Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[gondrin]

Trump: "No president has done more for Puerto Rico than I have."

Vid in link.

I swear, this is the most frustrating and vile of his lies and it drives my crazy.

In the vid he acts as tho nobody wanted to help Puerto Rico during Hurricane Maria. When in fact, Trump delayed $20 billion and of course the famous tossing paper towels. I swear this piece of garbage and he can just openly lie on this.

Didn't ya know? Those paper towels he threw out to a crowd once there was the biggest, most yuge thing ever to happen to Puerto Rico.

/s

[Edge-]

Trump: "No president has done more for Puerto Rico than I have."

What he did:

[Kaleredar]

I swear, this is the most frustrating and vile of his lies and it drives my crazy.

I mean... are you surprised?

Trump responds to everything in a mad-libs format. Whenever he's met with controversy because he insulted some group or another his response is more or less "I did the most bestest thing for *insert group here,* nobody loves *group* more than me, everybody says that I've done the most for *group*" Literally plug in any minority or country or cause you can think of, that's Trump's line every time. Like, he doesn't even think about it, that's the thing. His empty lying platitudes are just the autopilot his brain engages in.

[Nastard]

It must be so easy to grift Republicans. Just repeat "no one else is better at x than me" and they seem to eat it up every time.

[Jessicka]

It must be so easy to grift Republicans. Just repeat "no one else is better at x than me" and they seem to eat it up every time.

It seems a pretty lucrative profession.

[Dontrike]

It must be so easy to grift Republicans. Just repeat "no one else is better at x than me" and they seem to eat it up every time.

Considering Trump's most successful business is putting his name on stuff, and nothing else, it really is about that. In this case it's "No one else is better at getting grifted than me."

[Paranoid Android]

Asked if mass deportations would do harm to Florida's agricultural industry, Roth said he believes Trump would not actually engage in an indiscriminate mass deportation program.

Even if that did happen, he added, “We'll figure it out... We'll get more.”

https://www.propublica.org/article/f...mers-rick-roth

Yeah, Eff this guy.

So posting since this is the asshole who uses immigrant work but doesn't care. First in denial he will not be affected is the obvious of a Trump voter. In fact the attitude that Trump's fascism will not effect them, is why we get it

Worst of all is him stating "we will get more". The disgusting fact they really don't see them as human beings or objects you can discard and "get some more".

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Worst of all is him stating "we will get more". The disgusting fact they really don't see them as human beings or objects you can discard and "get some more".

This is the thought process behind all of these scumbag "job creators". No matter what the situation...they want their workers to constantly be reminded how replacable they are. Doesn't even matter what their citizenship status is...but obviously it's even more frightening if you're undocumented and your "employer" is holding that over your head too.

But yeah, this asshole doesn't actually his workers to be deported...what he wants is to keep them very afraid that they could be deported at any moment.

[Dontrike]

https://www.propublica.org/article/f...mers-rick-roth

Yeah, Eff this guy.

So posting since this is the asshole who uses immigrant work but doesn't care. First in denial he will not be affected is the obvious of a Trump voter. In fact the attitude that Trump's fascism will not effect them, is why we get it

Worst of all is him stating "we will get more". The disgusting fact they really don't see them as human beings or objects you can discard and "get some more".

"We'll get more," is this person admitting that they are going to buy immigrants to get here? Kidnap them? Put more people in prison to be the cheap labor force?

[Jessicka]

"We'll get more," is this person admitting that they are going to buy immigrants to get here? Kidnap them? Put more people in prison to be the cheap labor force?

They’ll tell you the civil war wasn’t about keeping slaves too. They never stopped fighting it.

[gondrin]

This is the thought process behind all of these scumbag "job creators". No matter what the situation...they want their workers to constantly be reminded how replacable they are. Doesn't even matter what their citizenship status is...but obviously it's even more frightening if you're undocumented and your "employer" is holding that over your head too.

But yeah, this asshole doesn't actually his workers to be deported...what he wants is to keep them very afraid that they could be deported at any moment.

