Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Shadowferal]

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter says Trump 'is done'

"Trump is done," Coulter, a onetime Trump booster turned critic, wrote in an email to The New York Times. "You guys should stop obsessing over him."

Coulter's comments came in an article published in the Times on Sunday about the mounting tensions between Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) amid speculation of a potential showdown for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

While DeSantis has so far sought to tamp down rumors that he's angling for a possible White House bid, his rise within the GOP and growing national profile have irked Trump, who sees the Florida governor as owing his political success to him.

Trump has privately griped about DeSantis's refusal to publicly commit to foregoing a 2024 run if the former president chooses to mount another bid for the White House.

Trump also appeared to take a swipe at DeSantis during a recent interview with the conservative One America News Network in which he slammed politicians who won't say whether they received a COVID-19 booster shot as "gutless." DeSantis has repeatedly dodged questions about his booster status.

Coulter pounced on Trump over those comments in a tweet last week calling the former president a "liar and con man."

"EXCLUSIVE: Trump is demanding to know Ron DeSantis's booster status, and I can now reveal it," Coulter wrote. "He was a loyal booster when Trump ran in 2016, but then he learned our president was a liar and con man whose grift was permanent. I hope that clears things up."

---

Beating each other up...a bit.

[Xyonai]

Skeletor has been attacking Jabba for a while now. It’s entertaining to watch.

The Wicked Witch of the South is just annoyed Trump wasn't better at enacting the hyper-regressive agenda monsters like her have been calling for, and now feels that his rampant unpopularity will just hang as an albatross on the necks of the more tactful regressives hoping to backpedal us into the worse parts of the 1950s. So all she's doing is hoping she can rally whatever audience she has left into turning on him.

[Edge-]

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/hours...d-trump-rally/

So, apparently some people were required to wait upwards of 4 hours to leave the rally. Claiming that Trump and the Secret Service were keeping everyone there until Trump left. A video compilation of Tiktoks showed that one woman was a first time Trump rally attendee and she wanted to leave early to beat traffic, and listen to the rest on the Nazi platformers Right Side Broadcasting, but she was denied exit til Trump left. Some people even pissed their pants, because there were no bathrooms/porta-potties in the parking lot.

This isn't the first time that Trump has screwed his rally attendees though. He left people stranded in Nebraska because he didn't pay the bus company to pick people up after his rally, in the freezing cold.

I'll wait for more verification, but given the prior track record as you reference, I wouldn't be remotely surprised.

Drinking piss and pissing their pants, maybe not willingly, to own the libs.

[Endus]

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/hours...d-trump-rally/

So, apparently some people were required to wait upwards of 4 hours to leave the rally. Claiming that Trump and the Secret Service were keeping everyone there until Trump left. A video compilation of Tiktoks showed that one woman was a first time Trump rally attendee and she wanted to leave early to beat traffic, and listen to the rest on the Nazi platformers Right Side Broadcasting, but she was denied exit til Trump left. Some people even pissed their pants, because there were no bathrooms/porta-potties in the parking lot.

This isn't the first time that Trump has screwed his rally attendees though. He left people stranded in Nebraska because he didn't pay the bus company to pick people up after his rally, in the freezing cold.

Pretty sure that's unlawful detainment, if they aren't lying and if they have the gonads to lawyer up. That it's Secret Service (supposedly) doing it doesn't change that.

[Breccia]

because there were no bathrooms/porta-potties in the parking lot

Why would there be? There was enough shit on the stage.

[Breccia]

Huh. Here's something I didn't think would happen.

So a 71-year-old Trump cultist was sentenced for being part of the murderous insurrection. Another Trump cultist, citing other Trump cultists as character witnesses, said that this Trump cultist should get leniency.

All standard stuff...except it was a NY sentence in a NY court.

Incidentally the guy asking for leniency is screaming into the wind. One, the sentence was 50 days in jail and $1,000 -- the lightest we've seen so far. Two, the dude pled guilty. Three, it's a misdemeanor. In most countries, being part of a (checks Oath Keepers situation) armed insurrection attempting to overthrow a fair and legal democratic election is a little more than a misdemeanor. Submitting a few church letters saying "he was a nice guy when he wasn't committing treason" shouldn't really affect things.

"Surely the issue here is really he was a peaceful, caring, 71-year-old family man who doesn't deserve prison time for an honest mistake. Surely he was just there to express his frustration and was swept up with the mob, I mean tour group, by accident."

