Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[NineSpine]

So wait for an election, is what you're saying.

Waiting around for other people to fix your country isn't really a tenable option. Particularly when you're relying on the failed systems that led to this problem in the first place.

I can’t have a conversation with someone when I say something and you just tell me I’m saying the opposite of that.

[NED funded]

This is the criminal illegal alien that the Milwaukee Circuit judge attempted to shield from justice. He has a laundry list of violent criminal charges including strangulation and suffocation, battery, and domestic abuse. Ruiz illegally entered the US twice.

Since President Trump was inaugurated, activist judges have tried to obstruct President Trump and the American people’s mandate to make America safe and secure our homeland— but this judge’s actions to shield an accused violent criminal illegal alien from justice is shocking and shameful.

We are thankful for our partners at the FBI for helping remove this accused criminal from America’s streets.

If you are here illegally and break the law, we will hunt you down, arrest you and lock you up. That's a promise.

Emphasis mine.

Like I said they are looking for anything to punish judges in general. Frustrated by their losses on the courts and their increasingly unhinged rhetoric around the judicial system

https://x.com/TriciaOhio/status/1915839095734993161

[Poopymonster]

Emphasis mine.

Like I said they are looking for anything to punish judges in general. Frustrated by their losses on the courts and their increasingly unhinged rhetoric around the judicial system

https://x.com/TriciaOhio/status/1915839095734993161

That's the plan. Even when it's proven baseless, a Trump case comes before them "Your honor is prejudiced against the President and his agenda because we harassed you and had you arrested for made up bullshit and you are now in a position of power over us. Recuse yourself."
Do that enough, and you'll run out of fair judges.
That's how they'll end up in front of The honorable Beauford Kissdrivel, the only judge in the Bumblefuck, South Dakota, population 3.

[Templar 331]

I regret to inform you that “the law” isn’t “a dude on the internet has alleged that feelings were involved in the charging.” I really hope you don’t try to use this defense in a trial where you represent yourself.

“It doesn’t matter if you broke the law, what matters is whether or not you’ve alleged the motivation for the arrest and trial is hurt feelings.”

"Your honor. The President ,who ordered my arrest via ICE who are illegally arresting other U.S. citizens, shouldn't even be in office since he violated the Constitution with his failed insurrection. He has admitted to the public that he will use the office of the President to retaliate against any who don't adhere to his wishes. Seeing as that President is not acting in good faith and honoring his oath to the Constitution and to the law, I plead to this court that the charges against me be dropped."

[NED funded]

That's the plan. Even when it's proven baseless, a Trump case comes before them "Your honor is prejudiced against the President and his agenda because we harassed you and had you arrested for made up bullshit and you are now in a position of power over us. Recuse yourself."
Do that enough, and you'll run out of fair judges.
That's how they'll end up in front of The honorable Beauford Kissdrivel, the only judge in the Bumblefuck, South Dakota, population 3.

Dont jump the gun on the baseless thing. If what is alleged is true then they might have a case. Do doubt their intentions though.

[Edge-]

Emphasis mine.

Like I said they are looking for anything to punish judges in general. Frustrated by their losses on the courts and their increasingly unhinged rhetoric around the judicial system

https://x.com/TriciaOhio/status/1915839095734993161

shield an accused criminal illegal alien from justice?

accused?

so not convicted?

so no due process for undocumented immigrants?

and also look, it's the administration explicitly saying this is a politically motivated attack on a judge that is "obstructing" donalds policies. not laws, policies, which they as non-political judges are not required to give a shit about because they only deal with the law

[tehdang]

People like tehdang cheering on this are cheering for the third worldification of the country. This is hte republican party now

People that think this constitutes “cheering” are giving the game away. There exists a vast gulf between “not de-facto unlawful arrest” and “cheering the arrest.” This gives into partisanship and manichean thinking.

If you’re just in search of people that cheer arrests for their targets, I’m sure you can find some on the internet. You don’t need to grab the nearest Republican in your vicinity and make a substitution.

- - - Updated - - -

"Your honor. The President ,who ordered my arrest via ICE who are illegally arresting other U.S. citizens, shouldn't even be in office since he violated the Constitution with his failed insurrection. He has admitted to the public that he will use the office of the President to retaliate against any who don't adhere to his wishes. Seeing as that President is not acting in good faith and honoring his oath to the Constitution and to the law, I plead to this court that the charges against me be dropped."

If you have proof that the President himself ordered this arrest, I suggest you present it. That would be very exciting news for this thread, and wholly unprecedented. Why would we even be talking about an FBI statement when you have something infinitely better?

[Edge-]

If you have proof that the President himself ordered this arrest, I suggest you present it. That would be very exciting news for this thread, and wholly unprecedented. Why would we even be talking about an FBI statement when you have something infinitely better?