I've seen this mentality personally. A lot of owners feel they are entitled to workers but yet tell workers that they aren't entitled to a job. They seem to forget that it is most definitely a two way street. If workers aren't entitled to a job, you most definitely aren't entitled to workers.

Those are the same owners that complain "Nobody wants to work anymore." or "Because we cannot find anyone, we are going to go out of business and I am going to lose everything.".

[Breccia]

Lawyers are allowed into Giuliani’s NYC apartment after he misses a deadline for turning over assets

A moving company representative and lawyers were expected to be given access to Rudy Giuliani’s Manhattan apartment on Thursday after the former New York City mayor failed to turn over belongings to two former Georgia election workers who won a $148 million defamation judgment against him.

The moving company representative and lawyers for Freeman and Moss were expected to be let into Giuliani’s apartment to see what property was there and estimate the cost of moving items named in Liman’s order, according to a court document filed late Wednesday by Aaron Nathan, an attorney for the election workers.

Giuliani keeps missing deadlines, and it keeps costing him. Either he's stalling while he tries to hide assets under a figurative rock and hopes nobody finds them, or he's really just that fucking stupid.

[Edge-]

Lawyers are allowed into Giuliani’s NYC apartment after he misses a deadline for turning over assets



Giuliani keeps missing deadlines, and it keeps costing him. Either he's stalling while he tries to hide assets under a figurative rock and hopes nobody finds them, or he's really just that fucking stupid.

Excellent. They can send Rudy the bill for that, too.

Shame he could find time to show up to Madison Square Garden to make up weird shit about 2 year old Palestinian kids but couldn't find the time to comply with court orders.

[DarkTZeratul]

Giuliani keeps missing deadlines, and it keeps costing him. Either he's stalling while he tries to hide assets under a figurative rock and hopes nobody finds them, or he's really just that fucking stupid.

He's a former prosecutor! He should know that ignoring court deadlines doesn't make them go away.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffre...michael-wolff/

Not sure if this has all been thoroughly fact checked yet and I'm not going to go all in on a post by "The Daily Beast" but...yeeesh, if any of this has any truth to it...

Wolff said of the photos, “They were with Trump at Epstein’s Palm Beach house sitting around the pool with these young girls, and the young girls are topless.

“And in some of the pictures, they’re sitting in his lap. I mean, and, and then there’s one I especially remember where there’s a stain, a telltale stain and on the front of Trump’s pants, and the girls are pointing at him and laughing.”

I will add there is reason to not just take everything said on faith, as the article itself notes:

Wolff, a veteran magazine journalist and author who was also the biographer of Rupert Murdoch, has long been a divisive figure with some questioning the accuracy of what he says and writes.

The man has come under fire before because some of his book about Trump "Fire and Fury" had some factual errors in it.

[Dontrike]

Trump thought it would be good to copy Putin by trying to sue someone/thing/place for a stupid amount of money no reason whatsoever as he tries to sue CBS for $10 billion. Why? Cause they interviewed Kamala. Yep, that's it.

Donald Trump is suing CBS News for $10 billion, alleging that the network deceptively edited an interview with his rival Kamala Harris to unlawfully influence the 2024 presidential election.

The lawsuit, filed in Texas, accuses CBS of “partisan and unlawful acts of election and voter interference through malicious, deceptive, and substantial news distortion calculated to … confuse, deceive, and mislead the public” and “attempt to tip the scales” in favor of the Democratic nominee.

His legal team filed the lawsuit in a federal court in Amarillo, where the case is expected to land in front of a judge he appointed. Any appeal of a decision in the case would go to a Louisiana-based appellate court that is dominated by conservative judges that have routinely sided in Republican-backed legal challenges.

A case from Trump — who lives in Florida, and who is suing a New York-based company incorporated in Delaware — is likely to be handed to conservative District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who Trump nominated to the bench. Judge Kacsmaryk notably reinstated Trump’s so-called “remain in Mexico” program and ruled to strip government approval of a widely used abortion drug. Both decisions were struck down by the Supreme Court.

