminal cases that actually go to trial, defendants are found guilty. By a non-trivial margin.

Nothing is guaranteed, obviously. But Trump had better hope that his lawyers can pull one hell of a Chewbacca defense, because I don't really see them explaining their way around this in any way.

[D Luniz]

I thought it would take 9 - 12 months for DJT to become penny stock. I forgot the internet accelerates the process. When Trump went public with the Taj Mahal in 1996, the WWW was still in its infancy. People still depends mostly on printed source of materials for their investment. No more. It is interesting to see how fast DJT stock respond to good news and bad news.

Started this morning at $24.38. News came out that DJT will have Live TV streaming. Went up to $25.30. Then Devin Nunes opened his mouth.



Basically saying that "we will stream contents that nobody want to watch." You could hear the sucking noise that made right away.

Down to $23 now. If the trend holds steady, it will become penny stock in another 3 to 4 weeks.

its not that nobody wants to watch
its that only bigots and assholes want to watch
and they tend to be to poor to afford extras cause they cant get good jobs cause no one wants to lose business by employing them.
Its why RW boycotts tend to be such fail. Companies follow money, not just the loudest voice.

[Breccia]

Habba goes on FOX News *ding* and says the report of Trump falling asleep is

But no, you know, I’ve heard that report. It’s unlikely. I know him. I sat through trial after trial with him. That never happens. So Trump is incredibly focused.

"Oh, Habba was there?"

No.

"But the NYTimes reporter was?"

Yes.

"Does Habba, in theory an experienced lawyer, know that Haberman making up a negative story about something that happened in a room full of witnesses, then broadcasting it, is defamation?"

Anyone within a thousand miles of Trump knows what defamation is, probably unwillingly.

"So why hasn't Trump sued yet, if it didn't happen, and he has dozens of witnesses, including a judge and some prosecutors?"

Because the story is true, and Habba is doing damage control. Unsuccessfully.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I bet conservative media are going to freak out any second now about how Trump is sold old and debilitated that he falls asleep in court.


Annnnnnnnnnnny minute now.

To be fair, court is boring as fuck. The seats are uncomfortable, there's lots of whispering between lawyers, judges, and clients, there's no music, everyone's quiet and you're not allowed to entertain yourself and they expect you to sit there for 3-5 hours at a time while barely anything happens for 30 minutes at a time.

[Surfd]

To be fair, court is boring as fuck. The seats are uncomfortable, there's lots of whispering between lawyers, judges, and clients, there's no music, everyone's quiet and you're not allowed to entertain yourself and they expect you to sit there for 3-5 hours at a time while barely anything happens for 30 minutes at a time.

Ie, it's literal hell for someone with an attention span as short as Trumps

[Ausr]

To be fair, court is boring as fuck. The seats are uncomfortable, there's lots of whispering between lawyers, judges, and clients, there's no music, everyone's quiet and you're not allowed to entertain yourself and they expect you to sit there for 3-5 hours at a time while barely anything happens for 30 minutes at a time.

Grand jury is actually better. You get nice comfy seats, you can ask the witness questions, you learn why certain things are the way they are according to the law, you're in at 10am and sometimes you can be out by 11:30am (the paperwork states 10 to 5). The only downsides is if you get people who ask irrelevant questions who also think they're a trial jury because that's where those questions belong. My current grand jury has 5-8 of these people because they can't be assed to pay attention.

[Shadowferal]

My current grand jury has 5-8 of these people because they can't be assed to pay attention.

Typos and Freudian slips seem related. On another note; Surreal scenes as jurors in New York trial tell Trump what they really think

[The Stormbringer]

Typos and Freudian slips seem related. On another note; Surreal scenes as jurors in New York trial tell Trump what they really think

Anyone who calls him 'President Trump' should be questioned more thoroughly. He isn't the President, he's a former President. Former President Trump would be appropriate and accurate.

[Flarelaine]

Again I fail to comprehend the drive to disqualify everyone who has sufficient background knowledge to make a reasoned, informed judgement from the process.

[Breccia]

Nunes explains how he will save Truth Social.

We're trying to take the best of Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, TikTok, put it into one app, well we're now going to have the ability for canceled TV programs and or maybe not canceled but maybe not allowed on all the platforms. You'll be able to actually watch television within Truth Social.

Yep, "taking the best of" all the platforms people actually use.

Oh, and cancelled TV shows.

Not only will he somehow do that, but somehow it will make Truth Social worth the billions a company that demonstrably spends ten times what they earn claims to have in value.

In other words, magic.

- - - Updated - - -

Again I fail to comprehend the drive to disqualify everyone who has sufficient background knowledge to make a reasoned, informed judgement from the process.

Normally I would counter with "This is America, even the worst of the worst deserves a fair trial with an unbiased jury".

The issue here is, people who have no idea about the facts of the case are likely to be Trump supporters. Trump intentionally courts the willfully ill-informed and spouts nothing but lies to them. Therefore "fair" and "unbiased" are at odds in this case.

The only way this trial will actually be fair is if we brought in people in cryogenic statis since the 1970's.

[Shadowferal]

Nunes explains how he will save Truth Social.

Too many "maybe, maybe not"...s in Nunes' statement.

[Gorsameth]

Anyone who calls him 'President Trump' should be questioned more thoroughly. He isn't the President, he's a former President. Former President Trump would be appropriate and accurate.

Former Presidents are generally referred to as President tho.

Bush and Obama are also referred to as President, not Former President.

[The Stormbringer]

Former Presidents are generally referred to as President tho.

Bush and Obama are also referred to as President, not Former President.

Pretty sure I've heard "Former President Obama" and "Former President Bush" plenty of times, but I suppose that is anecdotal.

[Flarelaine]

Normally I would counter with "This is America, even the worst of the worst deserves a fair trial with an unbiased jury".

And that is a lovely principle but even without Trump in the picture this practice limits jurors to those who will not understand the problem, any problem, because proper understanding will always require context and prior knowledge.

You teach maths. You wouldn't expect anyone to understand a problem in an AP course without having passed basic arithmetics. And when politics and law intersect, they are just as complex as advanced maths but way less straightforward. Maths, at least, is not only logical but arguably is logic.

- - - Updated - - -

Former Presidents are generally referred to as President tho.

Bush and Obama are also referred to as President, not Former President.

I know this does not actually entitle them to a different form of address, but for the record, both retired undefeated.