Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[diller]

Honest question - given how often you have expressed that things going on in the world either terrify you or send you into a murderous rage....

How do you function? You sound like someone who is not capable of processing information and current events in a rational manner.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - you really should talk to a professional about your extreme emotions and reactions to things.

When he says 'terrified' he means aroused, he admitted to watching gore videos.

[Gorsameth]

This Philadelphia Inquirer OP ED raises an interesting option: the person most likely to pardon Trump...would be President Joe Biden.

So, here's the chain of logic:
a) a President pardoning himself has no guarantee of success. Three days before Nixon resigned, his own DoJ said "no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself". It has, of course, never been challenged, but Nixon sure believed it.
b) conditions can be attached to pardons. Nixon himself did it with Jimmy Hoffa, pardoning him on the requirement he didn't run for (Teamster) president. Hoffa sued to break the requirement, and lost.
c) the current GOP runners can't do it, because they're not President. And half the field doesn't seem all that eager to do so.
d) Trump is a craven coward, like his followers who refuse to post here, unable to defend their support of a felon and a traitor but wanting to vote for him anyhow.
e) Trump's primary goal of running is to benefit himself, and Trump thinks everything comes down to a deal.

Now, the theory is not perfect. Trump could roll the dice, and other GOP candidates could pledge an unconditional pardon. But the theory seems to be that, if Biden offered a sure thing instead of a gamble or (gasp!) that Trump trust that someone else will keep their word, Trump would take that sure thing as soon as it was clear he was going to lose the election anyhow.

I hate the idea, and I hope it doesn't come up. Trump is flaking on the remaining debates and the risk of the Republican Party splitting grows by the day. I think the status quo has him losing and not getting pardoned, my preferred outcome no question. But I think the theory has some merit.

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

Or, and this is a wild take. We don't pretend like the biggest attack on American democracy in its history didn't happen.

The goal isn't to keep Trump out of the WH. The goal is to show that there is still some justice left in the USA.

[Shadowferal]

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

Too big an "if." I can't see Biden offering a qualified pardon. Trump has too big an ego and too big a mouth...which fuel his stupidity. He'd take the pardon, then claim Biden was scared not to give him one. Then he'll mouth off about the restrictions and stipulations...

[Breccia]

FOX News *ding* has taken a novel approach to defending Trump, namely, suggesting the grand jury was illegal.

Exactly what happened in the grand jury room? What kind of deliberations occurred. Again, the issue is probable cause and whether the defendants’ due process rights were abridged.

In Georgia, the grand jurors are free to publicly speak. We saw that earlier when in a prior investigative grand jury, the foreman went on television when its proceedings concluded and would not stop talking about what had occurred among grand jurors, and she did so gleefully. It should not be difficult for defense counsel to get to the bottom of what occurred.

FOX News seems to be pushing yet another conspiracy theory: that Georgia, for some reason, took the most public and biggest case they've ever had, and chose that case of all cases to skip steps and violate people's rights on purpose. The evidence FOX News has seems to be "there was a mountain of evidence, yet the grand jury still convicted almost instantly" which, you know, isn't what a lot of people would go with. (FOX News also reminds everyone that the GA DA didn't technically need the grand jury, so their argument seems to boil down to "she said she did but didn't", again, a strange defense for Trump the serial liar)

It is relevant to note that all three prosecutors had the grand juries vote smack in the middle of a presidential election, and all have demanded trials within months of the indictments – that is, for maximum political damage to candidate Trump, and maximum political benefit to candidate Biden.

And this again. Just a reminder: Trump is the one who announced he was running the very say 2022's elections ended. He was indicted all four times before the first debate, a debate he skipped by the way. Trump announced Sept 2015, proportionately after all of the charges for all those crimes he committed. This is not "the middle of a presidential election"

If, somehow, all three prosecutors...yes, somehow, FOX News thinks all three prosecutors violated Trump's 5th Amendment rights...all broke Trump's rights all at the same time, then the question even FOX News asks is "why haven't Trump's lawyers challenged the grand juries' results yet?"