I'll let the prosecution take that one.

Tryon is one of a much smaller group of rioters because he was expressly told by law enforcement officers that he could not enter the Capitol Building. He stood at the front of a mob that faced off with law enforcement officers at the entry to the Capitol. Tryon intentionally disregarded the officers because his intent to either interfere with or disrupt the Congressional proceedings was greater than compliance with the instructions given to him.

Once outside the Capitol, Tryon encouraged other rioters and attempted to rally the crowd on the grounds of the Capitol by standing atop a vehicle with a microphone and chanting the lyrics of the song 'We're Not Gonna Take It' by rock group, Twisted Sister. He also celebrated the riot by posing for a video.

So no, "please spare the confused and helpless poor old man, he didn't know what he was doing" is summarily rejected. I'm ever caught for lobbing Molotovs at a Dairy Queen, I don't expect my students saying "he seemed perfectly nonviolent during class hours" to be a valid defense. Especially considering the distance I would have to travel to lob Molotovs at a Dairy Queen. No joke, the closest one is over an hour away in a different country. Pretty sure that counts as premeditation.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't have to watch this Rachael Maddow clip, nor do you need to read this text as it was caught that day, but in it, she shows every Vice President since 1992 announcing the counting of election votes.

They all said the same thing...except Pence. Pence added about +100% extra words to the "script" saying there was only one correct legal submission per state.

The suggestion, then, was that Pence knew there were going to be multiple documents this time. Which, gee, seems to be the case now.

There are three possible ways this could happen.
1) That assumption is incorrect. Pence was just being Pence and adhering to the rules 100% and making it absolutely clear that's what he was doing. And possibly, predicting that such a plot would hatch without knowing it was there.
2) Pence knew ahead of time there were fake election forms because he was around when that conspiracy was announced.
3) Pence knew ahead of time there were fake election forms because someone tipped him off.

It seems more and more likely Pence will need to speak on the record about this. I realize he doesn't want to -- he already had one lynch mob try to murder him.

[Endus]

You don't have to watch this Rachael Maddow clip, nor do you need to read this text as it was caught that day, but in it, she shows every Vice President since 1992 announcing the counting of election votes.

They all said the same thing...except Pence. Pence added about +100% extra words to the "script" saying there was only one correct legal submission per state.

The suggestion, then, was that Pence knew there were going to be multiple documents this time. Which, gee, seems to be the case now.

There are three possible ways this could happen.
1) That assumption is incorrect. Pence was just being Pence and adhering to the rules 100% and making it absolutely clear that's what he was doing. And possibly, predicting that such a plot would hatch without knowing it was there.
2) Pence knew ahead of time there were fake election forms because he was around when that conspiracy was announced.
3) Pence knew ahead of time there were fake election forms because someone tipped him off.

It seems more and more likely Pence will need to speak on the record about this. I realize he doesn't want to -- he already had one lynch mob try to murder him.

Frankly, it was Pence setting the groundwork so that he could declare pre-emptively which documents were the "correct legal submission", to support the coup, if the insurrectionists had succeeded. He's priming the public to be aware of the "incorrect" ones (which support Biden's election), so when he dismisses them in favor of the actual fakes, it's not shocking.

Can they prove that in court? Unlikely. But I'd eat my hat if that's not what was going on.

[Edge-]

https://bangordailynews.com/2022/01/...alse-electors/

Supporters of Donald Trump privately discussed ways they could gain access to the Michigan Capitol on Dec. 14, 2020, when the battleground state’s presidential electors met, according to four sources with knowledge of the planning.

The conversations reveal how Trump’s Michigan backers were considering further escalating their unsuccessful effort to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s victory by getting inside the building where the state’s true 16 electors were scheduled to meet to solidify the result. The building was closed that day to the public.

Multiple sources said a group of Trump supporters contemplated working with a Republican lawmaker who had a Capitol office to get the 16 Trump electors inside or finding a way inside before the building was sealed off. The idea was to attempt to comply with a legal requirement that Michigan’s presidential electors meet inside the Capitol at 2 p.m. on Dec. 14.

But state GOP leaders were not on board with the scheme, according to the sources, and it ultimately didn’t happen.

“[W]e convened and organized in the state Capitol, in the city of Lansing, Michigan, and at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on the 14th day of December 2020,” said an inaccurate certificate signed and submitted to the National Archives by the 16 Trump electors in Michigan.

