Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[masterhorus8]

District Attorney Alvin Bragg is currently weighing whether to proceed with an indictment against former President Donald Trump for alleged hush money payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016.

He better fucking do it.

[Draco-Onis]

He better fucking do it.

He may as well hand in his resignation if he doesn't since the optics and precedent would be really awful.

[cubby]

That's a harsh accusation. It's along the lines of saying a cop planted a gun on an innocent man. If there was even a shred of evidence of this, Team Trump would have brought it to court already, because that shit's not allowed.
@cubby will explain, but prosecutors can't do that, and some random nameless asshole on TikTok didn't magically find out about something Trump's defense didn't know. The end.

In general prosecutors have to share all their evidence with the defense. Not doing so and being found out typically results in a reversed conviction (or more).

For this case, in which for the first time we are about to bring a formed President on criminal charges, you can bet the lead team is literally following every single rule in the book - to the letter. And if I were running the team, I would a second group of prosecutors playing the Red Team (the Defense), and having them "receive" and "respond" to all incoming documents and evidence and etc.

So it's highly unlikely that there is a pile of evidence out there exonerating Trump - much less sitting in the prosecutor's office being withheld. And as @postman1782 pointed out, most of this is coming from fake news sites. I'm sure Fox will run it shortly.

No one, anywhere, wants to get this wrong.

[postman1782]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pac...-investigation

Yes, the source is intentional.



Oh boy.

The comments on that article aren't unsurprising. People are claiming he did it to himself like Jussie Smollett.

[Edge-]

The comments on that article aren't unsurprising. People are claiming he did it to himself like Jussie Smollett.

I've almost had a mind to make an account there to see how quickly I'd get banned for simply posting factually accurate links. Only took like 5 posts on the bastion of Freeze Peach that is /r/conservative

[postman1782]

I've almost had a mind to make an account there to see how quickly I'd get banned for simply posting factually accurate links. Only took like 5 posts on the bastion of Freeze Peach that is /r/conservative

I did better than that, I only posted one post there and got banned. I posted Trump lost in 2020 and they banned me right away.

- - - Updated - - -

In general prosecutors have to share all their evidence with the defense. Not doing so and being found out typically results in a reversed conviction (or more).

For this case, in which for the first time we are about to bring a formed President on criminal charges, you can bet the lead team is literally following every single rule in the book - to the letter. And if I were running the team, I would a second group of prosecutors playing the Red Team (the Defense), and having them "receive" and "respond" to all incoming documents and evidence and etc.

So it's highly unlikely that there is a pile of evidence out there exonerating Trump - much less sitting in the prosecutor's office being withheld. And as @postman1782 pointed out, most of this is coming from fake news sites. I'm sure Fox will run it shortly.

No one, anywhere, wants to get this wrong.

They were one of the other sites posting it on Fox Business.

[D Luniz]

https://twitter.com/keithedwards/sta...91071655616512

Trump, in another very calm ALL CAPS "TRUTH" complains that Alvin Bragg is a "SOROS BACKED ANIMAL" hitting on both antisemitism and racism at once.

I wonder when he's going to "truth" out some allcaps DO SOMETHING!!!! again.

no different than his lawyer conveniently mangling the phrase "Throwing a monkey-wrench in the works" to "I think I threw a wrench in their monkey works."
bigots gonna be bigots

[Breccia]

So what else has very stable genius Trump been up to?

1) This:



"Oh, he took time to pray, as such a devout Christian leader as Trump does often no doubt."

Count the fingers.

"...what the hell?"

That's an AI generated image. Trump had AI make a picture of him praying.

"Why didn't he just go pray and have someone take a picture?"

Hmm. What happened the last time Trump had a photo op at a church?

"Well, he gassed a bunch of...oh. Right."

Trump is not a Christian. Someone who worships themselves first and money second, someone who steals, commits adultery, who preaches hate, and who incites violence, is not following the teachings of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

"But Trump says he's a Christian."

And I say I'm fucking Sen. Graham's wife. Wake me when either one is true. Until then, this image is Trump's equivalent of masturbating in public, and the image is sickening.