Where the heck are the defense lawyers for former President Trump and his co-defendants? Why are they so passive?

-- literal sub-headline of the article

See, this is what happens when you armchair quarterback. The author, Mark Levin, is a lawyer, but he seems to be as effective as all of Trump's other lawyers, in other words, not very. I don't remember any Trump lawyers claiming the grand juries were misled or rigged.

And, of course, FOX News has no evidence to back any of these claims. They have unsubstantiated guesswork masquerading as a theory. If Levin wants to defend Trump so much in court, and he thinks Trump's lawyers aren't doing a good job, he's welcome to join them.

[Surfd]

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

Not a chance. Trump's entire worldview is transactional, and his ego is way too big to ever allow himself to take a deal that even vaguely looks like he may be the one on the short end of the stick. Guarantee you Trump would rather go to jail than be seen accepting a Get-out-of-jail-free card from someone he has spent the last half a decade building up as the next best thing to Satan himself.

Donald Trump accepting a pardon from Crooked Joe of the Biden Crime Family would be pretty much impossible for him to spin into anything other than abject failure on his part: a deal with the devil where Trump got the raw end. It would absolutely destroy his image like nothing else could.

[Templar 331]

This Philadelphia Inquirer OP ED raises an interesting option: the person most likely to pardon Trump...would be President Joe Biden.

So, here's the chain of logic:
a) a President pardoning himself has no guarantee of success. Three days before Nixon resigned, his own DoJ said "no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself". It has, of course, never been challenged, but Nixon sure believed it.
b) conditions can be attached to pardons. Nixon himself did it with Jimmy Hoffa, pardoning him on the requirement he didn't run for (Teamster) president. Hoffa sued to break the requirement, and lost.
c) the current GOP runners can't do it, because they're not President. And half the field doesn't seem all that eager to do so.
d) Trump is a craven coward, like his followers who refuse to post here, unable to defend their support of a felon and a traitor but wanting to vote for him anyhow.
e) Trump's primary goal of running is to benefit himself, and Trump thinks everything comes down to a deal.

Now, the theory is not perfect. Trump could roll the dice, and other GOP candidates could pledge an unconditional pardon. But the theory seems to be that, if Biden offered a sure thing instead of a gamble or (gasp!) that Trump trust that someone else will keep their word, Trump would take that sure thing as soon as it was clear he was going to lose the election anyhow.

I hate the idea, and I hope it doesn't come up. Trump is flaking on the remaining debates and the risk of the Republican Party splitting grows by the day. I think the status quo has him losing and not getting pardoned, my preferred outcome no question. But I think the theory has some merit.

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

If he accepts the pardon that would mean he admits to insurrection, right? And that would mean he couldn't run for office via the 14th amendment, right?

[Breccia]

Speaking of legal defenses, the NYTimes heard from an expert who brought up a point about Meadows' latest court filing, and why it won't work.

Simply put, as we've all heard by now, Meadows is claiming that this should be a federal case, on the grounds that he was a federal employee. Again, Hatch Act, it wouldn't matter if he was.

But um...the filing by the GA DA mentions that Team Trump was harassing Kemp as far as Sept 2021. Trump, and Meadows, were out of their old office for eight months. And RICO handles the rest.

"Surely he would have been a federal employee if the election hadn't been rigged!"

See earlier bank robbery analogy. If I demand the money at gunpoint, it doesn't matter anymore if it should have been in my account already. Trump lost by all fair, legal, and reasonable accounts. "I should have won" is whining, not a legal basis for anything.

- - - Updated - - -

If he accepts the pardon that would mean he admits to insurrection, right? And that would mean he couldn't run for office via the 14th amendment, right?

Undecided. Trump would challenge both parts of that in court, and insist he be allowed on the ballot until it's decided, and then push the trial back until the election.

[Lenonis]

She files for divorce, his 2024 hopes drop to 0.

