Donald Trump Indicted on 7 Counts

[Fitzcarraldo]

One is a conspiracy charge:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-truth-social-indicted-classified-docs-probe-rcna79343

[KnightHawk 2.0]

One is a conspiracy charge:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-truth-social-indicted-classified-docs-probe-rcna79343Good. The MAGA King deserves to get indicted,and he can claim that he's innocent all he wants,because innocent people would have done the right thing,instead of attacking prosecutors on his fraudulent social media platform,and throwing temper tantrums like a petulant child.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Good. The MAGA King deserves to get indicted,and he can claim that he's innocent all he wants,because innocent people would have done the right thing,instead of attacking prosecutors on his fraudulent social media platform,and throwing temper tantrums like a petulant child. And things are going to get a hell of alot worse for the MAGA King Donald Trump.

[Stavros]

I don't think anyone is surprised at the hysterical reactions of Fox News, Stephen Miller, Elon Musk or the man himself, though it does beg the question -What does the Presidential Records Act of 1978 say with regard to Presidents and their documents? Roger Stone might not know the law has changed, as he remains a devotee of Richard M. Nixon, who would have been the first President to be indicted had Gerald Ford not pardoned him.

The law is utterly simple in its main provision-

"This Act stated any records generated during a Presidential administration documenting the constitutional, statutory or ceremonial duties of the Presidency are the property of the United States".
Presidential Records Act | Ronald Reagan (reaganlibrary.gov) (https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/presidential-records-act#:~:text=This%20legislation%20altered%20a%20lon g,property%20of%20the%20United%20States.)

The Prima Facie evidence that the Court must assess, is that Trump and his lawyers were fully aware of their obligations under the law; that Trump deliberately prevented documents from being handed over to the National Archive; that among them were sensitive documents of National Security importance (at least one of which, on Iran, cannot be found). Perhaps those defending Trump can step forward and tell is why Trump took these documents.

It don't look good, but the wheels of justice grind slow, and it might not be until this time next year that the Court is sitting in judgment.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Georgia could still indict him. The DOJ could also still indict him over January 6th.

[Stavros]

Georgia could still indict him. The DOJ could also still indict him over January 6th.

On a general level I would have thought the Georgia case is the most serious, as it is a direct interference in the election process, and I just can't understand how any lawyer would have advised Trump to make that call, unless they were not aware that it was being recorded. The violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978 is just as blatant, with evidence now containing an audio of Trump boasting about classified military documents that he had retained for himself, as quoted in the link below.

I wonder if the Jan 6 is harder to prove in Court. But for all the hysterical drivel of Josh Hawley and Kevin McCarthy, not only is this about the rule of law, the Grand Jury indictments, and the actual lack of any involvement by either President Biden or Merrick Garland, it is really just the consequence of promoting to the Presidency a man with proven links to organized crime going back to the 1990s, who has been associated with more men tried and convicted of crimes in a Court of Law than any other President -at what point did the idiots who enabled Trump from the start wonder if his past would ever catch up with him, and his Big Mouth make a lawyer's job all but impossible?

Trump boasts about having non-declassified papers in bombshell recording: ‘I have a big pile’ (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-bragged-secret-iran-document-121919295.html)

[broncofan]

More information relating to the indictments has been released today. I won't be able to look at it until later but Jonathan Turley apparently said it was damning. This is a guy who has bent over backwards to defend Trump. Lied for him. The consensus is that it's gonna be hard to defend him.

[rodinuk]

His lawyer’s resigned earlier today, it’s clearly a prime resigning day all over the globe.

[DAZ]

37 counts! and thats just this case.. two more upcoming

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I don't think anyone is surprised at the hysterical reactions of Fox News, Stephen Miller, Elon Musk or the man himself, though it does beg the question -What does the Presidential Records Act of 1978 say with regard to Presidents and their documents? Roger Stone might not know the law has changed, as he remains a devotee of Richard M. Nixon, who would have been the first President to be indicted had Gerald Ford not pardoned him.

The law is utterly simple in its main provision-

"This Act stated any records generated during a Presidential administration documenting the constitutional, statutory or ceremonial duties of the Presidency are the property of the United States".
Presidential Records Act | Ronald Reagan (reaganlibrary.gov) (https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/presidential-records-act#:~:text=This%20legislation%20altered%20a%20lon g,property%20of%20the%20United%20States.)