2) Speaking of things which aren't appealling, Trump hasn't appealled the Corcoran decision, despite his clear and routine view that SCOTUS owes him. He's wrong, they don't, but he seems to think they do.

There is an interesting theory on the topic, and I'll yet again harass @cubby after hours to weigh in.

The issue, as we know, is evidence existing that Corcoran and Trump tried to use privilege to hide evidence of a crime. The evidence, so far, has been strong enough to break privilege then survive one challenge.

If Trump appeals this ruling to SCOTUS, SCOTUS has no choice but to review the evidence. Then, SCOTUS will know for a fact Trump is a criminal. While they haven't been 100% siding with him so far anyhow, this will be too far for even a rapist to side with. Team Trump could be hoping they bring the trial of the crime itself to SCOTUS, without having to bring this evidence to the table, leaving SCOTUS some room to free him despite, you know, all that stuff he did.

"Is that realistic?"

Since it's looking more and more like (a) there is objective evidence Trump is a felon and (b) Smith etc. will probably know this too and try to present the evidence anyhow, not very realistic, no. But if you're trapped in an elevator when the cable snaps and you're plunging to the basement, why not jump at the last second? Like, what choice do you have?

3) Heavily related: Corcoran testified for 3 hours and did not comment to the press afterwards.

Obviously it's sealed. But I think the length of the testimony, plus the fact that he didn't march up to the cameras and spew Trumpaganda, is telling.\

But it isn't just Corcoran.

A federal judge has rejected Trump's claims of executive privilege and has ordered Mark Meadows and other former top aides to testify before a federal grand jury investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, multiple sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.

Meadows, Trump's former chief of staff, was subpoenaed along with the other former aides by Special counsel Jack Smith for testimony and documents related to the probe.

Yeah, as a reminder, re-election campaigns are not WH business. (More on that in another thread shortly) Committing crimes is also not WH business. Unlike Corcoran, I expect Meadows to do nothing but take the 5th. He thinks he can get out of this. Corcoran knows he's well and truly Trumped.

Trump is also in court for...everything, let's be honest, he's in court for everything. But he's also arguing his "absolute immunity" bit again. Specifically, the DOJ has claimed that Trump's incitement for civilians to commit political violence...you know, terrorism...isn't standard WH actions and, therefore, Trump wasn't shielded when he told his violent cultists to commit terrorism. Team Trump is arguing "fight like hell" was metaphorical, and also, that Trump did eventually tell them to stand down.

Without condemning the attack.

Yeah...that's going to be a tough sell.

4) Remember this?

"federal officials have been unable to find a life-size painting of Trump given by the president of El Salvador"

UPDATE: We found the painting.

In the bowels of the Trump National Doral hotel in Miami, in a small space leading to electrical rooms, an enormous portrait of Trump rests on a piece of deteriorating purple-colored foam.

Stored next to a stack of old yoga mats, Trump’s portrait sits underneath a halogen light and the metal sheen of air ducts, propped between two doors with placards that read “ELECTRICAL ROOM No Storage.”

The tiny room is overwhelmed by the grandiose portrait, standing about eight feet tall and featuring a grinning Donald J. Trump.

While the hunt is still on for many of the missing items, The New York Times found the artwork only a few days after profiling the Salvadoran artist who painted it. After that article was published, a reader emailed a tip that he had seen the portrait at the hotel back in October.

The reader, who requested anonymity so he would not be barred from future visits to the hotel, said that he and his son had attended a golf tournament last fall at the Doral and decided to have a peek around the grandiose property. They began opening up random doors to discover ornate ballrooms, marble clad hallways and wooden furniture with golden filigree.

The Times sent a reporter to the Doral on Thursday to see if the portrait was still stored in this obscure spot. Yes, there it was, next to yoga mats piled up to one side and collecting dust. The purple foam patch the portrait is resting on, ostensibly to protect the gold frame, is starting to show some wear and tear, crumbling a bit onto the floor.