The 16 Republicans who signed the document also inaccurately claimed they were the “duly elected and qualified electors.”

Yo, when do we start tossing folks in jail? Can we bring back the public stockades so we can throw rotten produce at these anti-democratic fucks?

[Gorsameth]

https://bangordailynews.com/2022/01/...alse-electors/



Yo, when do we start tossing folks in jail? Can we bring back the public stockades so we can throw rotten produce at these anti-democratic fucks?

Oh look, 16 people that falsified federal documents.

Throw
The
Book
At
Them

10 years prison, every single one.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/s...21902551007234

Child questions Dan Crenshaw's faith, Dan Crenshaw isn't having it. And neither is the audience. Given his inability to respond respectfully to a 10 year old child, which isn't surprising given the conservative "Combat" mindset, I'm not surprised at the response. He's been going after Greene, so he's on their shitlist.

Amusingly, 10 year old girl isn't happy with his response yet he continues to try to explain himself, accusing her of "twisting" his words which sounds really familiar.

And then, inexplicably, we have a few "Let's go Brandon" comments because...I honestly don't know anymore. I assume this is like a mating call for birds, it's how conservatives identify each other if they're not all peacocked out with the red MAGA hat.

[Drutt]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/s...21902551007234

Child questions Dan Crenshaw's faith, Dan Crenshaw isn't having it. And neither is the audience. Given his inability to respond respectfully to a 10 year old child, which isn't surprising given the conservative "Combat" mindset, I'm not surprised at the response. He's been going after Greene, so he's on their shitlist.

Amusingly, 10 year old girl isn't happy with his response yet he continues to try to explain himself, accusing her of "twisting" his words which sounds really familiar.

And then, inexplicably, we have a few "Let's go Brandon" comments because...I honestly don't know anymore. I assume this is like a mating call for birds, it's how conservatives identify each other if they're not all peacocked out with the red MAGA hat.

Wow, that is some spectacularly unnecessary assholery on display there. Who treats kids like that? Incredible.

[Edge-]

Wow, that is some spectacularly unnecessary assholery on display there. Who treats kids like that? Incredible.

I mean, it's a shitty question from the kid - and I can get the immediate frustration with having your faith questioned. But this is what happens when you live the "combat mindset" of modern conservatism in the US - it's always on and you can forget to turn it off. Everything is a battle. There is a winner and a loser in everything. And if you're not "winning", then you're "losing", whatever the hell that even means in a situation like this.

[Drutt]

I mean, it's a shitty question from the kid - and I can get the immediate frustration with having your faith questioned. But this is what happens when you live the "combat mindset" of modern conservatism in the US - it's always on and you can forget to turn it off. Everything is a battle. There is a winner and a loser in everything. And if you're not "winning", then you're "losing", whatever the hell that even means in a situation like this.

Kids will always ask awkward questions. It's part of them being kids and should be expected. What matters is how you handle it, and Crenshaw failed spectacularly. He was the adult in the conversation.

It's not like it was a hard question to handle, either, and speaks volumes about his character.

[Edge-]

It's not like it was a hard question to handle, either, and speaks volumes about his character.

Agreed. And remember, he's positively centrist/establishment compared to many in his party like Greene and Gomar and Trump. When even your moderates can't stop being shitty for 10 seconds to answer a question from a literal child, maybe your "ideology" (quotes because the Republican party legit doesn't have a coherent ideology) is only capable of producing folks like Gaetz, Cruz, and Crenshaw that maybe something is amiss.

[Endus]

Kids will always ask awkward questions. It's part of them being kids and should be expected. What matters is how you handle it, and Crenshaw failed spectacularly. He was the adult in the conversation.

It's not like it was a hard question to handle, either, and speaks volumes about his character.

Another important point is the idea that if you can't explain an opinion to a 10 year old well enough for that child to understand you, you don't actually understand your own belief well enough to express anything about if confidently, in public. Crenshaw knew he couldn't explain this, so he immediately went into attack mode. To a 10-year-old.

Especially since (without getting into the weeds on religious discussion here), holding up your personal faith as unquestionable like that is a form of idolatry and wouldn't be considered theologically defensible in any Christian theology class I'm aware of. As someone who actually has invested in some (minor, as in a college minor) post-secondary theology study. He's not just an asshole because he's being abusive to a kid, he's demonstrating a self-defeating lack of actual faith, by demanding no one "question" it. If you can't defend the holding of faith when challenged, you don't have faith, you have a thin veneer of belief that you've never invested a whit of effort into informing or understanding. It's performative, empty nonsense, nothing more.