Why? You really think Cult45 will care? Trump will just say something along the lines of "I'm the real victim. The communist left brainwashed my soon-to-be ex-wife. This is a hit job by the elites to try to stop me. I'm getting divorced for YOU." and they'll lap it up.

- - - Updated - - -

perhaps my opinion on the Republican Party actually valuing families is a touch outdated.

They elected Trump. Who cheated on multiple wives, made horrible comments about women, and has now been found liable for sexual assualt.

And his support within the GOP remains.

I'm not sure why this is such a blind spot for you when you are normally sharp with the analysis. The GOP is family value is name only. They are the FVNO party.

EDIT: Just want to add the current iteration of "family values" means being anti-LBGT and anti-abortion. Full stop. They couldn't possibly care less about anything else.

[Breccia]

Why? You really think Cult45 will care?

No.

I think the rest of the Republican Party will. I think they've been looking for the exit ramp for a while now, and just need an excuse. The fact that FOX/RNC held the debates without Trump anyhow, and asked about Trump while he wasn't there to defend himself, and that his support is still high but shrinking, backs that. Whether Melania leaving mid-campaign would be the exit ramp they're looking for, or whether they'll hope they have enough gas to make it to the next one, is something we might never find out.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump due in court Sept 6 for his full arraignment. Looks like all his co-defendants will go the same day in 15-minute windows.

[Endus]

This Philadelphia Inquirer OP ED raises an interesting option: the person most likely to pardon Trump...would be President Joe Biden.

So, here's the chain of logic:
a) a President pardoning himself has no guarantee of success. Three days before Nixon resigned, his own DoJ said "no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself". It has, of course, never been challenged, but Nixon sure believed it.
b) conditions can be attached to pardons. Nixon himself did it with Jimmy Hoffa, pardoning him on the requirement he didn't run for (Teamster) president. Hoffa sued to break the requirement, and lost.
c) the current GOP runners can't do it, because they're not President. And half the field doesn't seem all that eager to do so.
d) Trump is a craven coward, like his followers who refuse to post here, unable to defend their support of a felon and a traitor but wanting to vote for him anyhow.
e) Trump's primary goal of running is to benefit himself, and Trump thinks everything comes down to a deal.

Now, the theory is not perfect. Trump could roll the dice, and other GOP candidates could pledge an unconditional pardon. But the theory seems to be that, if Biden offered a sure thing instead of a gamble or (gasp!) that Trump trust that someone else will keep their word, Trump would take that sure thing as soon as it was clear he was going to lose the election anyhow.

I hate the idea, and I hope it doesn't come up. Trump is flaking on the remaining debates and the risk of the Republican Party splitting grows by the day. I think the status quo has him losing and not getting pardoned, my preferred outcome no question. But I think the theory has some merit.

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

Trump would probably take it. He can back some candidate as his effective avatar.

Biden would lose all credibility and demolish whatever legacy he's trying to build for himself. If it happens before the 2024 election, I can nearly guarantee Biden loses to whatever fascist fuckwit the Republicans put up.

- - - Updated - - -

No.

I think the rest of the Republican Party will. I think they've been looking for the exit ramp for a while now, and just need an excuse. The fact that FOX/RNC held the debates without Trump anyhow, and asked about Trump while he wasn't there to defend himself, and that his support is still high but shrinking, backs that. Whether Melania leaving mid-campaign would be the exit ramp they're looking for, or whether they'll hope they have enough gas to make it to the next one, is something we might never find out.

I don't believe there is an effective "rest of the Republican Party". Nearly everyone at that debate stated overtly they'd support Trump for President even if he was convicted. The only two who didn't were Hutchinson and Christie. According to 538; https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...2024/national/

The two of them have a combined polling rate of 4.5% support. Christie's a whopping #6, and Hutchinson may as well not exist.

[Muzjhath]

This Philadelphia Inquirer OP ED raises an interesting option: the person most likely to pardon Trump...would be President Joe Biden.