"Wait, if the portrait isn't at Mar-a-Lago, doesn't that mean stolen classified intel could als--"

Yes.

5) Three activists got #desantis2024 trending on CyberTrump 2077, all with the goal of forcing Trump to see that hashtag on his own platform.

At its peak, #Desantis2024 had more than 3,500 mentions on Truth Social. But as #Trump2024 began trending as a response, it soon overtook the former’s top spot under “Trending Topics” despite #Desantis2024’s having nearly double the traction. By Thursday, both hashtags had been bumped off the top-four trending list even as they continued to outperform every other hashtag.

6) And finally, in future news, Trump's rally later today is already looking to be a failure. Nobody is going to be there, with a few reasons given.
a) Some Republicans expressed that Trump's rally, during which he was likely to incite violence on the anniversary of the event Waco is best known for, suddenly remembered they had other plans. (Some people, including The Houston Chronicle, believe Trump is using the location and anniversary on purpose)
b) Other Republicans are just not willing to show Trump support while he's, you know, being investigated for everything.
c) And good ol' Mary Trump asked people to reserve a bunch of seats and then not show up.

[Breccia]

The Waco local newspaper reports on Trump's rally. And how the rally-goers are insane.

Tiffany Brooks, 38, from Riesel, said she likes that Trump is plainspoken.

“He says what is on his mind, and really doesn’t mind if what he says offends you,” Brooks said. “And he does what he says he will do.”

“When the mainstream media attack Trump, they attack us,” Waco businessman Daryl Smith said, referencing Trump backers as a group. “Look at this crowd. Biden couldn’t fill up a coffee shop. But they say he won the election. That’s ridiculous. The media slam Waco and defame Trump.”

“He deserves the four years he earned in the first place in 2020,” Diana Guajardo said. “More Hispanics support Trump than people realize.”

[Local] Restaurant [Uncle Worm's] employees delivered brisket sandwiches to Waco Police Department officers parked in the vicinity, while also offering $5 brisket sandwiches to motorists stuck in traffic on China Spring Road.

That last part is pretty cool.

Now, the newspaper went out of their way to avoid making crowd size guesses, other than "thousands". They did quote an anonymous local cop who suggested 15,000 baesd on his personal experience. Considering the rally started at 8AM and people came and left, he could be right.

But if you follow the link and look at the picture at the top, it's clear Trump did not get 15,000 people at his speech.

That audience seemse to be divided into wedges of bleachers, which I estimate to be 30 people across and 20 people deep, which therefore includes the ground-level seating. So, 600 per block. Based on the angles/wedges formed the way the picture is taken, I think there's six such wedges. That's 3,600 people.

Okay, but that's not Trump speaking yet. Scroll down to the second picture. There's a lot of people squeezed together...but the camera is zoomed in, as per usual. Even under the assumption that every single seat I counted before was now quadruple booked, even the ones off-camera (and not, oh I don't know, everyone being moved behind Trump to give the illusion of a packed crowd) and that's still not 15,000 yet. Also, anyone else notice how small the event is compared to some of his others? I know it's an airport and...hey why was it an airport? And not, like, a stadium? Anyhow, the venue feels small and cramped for such a hyped rally by the only Republican running. In Texas. Did Trump pick a small venue so that even a few people showing up would seem like a crowd? You know, the same overstuffing strategy he does with his shirts and suit jacket?

Also:

Trump arrived shortly before 6 p.m., his plane circling the airport as attendees intently looked to the heavens. He wrapped up at 7:32 in the evening, though quite a few fans did not last that long.

About 30 minutes into the rally, the crowd began to thin, with people getting a head start on the walk back to the parking lots, designated and otherwise. Several leaving early said they accomplished what they wanted to achieve by showing up for the rally, enduring traffic and long lines. Some said after hours on the tarmac, they were tired, hungry or both and wanted to get home.

I don't know about you, but I think the Waco local newspaper -- remember, this is the town Trump chose on purpose -- is not Trump's biggest fan. Oh, the article doesn't outright say "Trump has continued to repeat false claims about the 2020 election" or...actually wait.