The Prima Facie evidence that the Court must assess, is that Trump and his lawyers were fully aware of their obligations under the law; that Trump deliberately prevented documents from being handed over to the National Archive; that among them were sensitive documents of National Security importance (at least one of which, on Iran, cannot be found). Perhaps those defending Trump can step forward and tell is why Trump took these documents.

It don't look good, but the wheels of justice grind slow, and it might not be until this time next year that the Court is sitting in judgment.No not at all surprised by the hysterical reactions from the so-called journalists at the Propaganda News Channel,or the right wing loving assclown and twitter troll Elon Musk. No it sure doesn't,the MAGA King Donald Trump is in serious trouble.

[Stavros]

I don't know the actual figure, but I estimate Trump has hired more than 100 lawyers since the election of 2020. Did not one of those professionals ever tell him he does not have the legal right to retain a single classified document? The legal skills of John Eastman and Cleta Mitchell may be limited, but the law is so stark on the case of documents, I can't believe even a mediocre lawyer doesn't know the law.

As for the files on nuclear and military strategy, some with a focus on Iran, who would be interested in them? A) Israel, and B) Saudi Arabia. Kushner and his wife with their impeccable connections to both countries, might not be regulars at Mar-a-Lago, but one wonders if Trump retained these files to 'monetize' them- but has he made a dollar out of them? We might never know.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

The MAGA Party Spin Machine is in full effect with the Spineless Coward Kevin McCarthy,Chickenshit Mike Pence and others coming to their leader the MAGA King Donald Trump's defense,by making false accusations that President Joe Biden,Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Democrats indicted Donald Trump,when in reality it was special prosecutor Jack Smith and a Grand Jury that indicted Donald Trump. No one should be surprised that the enablers in Congress and Senate are choosing the MAGA King over the country,because this is the path they chose. And will eventually lead to their downfall.

[filghy2]

As is often the case with Trump, the striking thing about this is how flagrantly stupid he has been. It looks like he has been caught out in a clumsy attempt to hide classified documents simply because he wanted to keep them to show off to people.
https://newrepublic.com/article/173506/trump-indictment-phenomenal-self-own

Of course, it could be that he doesn't care about being indicted because he thinks it will help him win the nomination, but I think to most people it just underscores how reckless and incompetent he is.

[Stavros]

And then there are the Americans who claim they would go to war with their own country for Donald Trump. The Congressman who posted 'cryptic' police/military messages suggesting his supporters get ready for war. That he would never go to war for them is it seems, of no importance. For most of his life Trump has considered himself infallible, so by definition, any and all criticism of him must be false. Were he on camera shoplifting, he would insist the images are not of him.

He cannot win the Presidential election, it is only through a rigged Electoral College that he could return to the White House, assuming he has not been sent to prison, though the slow pace of justice in the US suggests he will not.

[Stavros]

One night in Miami? Robert Reich isn't absolutely sure, he says

"Violence is possible, but there will no civil war."
There will be no civil war over Trump. Here’s why | Robert Reich | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/12/trump-civil-war-chances-documents-indictment)

Not much consolation for anyone who does get hurt, and for what?

[KnightHawk 2.0]

One night in Miami? Robert Reich isn't absolutely sure, he says

"Violence is possible, but there will no civil war."
There will be no civil war over Trump. Here’s why | Robert Reich | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/12/trump-civil-war-chances-documents-indictment)

Not much consolation for anyone who does get hurt, and for what? No it sure isn't,because the imbeciles who support the MAGA King Donald Trump have been brainwashed by him and his enablers,that him getting indicted by special prosecutor Jack Smith was politically motivated and a witchhunt,which is bullshit. Donald Trump brought all of this on himself,and has no one to blame but himself.

[Luke Warm]

I’m much more interested in seeing Trump accountable for attempted election tampering in Georgia, and for the range of violations resulting in the January 6th assault on the US Capitol building.

