Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/1...antis-00066820

Bad news for Trump, seems that losing three elections really was the breaking point for conservatives.

Club for Growth is showing polling on potential 2024 candidates with DeSantis ahead of Trump by double digits.

https://twitter.com/theipaper/status...e9KMF1AYw&s=19

In other news, and I'm not familiar with this outlet so I'm eating a bit of salt as I type this, apparently Murdoch is totally done with Trump. Like, completely done. His myriad news publications will no longer support Trump, and if it comes down to it will even back a Democrat over Trump.

Again, grains of salt here since I'm trying to find more verification for this report.

If it's true though, the common wisdom would be that Trump "retires" from politics and hopes he fades into obscurity rather than goes to prison.

But given that it's Trump...I'm absolutely expecting him to throw a temper tantrum for a while before running anyways because he is the Great and Powerful Trump, and he did this all on his own and without any help or support from anyone and he's gonna beat them to show them he's the real winner.

I really hope he does that, actually.

[gondrin]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/1...antis-00066820

Bad news for Trump, seems that losing three elections really was the breaking point for conservatives.

Club for Growth is showing polling on potential 2024 candidates with DeSantis ahead of Trump by double digits.

https://twitter.com/theipaper/status...e9KMF1AYw&s=19

In other news, and I'm not familiar with this outlet so I'm eating a bit of salt as I type this, apparently Murdoch is totally done with Trump. Like, completely done. His myriad news publications will no longer support Trump, and if it comes down to it will even back a Democrat over Trump.

Again, grains of salt here since I'm trying to find more verification for this report.

If it's true though, the common wisdom would be that Trump "retires" from politics and hopes he fades into obscurity rather than goes to prison.

But given that it's Trump...I'm absolutely expecting him to throw a temper tantrum for a while before running anyways because he is the Great and Powerful Trump, and he did this all on his own and without any help or support from anyone and he's gonna beat them to show them he's the real winner.

I really hope he does that, actually.

So, what the hell is Carlson going to do if Murdock basically tells him he has to push an Anti-Trump message? Or Hannity since he is best buds with him.

[Kaleredar]

So, what the hell is Carlson going to do if Murdock basically tells him he has to push an Anti-Trump message? Or Hannity since he is best buds with him.

Murdock pays their bills, so they'll do what he says. These spineless vultures follow the money, plain and simple.

[Poopymonster]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/1...antis-00066820

Bad news for Trump, seems that losing three elections really was the breaking point for conservatives.

Club for Growth is showing polling on potential 2024 candidates with DeSantis ahead of Trump by double digits.

https://twitter.com/theipaper/status...e9KMF1AYw&s=19

In other news, and I'm not familiar with this outlet so I'm eating a bit of salt as I type this, apparently Murdoch is totally done with Trump. Like, completely done. His myriad news publications will no longer support Trump, and if it comes down to it will even back a Democrat over Trump.

Again, grains of salt here since I'm trying to find more verification for this report.

If it's true though, the common wisdom would be that Trump "retires" from politics and hopes he fades into obscurity rather than goes to prison.

But given that it's Trump...I'm absolutely expecting him to throw a temper tantrum for a while before running anyways because he is the Great and Powerful Trump, and he did this all on his own and without any help or support from anyone and he's gonna beat them to show them he's the real winner.

I really hope he does that, actually.

Once the knives come out, who/what/when will the good shit come out? The cut parts of interviews and Trump messages bragging about shit? His ego would force him to be best when talking bigly yuge to Fox.

[Fugus]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/1...antis-00066820

Bad news for Trump, seems that losing three elections really was the breaking point for conservatives.

Club for Growth is showing polling on potential 2024 candidates with DeSantis ahead of Trump by double digits.

https://twitter.com/theipaper/status...e9KMF1AYw&s=19

In other news, and I'm not familiar with this outlet so I'm eating a bit of salt as I type this, apparently Murdoch is totally done with Trump. Like, completely done. His myriad news publications will no longer support Trump, and if it comes down to it will even back a Democrat over Trump.

Again, grains of salt here since I'm trying to find more verification for this report.

If it's true though, the common wisdom would be that Trump "retires" from politics and hopes he fades into obscurity rather than goes to prison.