So, here's the chain of logic:
a) a President pardoning himself has no guarantee of success. Three days before Nixon resigned, his own DoJ said "no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself". It has, of course, never been challenged, but Nixon sure believed it.
b) conditions can be attached to pardons. Nixon himself did it with Jimmy Hoffa, pardoning him on the requirement he didn't run for (Teamster) president. Hoffa sued to break the requirement, and lost.
c) the current GOP runners can't do it, because they're not President. And half the field doesn't seem all that eager to do so.
d) Trump is a craven coward, like his followers who refuse to post here, unable to defend their support of a felon and a traitor but wanting to vote for him anyhow.
e) Trump's primary goal of running is to benefit himself, and Trump thinks everything comes down to a deal.

Now, the theory is not perfect. Trump could roll the dice, and other GOP candidates could pledge an unconditional pardon. But the theory seems to be that, if Biden offered a sure thing instead of a gamble or (gasp!) that Trump trust that someone else will keep their word, Trump would take that sure thing as soon as it was clear he was going to lose the election anyhow.

I hate the idea, and I hope it doesn't come up. Trump is flaking on the remaining debates and the risk of the Republican Party splitting grows by the day. I think the status quo has him losing and not getting pardoned, my preferred outcome no question. But I think the theory has some merit.

What do you think? If Biden gave Trump a pardon, conditioned on him leaving the race and staying out, would Trump take it?

If it did happen I fucking hope bloody fucking everyone in the US went and overthrew the government and called a constitutional convention after pulling out the guilliotine.

It'd be such a gross misscarriage of justice.

[Breccia]

I don't believe there is an effective "rest of the Republican Party".

Not by polling data, but I'm still drawing a line between Greene and McConnell.

[Kaleredar]

Not by polling data, but I'm still drawing a line between Greene and McConnell.

It’s a distinction that doesn’t matter when it comes to president. They will all still congeal around the nominee, even if it’s trump.

Sure, McConnell wants a more controllable person than trump. But he’ll still begrudgingly accept trump over the notion of losing outright, which currently is the alternative. None of them have the balls to oppose trump, let alone collectively, and the gop writ large has been conditioned to feed on manufactured, nebulous fear for the democrats and “the left.” Far more than they might individually disapprove of trump’s various “indiscretions.”

[Edge-]

It's funny because Republicans think they're appealing to Black voters and viewers with their racism.

[Breccia]

Speaking of culty Evangelicals, a top official in the Southern Baptist Convention says that a lot of pastors are becoming concerned that the Trumpists are rejecting the teachings of Christ:
https://www.npr.org/2023/08/08/11926...p-christianity

UPDATE: Russell Moore gains support as another public religious figure agrees.

"Well, unless it's the Pope it barely matters."

...


"Oh, god dammit."

It is, indeed, the Pope. Or "the New Pope" for those of you who watch Helsing Abridged.

Francis made the comments in a private meeting with Portuguese members of his Jesuit religious order while visiting Lisbon on Aug. 5; the Jesuit journal La Civilta Cattolica, which is vetted by the Vatican secretariat of state, published a transcript of the encounter Monday.

During the meeting, a Portuguese Jesuit told Francis that he had suffered during a recent sabbatical year in the United States because he came across many Catholics, including some U.S. bishops, who criticized Francis’ 10-year papacy as well as today’s Jesuits.

The 86-year-old Argentine acknowledged his point, saying there was “a very strong, organized, reactionary attitude” in the U.S. church, which he called “backward.” He warned that such an attitude leads to a climate of closure, which was erroneous.

“Doing this, you lose the true tradition and you turn to ideologies to have support. In other words, ideologies replace faith,” he said.

“The vision of the doctrine of the church as a monolith is wrong,” he added. “When you go backward, you make something closed off, disconnected from the roots of the church,” which then has devastating effects on morality.

“I want to remind these people that backwardness is useless, and they must understand that there’s a correct evolution in the understanding of questions of faith and morals,” that allows for doctrine to progress and consolidate over time.