But there seems to be a pretty solid case here, which I’m not complaining about ;)

[filghy2]

How is that Trump has again drawn the judge he appointed, who previously made dubious rulings in his favour?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/12/judge-aileen-cannon-trump-documents-case-00101641

It's notable that none of the people loudly screaming "witchhunt" seem to even bothering to mount a defence of his actions. Trump's explanations have been shifting, but he seems to be arguing that he had the right to declassify these documents and treat them as his personal property. Are these people seriously saying they are okay with sensitive national security documents being handled like that? Yes, I know the real answer is they just don't give a shit.

[Stavros]

In addition, one marvels or not, at the hypocrisy of people like Little Jimmy Jordan and Lindsay Graham instantly referring to Hillary Clinton when being asked about Trump's documents crimes -Clinton was never President, a fact so obvious it merely dismisses the comparison. That said, I don't know if the Presidential Records Act, or some other law governs the retention of documents for Govt officers, such as the Secretary of State. With regard to emails, again I don't know if every email must be retained, which would be a waste of storage space as most of the emails Clinton had were circulars. Moreover, whatever it is that she is accused of that is a charge legally not proven, the problem with Trump is that unless he can prove the documents in Florida were de-classified, he has to explain what he was doing with them.

If the Judge and Jury are sympathetic I guess they can put it down to him being old and careless -but where does this leave his lawyers? And if he is found guilty, a) he will get the most lenient sentence, and b) begin the process of appeal to drag the case into the next year, or two years.

Here is another comparison: in the UK, Boris Johnson's arrogance is losing him support among Conservative MPs, whereas in the US Trump's arrogance seems to encourage it among members of Congress.

Is the US now so sectarian it cannot be repaired?

[filghy2]

Meanwhile, in another democracy, a former leader was arrested without anyone claiming witchhunt or theatening trouble.
https://newrepublic.com/article/173576/yes-trump-supporters-functioning-democracies-can-prosecute-former-leaders

[Stavros]

The BBC News channel was reporting live from Bedminster last night, but after a few minutes of 'not of this world' drivel, they cut away to return to their panel, one of whom argued that Trump didn't even seem to know what the law was that was being used to try him.

One new thing I think -a member of the public outside the Miami courthouse said the US was becoming like Nicaragua and the Democrats, Biden in particular like the Sandinistas- and after court, Trump went to a 'Latino/Cuban' cafe, while the links are now being made to Latin American dictatorships in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua -is this something to do with the identity of the Jurors in the trial?

Are all 'Latinos' right wing 'Conservatives'? Is this a risk, or just not a risk in Florida?

And, one notes, at one time, it was the US who was directly or indirectly protecting or sponsoring military dictatorships in Latin America, from El Salvador south to Argentina.

As for the boxes containing shirts, shoes and socks....earlier in the day Trump claimed they were planted in Mar-a-Lago by the FBI. The man is unhinged and everyone can see it, so why do they still ride with him?

[tslvr]

I'm really getting tired of all of this, fringe right and fringe left are all bad. Someone has to have some sense and play in the middle.

[Stavros]

I'm really getting tired of all of this, fringe right and fringe left are all bad. Someone has to have some sense and play in the middle.

Can I ask who you refer to? Is it not the case that the 'fringe right' is now at the centre of Republican Party politics, and with the aid of Fox News and the 'Christian' Evangelists has established the most extreme agenda in US politics since at least the 1950s?

Fringe left is a difficult one for someone in the UK like me, as what I assume to be it really is on the fringes of US politics, though I guess if you refer to some BLM and Trans activists they can make a lot of noise -but the Democrats and Biden occupy the centre ground- maybe the party has not moved on from the Bill Clinton era and needs a more progressive agenda suited to the needs of the 21st, rather than the 20th century -??

I find it comical or absurd when Trump refers to Marxists, as I don't believe he has a clue what the term means, but knows it 'scares' people.

[tslvr]

Can I ask who you refer to? Is it not the case that the 'fringe right' is now at the centre of Republican Party politics, and with the aid of Fox News and the 'Christian' Evangelists has established the most extreme agenda in US politics since at least the 1950s?

Fringe left is a difficult one for someone in the UK like me, as what I assume to be it really is on the fringes of US politics, though I guess if you refer to some BLM and Trans activists they can make a lot of noise -but the Democrats and Biden occupy the centre ground- maybe the party has not moved on from the Bill Clinton era and needs a more progressive agenda suited to the needs of the 21st, rather than the 20th century -??