But given that it's Trump...I'm absolutely expecting him to throw a temper tantrum for a while before running anyways because he is the Great and Powerful Trump, and he did this all on his own and without any help or support from anyone and he's gonna beat them to show them he's the real winner.

I really hope he does that, actually.

All I can say is I REALLY hope to see Trump lash out at this and in his spiteful nature do everything he can to take them all down with him. I can see him actually putting himself in more legal jeopardy just to take them down with him if they burn him like that. Earned or not, he will see it as them betraying them.

God I would love to find out he had material on them that could put them in major legal hot water.

Maybe see him break out proof that he sent in people to Florida to bail DeSantis out and that the guys who outed him on the IRS was only doing so to save themselves from being roped in on their efforts to overturn that election as well.

Edit:

Or proof that Fox hosts had firsthand knowledge of his illegal doings with Murdock knowing and keeping it silent.

[Breccia]

His myriad news publications will no longer support Trump, and if it comes down to it will even back a Democrat over Trump.

Honestly, we might never know if that's true. Murdoch and the classic Republicans combined will likely form a cabal to Bernie Sanders ol' Trump in the primaries.

[Poopymonster]

All I can say is I REALLY hope to see Trump lash out at this and in his spiteful nature do everything he can to take them all down with him. I can see him actually putting himself in more legal jeopardy just to take them down with him if they burn him like that. Earned or not, he will see it as them betraying them.

God I would love to find out he had material on them that could put them in major legal hot water.

Maybe see him break out proof that he sent in people to Florida to bail DeSantis out and that the guys who outed him on the IRS was only doing so to save themselves from being roped in on their efforts to overturn that election as well.

Edit:

Or proof that Fox hosts had firsthand knowledge of his illegal doings with Murdock knowing and keeping it silent.

Who knows what wonders and treasures were taken from Mar-A-Lardo.

[Fugus]

Who knows what wonders and treasures were taken from Mar-A-Lardo.

The proof with him and DeSantis, I can definitely see and hope they got a hold of that.
The proof of Tucker and Company with Murdock's knowledge, if that exists I bet it would be stored somewhere else.

But this is a guy who kept his own call logs he was trying to hide in it, so never underestimate stupidity when it comes to that man. Still have to wonder who's name showed up on that list enough to make him want to keep it, maybe Clarence's wife.

[Paranoid Android]

New report: During Trump's presidency, the governments of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Turkey, China and Malaysia spent hundreds of thousands of dollars at Trump's D.C. Hotel at the same time they were trying to influence U.S. foreign policy.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...oaA7ibwdg&s=19

$750k total and usually purchased $10k rooms. Saudi Ministry of Defense spent $85k including the $10k suites one week March. When Saudi and UAE were lobbying for blockade of Qatar. Qatar then spent $307,941 at Trump hotel.

Gee if only we had some sort of clause for this. Of course in our corrupt the way we let Trump operate this may be okay unless Trump made it a requirement.

No doubt Trumpers don't care.

[

[Breccia]

Trump missed his deadline.

In a joint statement from Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), the panel bashed Trump for filing a lawsuit Friday challenging the subpoena, accusing him of “hiding” after he was compelled to appear for testimony Monday.

“Even though the former President initially suggested that he would testify before the committee, he has since filed a lawsuit asking the courts to protect him from giving testimony. His attorneys have made no attempt to negotiate an appearance of any sort, and his lawsuit parades out many of the same arguments that courts have rejected repeatedly over the last year,” the two said in a statement.

“The truth is that Donald Trump, like several of his closest allies, is hiding from the Select Committee’s investigation and refusing to do what more than a thousand other witnesses have done,” they added.

Trump has successfully outlasted the House panel for any reasonable testimony he might give, but they did sneak in a subpoena in time, and he did ignore it. The Jan 6th panel should hand that to the DoJ and say "Bannon his ass".

"Surely SCOTUS will declare the matter moot when the GOP nulls the investigation."

Based on precedent, yes, but it has to get to them first. The Jan 6th panel can still make Trump's life miserable until that happens. More importantly, right now, they're boxing up everything they have and getting ready to hand it directly to Garland. Once a special prosecutor hits the ground running, SCOTUS won't be able to declare the matter moot.

- - - Updated - - -

Kemp will testify in Georgia, now that he's no longer running for election.