Trump has continued to repeat false claims about the 2020 election, and none of his or his supporters’ formal actions to challenge the results were upheld.

They did say that. Oh, dear. Well at least they picked an appropriate selection of pictures.



Yep, that's a Trump campaign hearse. I am not making this up -- check the link for yourself. The Waco Tribune had all sorts of picture options, and this was one they went with. On purpose.



Trump's rallies already have a casualty, it seems.

Not only did Trump attract a small crowd to a small venue, they left while he was talking, and the locals don't seem to be impressed. I scrolled through and only recognized three other names, Greene, Lindell, and Nugent. Let me take this opportunity to remind everyone that Trump is the head of the Republican Party, he was in 2020 according to the RNC and is basically the only candidate running. Considering those three are the ones who showed, I think it's safe to say that their views are mainstream Republican views, and will be treated like such. Any Trump supporters on these forums that disagree are simply wrong because that's the party they asked for.

Guys...this is pathetic. This is the best Trump can do? And the rest of the Republican Party is okay with this being their leading contender? What a pathetic fat sad orange loser.

- - - Updated - - -

Did I mention that Trump opened up his speech, yes the one people walked out of, with a song pieced together from Jan 6th insurrectionists?

No? Well FOX News did.

Kilmeade on “Fox & Friends” criticized Trump for the rally’s spotlight on Jan. 6 and the former president’s focus on ongoing investigations into him, rather than on his record or on other issues important to his party.

“Instead, the president of the United States, the former president of the United States, opened up with Jan. 6 video, which is insane. He should be running from that period. I don’t care his point of view. That is not a good thing for him,” Kilmeade said.

“I thought that was absolutely awful. Even though he is winning in the polls, that will not.”

Trump opened up his rally with a rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” sung by inmates incarcerated for their role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

"Okay, that's bad, but at least he didn't play footage of the riots themselves."

Um...

"No."

Some footage from the insurrection was shown on big screens displayed at the rally site as the choir sang the national anthem and a recording played of Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

Normally this is where I challenge Trump supporters to sound off, but they won't, they're cowards. So I will answer for them.

"As a Trump supporter, seeing Trump recite the Pledge of Allegiance while footage of the January 6th attack on the Capitol plays is something I am 100% okay with, by virtue of (a) acknowledging it happened, or intentionally refusing to see the evidence that it happened, such as by ignoring Breccia (b) being a Trump supporter and (c) refusing to condemn it or even speak on the matter. My silence is not just consent, but approval, until I break my silence to say anything else."
-- all Trump supporters

But while FOX and Friends at least was saying

I think for Trump to spend 80 percent of his time complaining about court cases instead of just looking at his own record, and what he would have done.

He does that, or other candidates do that, they’re going to be unbelievably successful because that’s going to be the conversation at the kitchen table

that's rejection of Trump's actions, but not Trump. Not everyone agrees.

Since the Trump supporters here are cowering in their bunkers, I had to look elsewhere for opinions. I will now quote the entire NYPost OP ED from their editorial board, not merely one writer. I will bold the parts I think stand out the most.

As some of his allies are trying to rewrite January 6 as an afternoon stroll, Donald Trump is having none of it.

In the face of a possible criminal case in New York, he screamed that “death and destruction” would follow any indictment.

He posed with a baseball bat aimed at the head of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

"Whoa whoa what the fuck?"

THIS is Donald Trump.

He hasn’t changed in the slightest.

There is no shame.

After riling up rioters, cheering for a coup, and agreeing that his vice president needed to be hanged, he’s back to making violent threats against fellow Americans.

But wait, you say.

This is a biased prosecution.

Trump has every right to be upset.

We don’t disagree.

This is not a felony case, and Bragg trying to turn it into one is pure politics.

But rather than seek his vindication in the courtroom, or even just make an impassioned speech, Trump wants to inspire a mob.

Time and time again, Trump’s responses have been unhinged, indicative, and self-defeating.

And don’t buy for a second when he says he’s “fighting for you.”