Anyone trying the "I know Christianity better than the Pope" can just fuck right off right now. Not only is he a trained scholar on the subject and they're not, the Pope is effectively God's word on Earth. If you disagree, you're wrong.

Further update:

No, seriously. What the actual fuck? How did it come to this? How are we here? What IS this?

This poll led to this article, explaining (or attempting to) how this came to pass. I'll jump to the heart of it: cults have a sense of community, which is not what makes them a cult, just a requirement to attract and keep people. What makes it a cult is how dangerous and unhealthy that community is. The binding force in this case seems to be "Daddy didn't love me". Trump was not loved by his father, we nearly have objective proof of that. Trump's cult is drawn by that shared lack of being loved, but this lack of being loved in turn comes from being objectively horrible people. Trump is effectively the hyperbolic televangelist, telling people who have holes in their lives that they can at least help someone else by giving them all their money. This doesn't work on sane, healthy people.

What we need is more of the classic conservative part of the GOP admit it. It's happening, but not enough. Joe Walsh is not running for anything and can therefore speak his mind without consequences.

Former Republican Rep. Joe Walsh compared Trump to a “cult leader” and described the GOP as “a cult” in the wake of Trump’s surrendering on criminal charges for a fourth time. “This is not a normal political party,” Walsh told MSNBC’s Symone Sanders-Townsend on Sunday. “Donald Trump is a cult leader. He's become a martyr. Every indictment, every trial Symone, only strengthens him within Republican voters.”

“Overwhelmingly, the nomination is his,” Walsh said of Trump, who continues to poll well ahead of his Republican challengers for the GOP nomination in 2024. “And I worry and I fear that even in a general election it may help him. Imagine if he's acquitted or imagine if there's a hung jury on one of these trials. The possibilities scare me and should scare all of us.”

This is the divide I keep coming back to. There are people in the Republican Party who oppose Trump. I just wish there were more of them that mattered, specifically, enough to split the party in 2024 (possibly aided by a guilty finding) and force them to reflect on the consequences while staring down the barrel of a landslide loss. Because as much as Trump has hurt classic conservatives, they haven't abandoned him yet, and they're running out of time to do so and yet recover.

Speaking of guilty finding, Jack Smith goes to court March 4. If y'all remember, Trump asked for a date in April. Of 2026. The judge instead put the court date right before Super Tuesday. I don't think she was amused.

Chutkan said that Trump will have to prioritize the trial and that she wouldn't change the trial schedule based upon another defendant's professional obligations, say, for a professional athlete.

The public has an interest in the fair and timely administration of justice, Chutkan said. Trump's lawyer said that going to trial next year would violate the former president's rights, noting the millions of pages of discovery that prosecutors have turned over.

Earlier in the hearing, Chutkan said that while the special counsel team's proposal was too soon, Trump's proposal of 2026 wasn't reasonable. “Discovery in 2023 is not sitting in a warehouse with boxes of paper looking at every single page,” Chutkan said.

“This case is not going to trial in 2026,” Chutkan said. She pointed out that Trump's team has had time to prepare already; the public has known about the existence of the grand jury investigating Trump since September 2022 and the identity of many of the witnesses has been known.

In response, Trump's lawyer called it a "show trial" and said he couldn't be ready in time. The judge noted that for the record, and ignored it.

The consequences of Trump's many public trials for his many public offenses seem to have actually caught up with him and hurt him this time. Considering the very real threat of the Mar-a-Lago case, the one in which Trump has no defense and the evidence of his objective guilt is public, I expect his lawyers to attempt everything they can to move or delay this, but I don't think it'll work. The date is a full three months after Agent Smith's asked date already, discovery has already been presented, and "I'm not ready" isn't something that should work on a trial of this magnitude. Get ready, fuckers.

"But it's 12.8 million pages!"

Wow, sounds like Trump has a real problem, huh? He should get working on that. Maybe focus on not going to jail, instead of running for office? Also, 12.8 million is one page per person who watched the FOX News debate. That's a coincidence, I just thought it was interesting.