Gov. Brian Kemp will testify Tuesday morning before the Fulton County special grand jury examining whether former President Donald Trump and his allies criminally meddled in Georgia’s 2020 elections, according to two sources with knowledge of the appearance.

The Republican, who cruised to re-election last week, is among the most high-profile witnesses to testify before the 23-person grand jury. His blockbuster appearance represents a hard-fought victory for the Fulton County District Attorney’s office, which has been angling for Kemp’s testimony for a year-and-a-half.

In late August, the governor had been directed by Fulton Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney to appear before the grand jury “some date soon after” the election.

Kemp is a central witness to the investigation, which Willis launched in Feb. 2021. The grand jury was seated in May to help her compile evidence and testimony.

Unlike Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, whose Jan. 2, 2021 conversation with Trump was recorded, the details of Kemp’s behind-the-scenes interactions with the commander-in-chief are largely unknown.

Fulton prosecutors previously said they’re interested in questioning Kemp about the identities of the people who tried to get in touch with him following the 2020 elections; the contents of phone calls Kemp had with Trump or his associates; evidence the Trump campaign provided in support of its theory that Georgia’s election was rigged; whether Trump specifically sought a special election or other relief; and any threats that might have been made.

Kemp is “uniquely knowledgeable about the election interference matters being investigated by the grand jury since he was personally involved in the conversations at issue,” Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor advising the grand jury, said in an August court filing.

With his re-election campaign behind him — a victory he secured without Trump’s help — it’s possible Kemp could be more open to answering questions from jurors and prosecutors.

Kemp is a classic Republican, and very likely has every reason to want Trump out of his party. But he also has every reason to stick to the truth. I do not believe there will be a conflict here. Kemp has pushed back on the subpoena for a variety of reasons, but I honestly think he just wanted to win re-election before turning on Trump -- and, gosh, if Trump isn't blood in the water right now.

- - - Updated - - -

When you spend your life working for Trump Org, you're taught how to value you own self-interests. It should not surprise anyone that Trump Org execs will immediately testify in self-serving self-saving ways, rather than think of the good of the company.

...it miiiiiiiiiiiiight have something to do with how expendable they know they are.

Senior Vice President and Controller Jeffrey McConney told jurors at the Trump Organization’s criminal tax fraud trial that he didn’t see much upside if he ratted on longtime finance chief Allen Weisselberg or operations chief Matthew Calamari Sr., two of Trump’s most trusted, loyal lieutenants.

“I thought if I started refusing or fighting back, I’d probably lose my job,” McConney said near the end of a sometimes contentious fourth day of testimony — a lengthy warm-up act for Weisselberg’s looming turn as the prosecution’s star witness.

“Allen was my boss. Who was I going to tell? I wasn’t going to confront him with it. I wasn’t going to argue,” McConney said at another point in his testimony. “I was going to do what he told me to do.”

McConney said Weisselberg and Calamari Sr. leaned on him over the years to fudge payroll records to hide extras such as Manhattan apartments and Mercedes-Benz cars from their taxable income, in part by reducing their salaries by the cost of those perks and issuing falsified W-2 forms.

McConney said Weisselberg, his supervisor, once even had him set his wife up with a one-time $6,000 payroll check for a no-show job at the company so she could qualify for Social Security benefits. He said Weisselberg warned him not to tell others in the company about what they were doing.

“Allen Weisselberg did not want other people at the company to know this secret,” McConney said.

"Sounds like he's a willing participant."

Most likely, yes. I don't think he's sorry he broke the law, I think he's sorry he got caught by proxy. That said, he's trying desperately to save himself...and it's working.

Judge Juan Manuel Merchan declared McConney a hostile witness after prosecutors complained that he had been far more responsive to defense questioning, even though he was granted immunity to testify as a prosecution witness.

McConney, who still works for the Trump Organization and has a company-paid lawyer, acknowledged on the witness stand Monday that he's been speaking with company lawyers about his testimony when court wasn’t in session. He said he even performed some tax calculations on their behalf Sunday night.

“I think it is pretty clear to the average observer, he is very helpful to you (the defense),” Merchan said. “On the other hand, it seems like he has a really hard time understanding the people’s questions and he has a hard time, frankly, giving credible answers.”

McConney is scheduled to return to the witness stand on Tuesday. As a hostile witness, he could be subject to several more hours of questioning as prosecutors seek to square his previous trial testimony and his answers to questions during eight grand jury appearances in the last few years.