If you actually “rose up” and were arrested, Trump would abandon you, just as he has every ally who wasn’t useful to him anymore.

What did he do for those locked up for months over Jan. 6?

What cash did he hand over for the candidates he endorsed in the recent midterm elections he torpedoed for Republicans?

Ever given Trump money?

If you stop, and even if you don’t, the angry pleas come fast and furious.

Don’t you care!?

How could you abandon him?

We understand voters who rallied to his cause because he vows to fight for them.

There is much wrong with the country.

And yes, it will take someone strong to wade through the thicket of Establishment opposition to change.

But Trump is not trying to make America a better place.

He’s not offering anyone apart from himself a better future.

He’s out for revenge.

This is how Trump has been spending his time since announcing his run for president.

Stewing in Mar-a-Lago.

No grievance is too small.

When he found out that Rihanna once criticized him, he took to Truth Social — multiple times! — to bellow how bad her Super Bowl halftime show was.

He once posted a screed, at 5 o’clock in the morning, about MSNBC’s programming decisions.

When Trump ran in 2016, he was an unknown entity.

Independents took a chance, wanting to break from the stagnant political machines that sought to anoint Hillary Clinton.

But he’s not a mystery anymore.

Americans know that Trump can’t stop himself from nursing piddling grudges and throwing out childish insults.

The emperor has no clothes.

Perhaps you don’t mind.

But there are plenty of middle-of-the-road voters who do.

They saw this behavior in 2020 and the 2022 midterms and said we need less anger and more hope.

Less rage and more rational action to fix the problems facing our nation.

You want a leader who will fight for you?

Then you have to pick someone who can actually get elected.

Republicans can’t throw away their shot in 2024.

Obviously I don't agree with all of that, but the fact is that Trump supporters who don't speak up are lumped in with the "you don't care" the NYPost was talking about. Their silence will be treated as admission that Trump is a horrible, violent human being, one who now has not only said "death and destruction" will follow his arrest, but is also posing suggesting violence against Bragg, and playing video of violence at a rally behind him while he recites the Pledge of Alleigance.

Which reminds me.

Before the weekend, I asked @Rozz and/or @Flarelaine to comment on the issue.

Now, what happens from here could be...involved, so before I continue, I think I need a rules question addressed.
@Rozz @Flarelaine

What are the rules about calls for violence on these forums? Actual real-world violence, not in-game of course.

They didn't answer. And Trump has gone even further in that time.

Since calls for violence are, provably, through Trump's words and actions, going to be an even bigger deal than I thought three days ago, and because I still don't have an answer, I'm going to ask some blues this time. Once again, the situation demands a public answer, so we can follow the rules in a constructive way.

@Radux
@Tziva

Or any other blue for that matter: What are the rules about calls to violence on these forums? We need these answered, because the topic of the forums themselves, Politics in this case, are heading in that direction due to causes outside these forums. A clarification is called for, a clarification is needed.

Thank you for your time.

[Edge-]

What is this, like the 10th time conservatives and conservative media are "seeing him for who he really is and slowly backing away."?

Where's Van Jones at, nowadays? Can he say that Trump has finally grown into his presidency, again? I miss those times idiots like him fell over themselves to praise Trump for something as simple as "sticking to a script for an hour" as if that's a life-changing moment.

I look forward to Fox and the NYPost lining up behind him if he wins the nomination again, as almost every Republican has specifically committed to "Supporting the nominee" when asked while specifically refusing to reject Trump if he's the nominee.

- - - Updated - - -

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/d...crypted-emails

Peter Navarro, Trump’s former trade adviser and a key Big Lie booster, has been harboring hundreds of government records that he’s appealing in federal court to keep. The Justice Department sued him over the records last August. Earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled against Navarro. But Navarro isn’t giving up.

Last week, Navarro said he intended to appeal the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and asked District Judge Kollar-Kotelly to stay her ruling while he appealed. On Saturday, DOJ lawyers filed a motion pushing back on his efforts to hold onto the documents after months of courtroom bickering.