Pre-emptive note that's as deep as I'm willing to go on the subject here on these forums, because of the rules (and I'm being careful to keep it pretty broadly on the relatively neutral concept of "faith" itself, rather than specific religious principles or citations that would invite rule-breaking discussion). If you really want to have at me over this, send a PM.

[Edge-]

Another important point is the idea that if you can't explain an opinion to a 10 year old well enough for that child to understand you, you don't actually understand your own belief well enough to express anything about if confidently, in public. Crenshaw knew he couldn't explain this, so he immediately went into attack mode. To a 10-year-old.

Hard disagree on the bold. I don't think he knows this, definitely not actively. It's just that "attack mode" is literally the default for the current conservative movement in the US. Everything is a war/battle. Every interaction is an arena of combat. There are only winners and losers, and if you're not a winner than the only alternative is that you're a loser. It doesn't matter who your foe is, real or fictional, child or adult, you're either first or you're last.

This is a pretty constant theme throughout conservatism in the US, from lawmakers to "mainstream" news/pundits like Carlson to the vanguard of the extreme right and folks like Jones and Bongino.

There's no "turning it off", because that's how they perceive and interact with the world. Crenshaw unintentionally admitted as much last year when talking about grifters like Greene and Gaetz - https://www.texastribune.org/2021/12...ters-backlash/

I mean in the conservative movement. Lie after lie after lie. Because they know something psychologically about the conservative heart. We’re worried about what people are gonna do to us, what they’re gonna infringe upon us.

When that's your starting point, every interaction must be inherently combative.

[Huehuecoyotl]

Hard disagree on the bold. I don't think he knows this, definitely not actively. It's just that "attack mode" is literally the default for the current conservative movement in the US. Everything is a war/battle. Every interaction is an arena of combat. There are only winners and losers, and if you're not a winner than the only alternative is that you're a loser. It doesn't matter who your foe is, real or fictional, child or adult, you're either first or you're last.

This is a pretty constant theme throughout conservatism in the US, from lawmakers to "mainstream" news/pundits like Carlson to the vanguard of the extreme right and folks like Jones and Bongino.

There's no "turning it off", because that's how they perceive and interact with the world. Crenshaw unintentionally admitted as much last year when talking about grifters like Greene and Gaetz - https://www.texastribune.org/2021/12...ters-backlash/



When that's your starting point, every interaction must be inherently combative.

It isn't necessarily just a Conservative thing (and I'm trying desperately not to go "both sides" centrist here). The fact is, any political system that is set up as winner takes all, two sides, ends up as a zero sum game. It's competitive, because it literally is "I win, you lose". That's why this style of politics is so toxic, both in the US and the UK.

If you have a better system, that encourages a LOT of different political parties, then you can grow up as a society and move towards cooperative political processes. I have this idea, I need to persuade enough of my colleagues from different parties that it's a good idea, and if I succeed in that, the idea can proceed. I "team up" with other parties on a case by case basis. And I don't oppose for the sake of it, because I need to support ideas that the people that are voting for me would also support. Because if I don't, they might decide my party isn't the one for them, and move to another.

Both our countries desperately need some form of PR. Because the systems we have are driving us backwards.

[Edge-]

The fact is, any political system that is set up as winner takes all, two sides, ends up as a zero sum game.

I'm not specifically talking about political races and whatnot. I'm talking about everything, including a response to a question from a 10 year old girl. It's a zero-sum game. You either win that battle or you lose it, because those are the only two options available when you frame your reality as a perpetual and all-expansive arena of combat.

It's very much not a "both sides" thing since you don't see this kind of routine behavior from "the left", much less as widespread as we see it amongst conservative politicians, "news media", pundits, influencers etc. etc.

[DarkTZeratul]

It's very much not a "both sides" thing since you don't see this kind of routine behavior from "the left", much less as widespread as we see it amongst conservative politicians, "news media", pundits, influencers etc. etc.

Hell, we didn't even see this kind of behavior as much from most of the "old guard" Conservatives like John McCain.

[Edge-]

Hell, we didn't even see this kind of behavior as much from most of the "old guard" Conservatives like John McCain.

There were some crumbs of it but no, this is not part of the "traditional" conservative mindset in the US. This is very much part of the modern conservative movement, which defines itself by being in a constant state of combat.