I find it comical or absurd when Trump refers to Marxists, as I don't believe he has a clue what the term means, but knows it 'scares' people.
No country can survive with either fringe being the ruling party. I've voted both left and right in my life, so I try to see things from both sides. Bill Clinton did a lot of good for this country was he was forced to the middle. Trumpdid many good things while he was in office< but it is time for him to move on because this election for him is more about revenge and that isn't good. And Biden has always claimed to be a centrist, but he's the guy that led to taxing social security. As president, I truly believe that he is not in charge of anything. He's closing in on three years and still only takes scripted questions from certain reporters.

[filghy2]

And Biden has always claimed to be a centrist, but he's the guy that led to taxing social security.

That's just misinformation. https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/posts-mislead-on-bidens-role-in-social-security-taxes/

"In the early 1980s, President Ronald Reagan, with congressional leaders, convened a bipartisan commission to study the issue. In 1983, that commission issued a report that formed the basis for amendments to the Social Security program. Among the recommendations in the report was that benefits be taxed as income for recipients who had income over a certain threshold.

The bill that included that change to the program passed in a bipartisan vote in 1983. Biden was one of 88 senators who voted for it. Only nine senators voted against it.

When Reagan signed the bill into law, he praised the bipartisan effort in his remarks and was joined by members of both parties."

What does any of this have to do with the charges against Trump anyway?

[Stavros]

No country can survive with either fringe being the ruling party. I've voted both left and right in my life, so I try to see things from both sides. Bill Clinton did a lot of good for this country was he was forced to the middle. Trumpdid many good things while he was in office< but it is time for him to move on because this election for him is more about revenge and that isn't good. And Biden has always claimed to be a centrist, but he's the guy that led to taxing social security. As president, I truly believe that he is not in charge of anything. He's closing in on three years and still only takes scripted questions from certain reporters.

Thanks for your reply.

A country can survive extremism in politics, but in a damaged form, and too much time is then taken up by successors trying to repair the damage -this is what has happened in the UK with Brexit, and it appears it will be years before the UK can repair the damage done by Boris Johnson and the other supporters of Brexit. If the UK has not fallen apart, that might be due to the crisis in the Scottish National Party that has deferred a new Independence Referendum for years.

Moreover, while I understand the Americans have a different definition of 'Left' and 'Right' from mine, if 'centrism' means Democrats and Republicans doing more or less the same thing, then even Trump was a Centrist. His alleged idol, Ronald Reagan famously declared 'Govt is the problem, not the solution', but did little to disengage the State from the Economy, which ought to be a litmus test of any fidelity to Free Enterprise and Free Markets.

Trump did not disengage the State from the Economy. Throughout his life has relied on the tax payer to give him the loans he used to fund his buildings, just as he has posted business failure after business failure to claim compensation from the tax payer. Did he reform the tax system to ensure that tax payers don't reward business failure? Of course not. His 'tax reforms' were just benefits for the rich, just as his massive subsidies to agriculture were based on his catastrophic trade relations with China, and his personal belief that if tax payers are subsidizing his life, they may as well reward failing farmers.

So what did Trump achieve? I don't see anything

-the border wall the Mexicans didn't pay for, which was never completed and never effective in preventing the cross-border passage of illegal immigrants

-the promotion of a repeal of Roe-vs-Wade through his judicial appointments has lost the Republican party votes in every election in States since the Supreme Court decision

-he approved the assassination of Qasem Suleymani, but was a stunt -when the Iranians retaliated by killing Americans in Iraq, Trump got scared and backed off an escalation (which was what John Bolton wanted).

-Trump negotiated with the Taliban the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, though it was Biden acting on that agreement who was more heavily criticised

-Trump lauded the 'Abraham Accords' that saw Middle East dictatorships that already had relations with Israel, formalize them, presided over by a man, Jared Kushner who, along with his Father and Brother, have financial investments in Israel; rarely has American foreign policy been more concerned with the financial interests of the President and his relations, than the USA as a country

-Trump's mismanagement of the Covid pandemic is a scandal -not only did he dismiss the science from the start, when it was his moral and Constitutional duty to support the most affected States -Washington, Michigan and New York, he swamped them in insults and abuse instead, while his son-in-law Jared Kushner actually deprived the State of New York of Federal PPE in order to make the Democrat administration there look weak and ineffective. As for promoting anti-science doubts about vaccines and lock-downs, one could argue Trump should be in Court as an accessory to murder, though to some extent the Governors of States, such as De Santis are also in the frame for these crimes.