That immunity better have a take-back clause if, for example, he gives no useful evidence in any way. Remember, Trump Org is the defendant. He works there, his lawyer is from there, he has no real interest in them being destroyed. The AG needs to force McConney to decide if the company is worth jail time for those crimes he committed. Of which there is documentation.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass seized on McConney’s reluctance to tell Trump, questioning him on what’s known as re-direct examination — a chance for him to ask more questions after the defense’s cross-examination.

“You falsified W-2s, you invented an employee and gave her a W-2 for work she didn’t perform,” Steinglass asked. “Did you ever bring this to Donald Trump’s attention and say, ‘the CFO is making me commit a fraud … I’m uncomfortable doing this.’”

“No,” McConney said.

[Edge-]

Man, that immunity deal should be off the table if homeboy is gonna lose his spine whenever asked questions in public.

Want immunity? Do the thing you said you were too afraid to do because you enjoyed the paycheck you were receiving and didn't think there was anyone to report wrongdoing to other than your boss. It's not like there are multiple law enforcement agencies that would have loved to hear about this.

What an absolute fuckin loser.

[Breccia]

What an absolute fuckin loser.

I'm willing to believe that the NY AG and staff involved are not going to give him a blanket immunity deal with no strings attached. And as that article suggested, he's given other statements before. I would like to believe that, even if he has a questionably good immunity deal, that no plea deal covers perjury. Because, you know, kinda defeats the point. If he makes two statements under oath that contradict, that's a problem. I would also like to believe that his deal is also revoked if he lies on the stand.

[cubby]

Agreed, Garland doesn't want even the appearance of politics, even in a case such as "Vice President Harris carjacks a minivan on CNN's live feed". Trump will be asked, politely, to come fill out a deposition personally. Trump will refuse. Then one day, a dozen men in black suits will be between the 15th and 16th holes, so Ivana can see Trump led away in handcuffs.

- - - Updated - - -

In a filing that surprised me, at least, Trump lawyers tell the "special master" that Trump made the stolen items his own personal property by just taking them when he left.

So, basically, now that we have proof Trump directed the packing personally, they're left with "Okay fine he did it, but it was legal". Simply by virtue of taking them with him, the in-court filing claims, Trump made them personal and not WH property.

I believe I have the DOJ counter-argument here...



Okay okay I have the real response here.



Trump's lawyers are claiming that Trump didn't need to declare anything, anything. He could just do whatever he wanted, and the law would make what he did legal. That's not how the law works. Like, very specifically, this law, and the declassification thing that still hasn't come up...has it? Did I miss when Trump said, under oath, that he declassified anything? Or is it the same "I don't have to prove it" garbage?

The DOJ also used the term "shell game" exact words, to describe what Trump is doing. First, they're trying to argue that Trump didn't steal because it was his own personal property, in a way that fits the facts -- namely, that no evidence of Trump doing anything other than stealing exists. When that fails, they'll claim Executive Privilege. This could explain why the DOJ wants Trump to sign off on the evidence list. Maybe. Not sure, to be honest.



"I didn't know I had them." Ah, is Trump really going to try the "It's not mine, officer, I'm holding it for a friend", a doobie-ous attempt at best?

Now like I said, this filing surprised me. Yes, I know what's left of Trump's lawyers who haven't been arrested or disbarred are throwing every handful of feces Trump gives them at the courthouse walls and seeing what sticks. Maybe they would have gotten to this eventually.

But, and please @cubby correct me if I'm wrong, but...isn't this filing, under oath, Trump's admission he took them? Like, admission of guilt, literally? I mean, say what you want about "the FBI planted them", it's bullshit and you should get held in contempt for that shit, but at least it's not admission Trump stole directly from the WH.

In any event, even for a team as desperate as they are, I just don't see the benefit here. "It was legal for Trump to take them" is an affirmative defense, if I'm using that correctly. As Trump signed no record to the effect of claiming the items as his own personal property (if he did, it would have been introduced into evidence by now) they're trying a defense which is based on the lack of records -- even though that's the opposite of how the laws in question work. Team Trump will need to show legal precedent that what Trump is now claiming he did is allowed, and I'm just going to say, I don't believe such exists.