“Dr. Navarro, as this Court found, has no possessory right to the records; he does not own the records; and he was statutorily obligated to have incorporated them into the White House records system within twenty days of creation, which he concededly did not do,” the DOJ wrote. “Defendant cannot be irreparably harmed by producing documents he has no right to possess in the first place.”

Somehow, the legal battle over Peter Navarro refusing to turn over government documents he stole and retains to this day is still ongoing.

Most people steal something and they get charged straight away. I guess if you're a rich white dude they give you like a year of polite requests so you can drag your feet or something.

[Myradin]

What is this, like the 10th time conservatives and conservative media are "seeing him for who he really is and slowly backing away."?

They're either backing away so slowly that they're still in the process of baking away when the next thing happens, OR they back away, realize they don't have much else, and then go back to him anyway.

I mean who else do republicans have to back at the moment? Desantis? Former trumpies?

[Endus]

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/d...crypted-emails

Somehow, the legal battle over Peter Navarro refusing to turn over government documents he stole and retains to this day is still ongoing.

Most people steal something and they get charged straight away. I guess if you're a rich white dude they give you like a year of polite requests so you can drag your feet or something.

If he'd taken a bag of cash off the back of an armored car, SWAT would've rammed his door in and searched his entire house and hauled him off in cuffs before the end of the day (assuming they knew who he was that quickly). The court's response on issues like this should be "we asked you nicely, once. Now the police are coming in and taking everything and arresting you for obstruction."

[Edge-]

I mean who else do republicans have to back at the moment? Desantis? Former trumpies?

DeSantis, though his star seems to be fading a bit and he's heading straight towards a confrontation with Trump. While he steps in poop realizing that his particular brand of Republican politics might be popular in Florida but is a bit less so nationally.

Also, Nikki Halley! She's running! She's got...policy positions! She's not Trump!

And I think we can count in Mike Pompeo, he had that surgery to help him lose weight and look more presidential! He used to be Secretary of State just like Hillary Clinton, except he was arguably far worse at the job!

And isn't that Tiger King guy running? Did he announce what party it's for? Maybe him?

Then there's Vivek Ramaswamy! Who I hear you ask? I don't know much either, but he's pretty brown for the Republican ticket so I'm skeptical.

Mike Pence could throw in! You know, the guy the Trump supporters came to hang on Jan. 6?

We could throw in some other elected officials who seem to have larger ambitions like Virginia governor Glenn Younkin, who threaded the, "I'm not a Trump guy but I'm a Trump guy." needle very well in his state. Or Krisi Noem, who has proven quite popular despite governing over a state of like 50 people.

You could also go for some of the hilarious longshot-literally-why-bothers like Liz Cheney because of course she's floated running to stop Trump, as if it would matter. Or former national security advisor John Bolton, who probably floated running just to sell more copies of a book or something.

There are some other options like NH governor Chris Sununu, but it's unlikely that his more moderate social views will see much traction from the far more extremist modern Republican party.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...orme-rcna76793

Former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign has decided that anyone who works for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, including on a potential presidential bid, will be ineligible to join the Trump campaign or another Trump White House.

Trump aide Justin Caporale confirmed the decision to NBC News, and it's a warning shot to political operatives mulling their next moves. The development, first reported by RealClearPolitics, comes as Trump holds onto a substantial polling lead and the DeSantis operation begins to materialize.

And Republicans continue to make it clear that they will always place petty personal vendetta's over actually doing the best job possible.

[Breccia]

Mike Pence could throw in! You know, the guy the Trump supporters came to hang on Jan. 6?

Mike Pence has not formally announced, and I don't think he will. But boy do I hope he does. Trump and Pence in the Republican primary debates would be the stuff of legends.

[D Luniz]

Mike Pence has not formally announced, and I don't think he will. But boy do I hope he does. Trump and Pence in the Republican primary debates would be the stuff of legends.

He can't really say anything against Trump about Jan 6th without an instant "and you're saying it here but claimed congressional privilege to avoid it under oath?"

[Breccia]

He can't really say anything against Trump about Jan 6th without an instant "and you're saying it here but claimed congressional privilege to avoid it under oath?"