-the war against Science did not just increase the unnecessary deaths from Covid, but is integrated into the ignorant drivel Trump and his supporters say about Trans issues, from the attempt to throw Trans Americans out of the military to the weaponizaton of children as part of their preposterous defence of 'the Family', as defined by 'Christian' evangelists.

-Trump demeaned the Office of the President because he never understood what it means. He inherited the CEO position in his father's firm, he never worked his way to the top. As CEO he barked orders, and they were obeyed, and that is how he viewed the Presidency, and because he has no humility or an understanding of what work is, he cannot adjust his perspective to see how unsuitable he is for the Office, though most Americans never considered him fit for that office.

-He says he 'rebuilt' the military but it wasn't in need of repair. But he did heap insult and abuse on veterans, just as he spent years insulting and abusing Americans. He called Hillary Clinton a 'skank'; he said of Americans who don't like him, 'they're scum'. The language of a jerk, not the President

-As for policies on gun control, narcotics, homelessness -four years of Trump led to a deterioration across all three areas and many lost and damaged lives.

One final thought, about 'the Border'. Why have so many Central Americans given up on their own country to head north? In four years, did Trump ever take Central and Southern America seriously as partners, neighbours, even friends? Surely if the US wants to stop illegal immigrants from 'the South', it should have a 'Southern Strategy'? Trump has no idea what strategic thinking is, and I doubt he ever bothered to either read expert reports on ''Latin America', or take notice of anything said to him, because he elevates his ignorance into wisdom, and his incompetence into genius.

So on fundamentals, the Americans remain divided as they have been since I took an interest in the place- they want the Federal Govt to help out when times are bad, but can't decide if this creates a dependency on the State, or the dependency is due to chronic economic failure. They want the US to be a strong, international power, but aren't united on where and how to be this. On social policy, I think most Americans are liberal, that is, they believe individuals should make the decisions that affect their lives, and not be shaped by the demands of 'Christian' Fundamentalists. And so on.

So Biden represents what most Americans believe in, and Trump what they reject. Biden might not come across as the dynamic, incisive type of President Obama was, but in functional terms, he has achieved more in three years than Trump ever did or can; and for all the explosive claims of Fox News, and the nut jobs in Congress determined to prove Biden is corrupt, the simple fact is that Trump has and has had the closest relations to organized crime and convicted criminals than any other President, but they don't want to talk about that.

And it may be that he joins his buddies as a convicted felon himself. And American knows it is better than this, which is why Trump will never be President again.

[filghy2]

Far from being part of a partisan witchhunt against Trump, the evidence suggests that the DoJ and FBI have been extremely reluctant to pursue investigations against him for fear of being seen as partisan. A Washington Post investigation reveals that investigation of the role of Trump and his associates in January 6 was delayed for over a year.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/06/19/fbi-resisted-opening-probe-into-trumps-role-jan-6-more-than-year/

Even on the documents case, the indictment took almost 18 months after they first learned that Trump had likely retained classified material.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/21/donald-trump-conservatives-fbi-jail-biden

As a result, we now have a situation in which legal proceedings are unlikely to be completed before the next election, while the ability to gather evidence on January 6 may have been hampered by the delay. Perhaps the cautious approach may influence the perceptions of independents and some of the saner Republicans, but it's clearly not going to make any difference to most Republicans.

[Stavros]

And a man who claims he can't get a fair trial in New York or Washington has not, as far as I know, argued he can't be tried in Florida-- in district that voted for him, from who the jury will be selected, under a judge he appointed. Will they convict on the evidence?

[Stavros]

Is he going down? I can't imagine a 'real man' like Trump would ever go down on a woman, but I can see the reason why he will do the time when he has so clearly done the crime.