"it all started under this administration but there's just no way you can ultimately blame this on the head of this administration" is sure a take.

[Xath]

Is this the trolling part, where you flip the standard to proving a negative? Sorry, I don’t buy into a premise of “This is a link, now prove to me the negative that this is not what I say it is.”

Nobody is above the law.

Alleged to have assisted an illegal alien evade arrest by misleading ICE officers. ICE officers pursuing a lawful detainer previously negotiated with the chief judge. The good news is the judicial system regards her as innocent until proven guilty, and she will receive trial according to due process.

Maybe this is a learning process for people that think judges are immune from the law? Or maybe people are confused about the difference between a judge rendering a judgement or order, and the judge’s conduct? You’ll have to explain your position more than juvenile games that assign the burden of evidence.

Learn about judicial immunity and stop defending fascism

[Breccia]

If you have proof that the President himself ordered this arrest, I suggest you present it.

That's your defense? "I admit it was done by his people, but prove he himself ordered it"? You were better off with blatant lying. This is just pathetic.

[Rasulis]

Michael Hartnett urges investors to flee the stock market and dump the dollar.

"Who is he and why should we care?"

He's the leader of Bank of America's fiscal strategists, hired to look at exactly this current situation.



Simply put, the people hired by one of the biggest financial institutions in the world said that Trump is a whirlwind of chaos, and you should take your money out of his direct control.

- - - Updated - - -



Handwaved. Trump defenders claiming "no-one is above the law" are blatantly lying.

Where does Mr. Hartnett want us to put all that money? Actually, where has all the money from the US stock market gone to?

The US stock market lost around $10T.

All the other stock markets have basically followed the US market. So, the money did not go into other markets. Imagine $10T infusion into any market.

Crypto? Crypto is still down from Trump's inauguration.

Gold? The global value of gold has only gone up $1T. Not remotely close.

Cash? That's a lot of pillows.

Bank accounts? Not really seeing it.

My thought is the Secondary (pre-IPO) Market for private companies like SpaceX, OpenAI, etc. At least some of the money. Not sure the Secondary Market has the capacity to absorb $10T.

[Endus]

I can’t have a conversation with someone when I say something and you just tell me I’m saying the opposite of that.

You said they "need to build political capital". Political capital is largely the means by which a party or representative mobilizes voters to the polls, advances policy reform, and so forth.

Are you expecting the Democrats to be able to advance Democratic or even more-progressive policies when the Trump Republicans have majorities in both Houses and hold the Presidency?

Because short of that, I can't see how you're talking about anything but winning elections.

[NineSpine]

People that think this constitutes “cheering” are giving the game away. There exists a vast gulf between “not de-facto unlawful arrest” and “cheering the arrest.” This gives into partisanship and manichean thinking.

If you’re just in search of people that cheer arrests for their targets, I’m sure you can find some on the internet. You don’t need to grab the nearest Republican in your vicinity and make a substitution.

- - - Updated - - -

If you have proof that the President himself ordered this arrest, I suggest you present it. That would be very exciting news for this thread, and wholly unprecedented. Why would we even be talking about an FBI statement when you have something infinitely better?

I have evidence the president ordered the pardoning of multiple pedophiles that assaulted police officers.

- - - Updated - - -

You said they "need to build political capital". Political capital is largely the means by which a party or representative mobilizes voters to the polls, advances policy reform, and so forth.

Are you expecting the Democrats to be able to advance Democratic or even more-progressive policies when the Trump Republicans have majorities in both Houses and hold the Presidency?

Because short of that, I can't see how you're talking about anything but winning elections.

I'm expecting the Democrats to do what they can to turn the public against Trump and Republicans, and toward Democrats, so that they can win the next election. I know, totally insane for me to expect politicians to try to win elections.

[Endus]

I'm expecting the Democrats to do what they can to turn the public against Trump and Republicans, and toward Democrats, so that they can win the next election. I know, totally insane for me to expect politicians to try to win elections.

So when I said you want them to "wait for an election", and you got upset that I was misrepresenting you, you've now clarified here that you want them to win the next election.

We're running circles around goalposts, here.

[tehdang]

did the biden administration have an established, clear pattern of constant, gross dishonest and lies? like claiming 200 trade deals were in talks and the providing 0 evidence of that? or claiming that egg prices are down 93% when they're actually up?

no?

then I'm unsure why you try to compare the two. well, actually it seems you're doing so because you know donald's lies are indefensible so you're hoping you can deflect.



it's almost like we can look at donald promising to weaponize the federal government against political opponents and then look at the federal government actually being weaponized against political opponents like he promised and connect those two dots.

do you need help connecting those two dots? they are the only dots on the page.



well, because that's the most likely outcome given recent history and the prior administration's history. donald has lost an incredible number of court cases, more than any other administration in history



do you have any specific examples of me doing this? i'd be curious for a specific example and not a appeal to vagueness : )



i am left amused that you still treat this administration and ice as acting honestly or in good faith at this point given the months of neither thing ever happening



i'm happy to update my opinion when new information comes to light, if it comes to light. i'm not wedded to it forever.

but i also don't forget everything we know about donald and everything that's happened since january 20, 2025 and i think anyone taking the word of anyone from this administration/leadership, including the current border czar/head of ice, is either incredibly gullible, wants to believe the lies, or hasn't been paying any attention at all.