Incidentally, Trump's NY trial begins March 25. Yes, Trump's lawyers brought up how many trials Trump was in when trying to get a better court date. No, it didn't work. The easiest way to get out of being in so many criminal trials is to not commit so many crimes. If you ignore that option, you lose the court's good graces anyhow.

[Lenonis]

I think the rest of the Republican Party will.

I again gently remind you that it's a cult, not a political party at this point. The Republican Party lost control of their voters when they let Trump rise to prominence in the party. If they turn on Trump now they won't torpedo Trump. They'll just get themselves labeled as RINOs or worse and find themselves swept out of the primaries by angry Trump voters.

There is literally nothing anyone can do about Trump's campaign run other than Trump himself. It's too late.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone trying the "I know Christianity better than the Pope" can just fuck right off right now. Not only is he a trained scholar on the subject and they're not, the Pope is effectively God's word on Earth. If you disagree, you're wrong.

A minor but significant point especially when it comes to this intersecting with politics is that the Pope is the lead authority on Catholicism not Christianity. The US evangelicals (which are a force in US politics) don't even recognize catholicism as Christianity for the most part.

[The Stormbringer]

This hurts to say, but right now I'm pinning all my hopes on our legal system and Trump actually getting fucked repeatedly by his own criminal actions. Maybe, just maybe, multiple convictions will be enough so that he doesn't win the next election...

[Bluespiderman57]

I especially love how Judge Chutkan responded when Trump's lawyer said they would not have enough time to go through all the documents.

Trump attorney John Lauro argued that the date was unfair to the former president. "We will certainly abide by your honor's ruling, as we must. We will not be able to provide adequate representation ... the trial date will deny President Trump the opportunity to have effective assistance of counsel," he said, according to Politico's Kyle Cheney. Chutkan agreed that Trump needs more than five months to prepare, referring to the DOJ's recommendation, but said that the date proposed by Trump is "far" too long, arguing that the public has a right to a speedy trial in the case. "Mr. Trump is represented by a team of zealous, experienced attorneys. And has the resources necessary to review the discovery… I've seen many cases delayed because the defendant lacks adequate representation. That is not the case here," Chutkan said, according to CBS News' Scott MacFarlane.

It reminds me of that scene from the second PotC movie. "What do you mean you don't have time to review the discovery? Can't you just hire more people? Have you not introduced yourself, all these years, as Billionaire Donald J. Trump?

[jeezusisacasual]

This hurts to say, but right now I'm pinning all my hopes on our legal system and Trump actually getting fucked repeatedly by his own criminal actions. Maybe, just maybe, multiple convictions will be enough so that he doesn't win the next election...

Lets assume he does not face charges or is held accountable for his actions would he if he wins the next election start becoming even more more fascist? Would it cause a scorched earth style on the American public? As an outsider looking in at America it seems that we would see a massive change in the global western order because it seems nothing will stop his base from glorifying him as a martyr. One would think that mocking someone who is disabled and openly talking about groping a woman or worse peeking in dressing rooms would have ended the " Faithful " right wing following but it only emboldened them which leads me to think that they wish they could behave like he does and supports him out of that lust.

[Breccia]

"Mr. Trump is represented by a team of zealous, experienced attorneys. And has the resources necessary to review the discovery"

I can't help but notice she didn't call them good lawyers.

Trump has a proven history of firing lawyers who didn't make the impossible come true. He might have the resources, but I'm not convinced that'll turn into manpower. There are demonstrably fewer and fewer people willing to put The Scarlet L on their permanent record for an objectively guilty traitor who won't pay them.

Team Trump could try to wait until the very last minute (again) and ask for a delay (again) but I would advise them to not rely on that. The judge really doesn't seem interested in humoring that. Honestly, the smart move here might be to wait until the last minute, then quit. I mean, they weren't going to get paid either way, but leaving Trump without a lawyer might actually get him an extension.