Trump has demanded a jury trial and wants to be awarded $10 billion in damages.

The lawsuit spends several paragraphs on political attacks, calling President Joe Biden’s decision to end his re-election campaign “an unprecedented and anti-democratic political coup” and accusing CBS and other media outlets of going “into overdrive to get Kamala elected.” The document only references Harris by her first name.

rump’s attorneys claim news outlets “have tried to falsely recast her as the candidate of ‘joy,’ whitewashed her lengthy record of policy failures, and painted over her repeated, disqualifying gaffes,” including “word salad” and “jumbles of exceptionally incoherent speech that have drawn disapproval even from dyed-in-the-wool Democratic commentators.

Thursday’s long-shot claims, filed just six days before Election Day, follow Trump’s obsessive attacks baselessly alleging that the network did something “illegal” and doctored her responses.

He also has repeatedly threatened to revoke CBS’s broadcast license, along with other television networks that have aired critical coverage of his administration and campaign.

Trump has previously launched unsuccessful lawsuits against CNN and The New York Times. A judge this year determined that the former president owes the newspaper and three reporters nearly $400,000 for their legal fees after his failed lawsuit against them.

The Republican presidential nominee also backed out of a chance to appear on 60 Minutes himself. Anchor Scott Pelley told viewers during the Harris broadcast that Trump’s campaign “complained that we would fact-check the interview.”

“We fact-check every story,” Pelley said.

The network has since refuted Trump’s “false” accusations, and an attorney for the network said there is “no legal basis” for a legal challenge after a legal threat from Trump’s team to turn over unedited transcripts.

At issue is how 60 Minutes aired Harris’s answers to a question from host Bill Whitaker about whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is listening to the US.

A preview of the interview that aired on CBS’s Face the Nation shows her responding by defending America’s influence, while the 60 Minutes broadcast includes an answer that “we are not gonna stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.”

CBS has said that the network aired the entirety of her answer; a first half aired on the Sunday program and the second half aired on Monday’s broadcast as two parts of the same answer to the same question.

“Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response,” the network said in a statement earlier this month.

“When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point,” the statement said. “The portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide ranging 21-minute-long segment.”

In the suit it actually says that Trump is "the leading political candidate" and that this interview was done to sway the populace in order to vote for her. You can tell some of this was written by Trump.

[Kaleredar]

Trump thought it would be good to copy Putin by trying to sue someone/thing/place for a stupid amount of money no reason whatsoever as he tries to sue CBS for $10 billion. Why? Cause they interviewed Kamala. Yep, that's it.



In the suit it actually says that Trump is "the leading political candidate" and that this interview was done to sway the populace in order to vote for her. You can tell some of this was written by Trump.

This country needs a “cry wolf” statute added.

If you get X number of lawsuits thrown out for pure frivolity, any new defendants in further lawsuits that get struck down get to immediately counter-sue.

[Edge-]

This country needs a “cry wolf” statute added.

If you get X number of lawsuits thrown out for pure frivolity, any new defendants in further lawsuits that get struck down get to immediately counter-sue.

Really bordering on, if not well over the line, of what should fall under tort law. Though given that he's primarily challenging organizations and institutions rather than people it doesn't fit the traditional definition.

Honestly surprised he can still find the money for all this, or lawyers - even bad ones - who will keep working for clout.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

This country needs a “cry wolf” statute added.

If you get X number of lawsuits thrown out for pure frivolity, any new defendants in further lawsuits that get struck down get to immediately counter-sue.

Well, its not quite what you're looking for...but you can sue someone for wrongfully suing you.

[Odinfrost]

Really bordering on, if not well over the line, of what should fall under tort law. Though given that he's primarily challenging organizations and institutions rather than people it doesn't fit the traditional definition.

Honestly surprised he can still find the money for all this, or lawyers - even bad ones - who will keep working for clout.

But corporations are people, so it should still apply.
And that's my opinion, I'm just using the GOPs logic