If you get to make up a standard, and call it sufficient to deem an action unlawful before knowing anything about it, I will always ask if you’re going to allow everybody else that same privilege. I have just decided that on the weight of Biden’s lies and misconduct, throughout his term, I can second guess every administration action and demand that defenders prove that they aren’t unlawful. You see why this is an impossible standard?

The same applies to “weaponization” arguments. You’re interpreting his statements that way. It’s no excuse to disregard any factual claims one way or another. The same goes for Trump’s claims that the weaponization was done against him. He can’t simply use that claim or interpretation to ignore the laws and court cases and appeals. If you’re going to be consistent, then Trump has an easy out that you just gifted him. Good job.

I’m not buying what you’re selling as “most likely outcome.” You asked me to argue that “this wasn’t part of a campaign of terror.” I don’t indulge this goalpost-shifting. I don’t know enough about the charges nor the defense to the charges to even begin to judge. You’ve got nothing, and you’re part of the way to admitting that you’ve got nothing, to decide one way or another. If you showed me that the FBI had charged three judges with similar crimes, and they were all dismissed quickly, then I’d be on your side. As it stands, you’re presenting premonitions as evidence. Not good enough, and I think you know it.

You have repeated a claim that still wrong for the same reasons I already stated. You believe someone has lied in the past, so you flip the story to mean he is guilty of lying on the future unless proven not to have lied. This has never been the case, and will never be the case.

The drug dealer isn’t guilty of murder just because he was guilty of dealing drugs beforehand. He isn’t vulnerable to your “connect the dots” or “I’ve established a clear record of your past” or “how dare you ask me to consider you acting in good faith.” They’re all poor attempts by you to avoid the simple truth. You don’t know, you have no basis to know, but you still want to present your insinuations and prejudices as strong evidence. They aren’t, and nor will they ever be.

And as a last side note: the presumption is declaring that “this is an example of unlawful arrest” and it doesn’t take presumption of good faith to assert “we don’t know whether or not this was an unlawful/pretextual arrest.” The false logic you’re employing is “we know this was not an unlawful/pretextual arrest,” and I have never made that assertion. If you had found a person that did argue that they knew this arrest was justified, then you’d have a couple paragraphs of solid argument against such a person.

[Breccia]

If you get to make up a standard

I mean, you did, you voted for a felon rapist terrorist. For you to take issue with others is hypocrisy.

[tehdang]

Learn about judicial immunity and stop defending fascism

It only applies to judicial decisions. A judge can’t claim he has judicial immunity for a traffic ticket.

[NineSpine]

It only applies to judicial decisions. A judge can’t claim he has judicial immunity for a traffic ticket.

Your judicial opinions are interesting. Perhaps you can explain why Trump pardoned multiple pedophiles that assaulted police officers?

- - - Updated - - -

So when I said you want them to "wait for an election", and you got upset that I was misrepresenting you, you've now clarified here that you want them to win the next election.

We're running circles around goalposts, here.

My argument is they need to do things now, and you keep telling me that my argument is that we need to wait for the next election for something. Is this some kind of troll? I don't know how many times I can repeat myself. I'm sorry if my argument doesn't fit this weird box you seem desperate to put it in, but this is ridiculous.

[Breccia]

Your judicial opinions are interesting. Perhaps you can explain why Trump pardoned multiple pedophiles that assaulted police officers?

And the violent terrorists! Don't forget the violent terrorists. There's no point in having a discussion with Trump supporters about the rule of law when Trump pardons tried, convicted, in many cases admitted violent terrorists.

[NineSpine]

And the violent terrorists! Don't forget the violent terrorists. There's no point in having a discussion with Trump supporters about the rule of law when Trump pardons tried, convicted, in many cases admitted violent terrorists.

I don't know why anyone is responding to @tehdang with anything but a request for an explanation of pardoning violent pedophiles.

- - - Updated - - -

It only applies to judicial decisions. A judge can’t claim he has judicial immunity for a traffic ticket.

"David Daniel, who was set free from prison after assaulting a police officer on January 6 by the president, is now facing child sexual assault and child pornography charges involving two young girls in his family, one prepubescent and one under the age of 12."
https://www.newsweek.com/january-six...harges-2024043