I could not find Trump's court filings -- I swear I looked. I found the DOJ's response but I cannot 100% prove from that that Trump asserted no law, no precedent, other than "It was legal because I'm Trump". But in that DOJ filing I just linked, they rebutt Trump's argument six times in three pages. Five of those six cite precedent. The last one simply says "see above" so it's basically 6-for-6 anyhow.

But I like the last two.

The fifth, the DOJ says "Trump should be required to file a declaration of affidavit regarding the government's inventory as set forth by etc etc" which is a direct reference to that other filing I mentioned earlier.

The sixth, the DOJ says that because 2800 of the 2900 items weren't called any kind of privilege, then the ban on reading those should be lifted. This is, of course, a direct referral to the "shell game". Rather than waiting for the "special master" to rule one way so they can claim the other, the DOJ is claiming Trump palmed the ball, and that there aren't any protected items at all. Enough stalling, they refused to put up, now they must shut up.

Oh, and the DOJ cite cases Nixon lost, and redacted multiple pages of inventory. These are both bad signs for Trump. Not only is bringing up Nixon bad, because Nixon's the closest we've had to this issue and Nixon lost, but redactions mean we still have classified info in play, which Trump isn't allowed to have in his unsecured basement.

- - - Updated - - -

The House Oversight Committee reports that Trump, while in the WH, directly took $750,000 from foreign governments. Because they stayed at the most expensive rooms -- Trump's.

An elected official taking money directly from someone is called "bribery". Foreign nationals aren't allowed to give money to US political causes. But, hey, at least the UAE were smart enough to keep the receipt.

Yeah, it's a little surprising they used this gambit, because it automatically admits that he took them. Now, there are going to be issues of intent and Presidential Documents bullshit argued, however, the issue of Trump taking them is now crystal clear.

This is vaguely similar to the insanity defense in a murder trial. It's an all-or-nothing gambit.

[Poopymonster]

Yeah, it's a little surprising they used this gambit, because it automatically admits that he took them. Now, there are going to be issues of intent and Presidential Documents bullshit argued, however, the issue of Trump taking them is now crystal clear.

This is vaguely similar to the insanity defense in a murder trial. It's an all-or-nothing gambit.

You mean a stall-or-nothing gambit. He's still hoping post-election they can skupper the Jan 6th committee.

[Breccia]

You mean a stall-or-nothing gambit. He's still hoping post-election they can skupper the Jan 6th committee.

The Jan 6th panel is not involved in the Mar-a-Lago raid.

[Poopymonster]

The Jan 6th panel is not involved in the Mar-a-Lago raid.

All the documents they retrieved in Mar-A-Lardo, good chances something there is connected. Missing phone logs for the hours of the terrorist attack on the capital for example.

Wouldn't be a complete win, but it's something he can throw the cultists to keep him personally as their biglyest and yugest winner ever.

His ego would require nothing less.

[Breccia]

Pence continues his very low-energy rebuke of Trump, the man who tried to murder him in public.

“Do you believe that Donald Trump should ever be president again?” ABC’s David Muir asked Pence.

“David, I think that’s up to the American people,” Pence responded. “But I think we’ll have better choices in the future.”

“People in this country actually get along pretty well once you get out of politics,” Pence told Muir. “And I think they want to see their national leader start to reflect that same, that same compassion and generosity of spirit. And I think, so in the days ahead, I think there will be better choices.”

Also:

“Will you run for president in 2024?” Muir asked Pence.

“We’re giving it consideration in our house,” Pence replied. “Prayerful consideration.”

No, he's not running. He has a worse chance than Trump. But, man, that'd be an interesting debate to watch.

[Shadowferal]

I'm curious to see if Jared and Ivanka join Trump onstage when he announces his run.

[Breccia]

I'm curious to see if Jared and Ivanka join Trump onstage when he announces his run.

Let's not be too surprised if he doesn't announce a WH run. He delayed after the midterms on purpose: to give himself an out rather than commit to being a loser again.

[Shadowferal]

Let's not be too surprised if he doesn't announce a WH run. He delayed after the midterms on purpose: to give himself an out rather than commit to being a loser again.

...ooh, but his ego has ever been his weakness. I would be very surprised if he conceded to 2nd fiddle.
McConnell...DeSantis...even Pence, need to be put into their place.