The moderators would likely ask very baiting questions, like "Mr. Pence, do you blame Trump for the riot outside the Capitol yelling 'Hang Mike Pence'?" That's not protected by anything.

- - - Updated - - -

So, Giuliani recently had an interview with Bobb, yes the same one, on Gettr.

...you probably know where this is going, don't you? You know what, let's change things up a bit.

Take a guess what Giuliani said during the interview. No checking Google, no searching for news on your phone apps, just guess. Based on the last 7 years, take a legitimate guess as to what Giuliani said. If you know the real answer, no spoilers please, give everyone a chance.

In 2 hours from now, I'll post what Giuliani actually said. And we can compare and contrast what really happened vs. what people post. As a hint, even if you post a joke, you might still be close.

So, no cheating, no spoilers, honest guesses only. Siri, set timer for two hours.

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...royer-00089121

rofl, Christie thinks he still has some sort of political future. Honestly how deluded are these stupid fucks that they think that literally anyone gives a shit about them? Nobody in his home fuckin state likes his ass.

And running against Trump after spending years gently fondling his balls and defending him publicly sure is a way to go about it. Holy shit why is the GOP full of cucks.

[Breccia]

No guesses? Not sure if y'all said "I know the answer" "this is too crazy to guess" or "it's the middle of a workday".

In any event, the answer is "Giuliani said Soros personally tried to stop him from flying out of Ukraine in 2019".

Giuliani spoke with Trump 2024 campaign attorney Christina Bobb in a recent conversation streamed on Gettr.

The former New York City mayor, whose law license was suspended over his promotion of Trump’s election lies, told Bobb “I almost got arrested, almost got killed” when Soros personally chased after him when he visited Ukraine in 2019:

Soros tried to figure out how we were leaving, to cut off — we got a private plane, he was gonna cut it off. We were originally on a plane the next morning, we knew they were gonna cause trouble at the airport. They were gonna cause trouble with our visa, cause trouble with this, cause trouble with that. So we rented a private plane that night, but we didn’t realize he controls the private airport, and he found out we rented the plane, but he couldn’t get there in time.

"Oh, when you said 'personally' I thought you meant Giuliani said Soros himself got in front of the plane on the tarmac."

Um...

"...no."

This led to Giuliani’s claim that Soros, himself, was in a car that literally drove onto the tarmac and tried to chase down the plane before it took off.

“They tried to stop us,” Giuliani said. “They tried to come out on the jetway.”

Giuliani did not explain why Soros, a billionaire businessman, personally tried to stop him from leaving Ukraine.

"Is this a smart thing for Giuliani to say?"

...what has been?

"No no, I mean, didn't his 2019 trip tie into Trump's second impeachment? Isn't admitting he was there on Trump's behalf kind of risky?"

In a sane world, yes.

"What was Soros doing in Ukraine?"

I don't think he was. I think Giuliani is lying.

"How old is Soros?"

He would have been 88 at the time. Not exactly the age range one associates with car chases, or playing chicken with an airplane on the runway.

The video is here, but that is a Gettr link, it's your call if you want that in your cookies/history. I know I did not go there, so full admission, I have not seen the entire video, but considering even WaPo is carrying the story I think it's safe to assume it's legit.

This is a YouTube link from some guy's channel that hopefully contains the same info.

[Edge-]

And here I thought it was going to be his recitation of "I'm a Little Teapot".

Holy shit though, Republicans are just making up their own action movies and pretending it's reality. I've seen this movie at least a few times. No wonder they get so upset with Hollywood, they don't understand that it's all fuckin fake.

[Gorsameth]

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...royer-00089121

rofl, Christie thinks he still has some sort of political future. Honestly how deluded are these stupid fucks that they think that literally anyone gives a shit about them? Nobody in his home fuckin state likes his ass.

And running against Trump after spending years gently fondling his balls and defending him publicly sure is a way to go about it. Holy shit why is the GOP full of cucks.

Oh Oh I know this one.

Its $$