The most disturbing aspect of this is the contempt that Trump supporters have shown for the Rule of Law, which is fundamental to a free society. Mike Pence, boringly normal in this regard, has supported the law over Trump, while others, the usual suspects, not just De Santis but for heaven's sake, a so-called Lawyer, have defended Trump, as if they were so blinded by their loyalty to this Grade A American Crook, they can't see the cliff edge toward which they are walking.

Yes, Trump has been treated differently from other Americans -he should have been arrested on January 6th 2021, though I guess prosecutors always want a tight case to present in Court. But the Fake Electors? Surely they could have been arrested as soon as they made themselves known, just as Trump's supporters know his handling of Govt documents was completely different from the way they were handled by Clinton, Biden and Pence. The desperation being shown is all the more reckless when it is the Rule of Law, and indeed, portentous as it sounds, the foundations of the Republic that are at stake.

Trump cares only for himself, his supporters know that. Trump cannot win an election, his supporters know that. It seems to me that this is worse than Watergate, but it remains a critical test, and if it fails, why then, surely the US will have failed as a state, and it is only a matter of time before people trafficking, child killing filth like Greg Abbott declare independence, or some form of State Autonomy?

Brexit has brought the UK to the edge of collapse, but the collapse has not happened, largely because the Scottish Nationalists are imploding, and on a few policies the UK has reversed course; but the UK has been weakened as a state, politically and economically. I think the US is at a similar crossroads, but the stakes are higher.

One certain thing: the relentless Trump Everywhere All at Once, is sucking the oxygen out of politics. The homeless remain on the streets; the poor make their daily trek to the food bank; the rivers and reservoirs dry up with no coherent plan to manage resources when so many Republicans think the environmental threats they can see every day are just accidents, or once in a lifetime events and normality will be resumed next week, or next month.

The only positive is that a generation of men is in the political departure lounge -Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, if only Joe Biden- is it really too late for the Democrats to make a bold step and choose another?

Is there a new generation genuinely determined to heal America's wounds, or is it a lost cause?

[Fitzcarraldo]

Half the country already thinks Biden is a woke commie lib, when he's actually about as centrist as an American politician can be right now. Anyone to the left of him will likely lose to whatever steaming pile the Republicans nominate, and a lot of people may vote Republican simply because Biden is old.

Even the non-right media has done nothing to paint Biden's administration in a positive light. Any good news on the economy is couched in terms of a looming recession. His age is always mentioned. Polling showing that voters don't want a Biden/Trump rematch is always mentioned. The man literally pulled us back from the brink, got landmark infrastructure legislation and the CHIPS Act passed, and gets zero credit.

This is worse than Watergate because Nixon resigned instead of just claiming that it was a bogus investigation (and he knew his party was not going to back him). Now we have the entire Republican party doubling down on not only not holding Trump accountable for any criminal activity, but of doing everything possible to put him back in the White House so he can destroy our constitutional republic forever.

Fake electors have been indicted in Michigan. Something is coming in Georgia eventually.

[Stavros]

I don't think I will ever understand the support a liar and a con-man like Trump has among seasoned politicians and journalists. I can only assume they are as disenchanted by the USA as Trump is, and no longer have any faith in the system that was created in the aftermath of 1776. The problem is that while Trump appears to favour some form of Autocracy or Dictatorship, it is not clear what his Republican supporters want, though the Libertarians funded by the Koch dynasty and similar rich men, want an end to Government in its broadest sense of the word, a radical position which seems be derived from the earliest settlers who believed in self-government.

That said, is it even conceivable that faced with such serious consequences, Trump could do a deal, plead guilty to some of the charges and take a chance on the rest? Or even just throw in the towel on the basis that he will not be sent to prison?

The text of the indictment is here-

trump-indictment.pdf (d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net) (https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/08/trump-indictment.pdf)

[Stavros]

The indictment makes for fascinating reading, though a lot of its content was aired in the hearings in the House that were televised last year. There is a long section on the Vice President that to my mind undermines most of Trump's case, or Defendant 1, Def1 here.

Defenders have argued this case is a test of the First Amendment, that Free Speech is the foundation of Trump's defence, that he had the legal right to tell lies.

I disagree with this, on the basis of what is in the Indictment. It details the number of times Def1 was told there was no fraud, either in general terms, or in the specific States that became the subject of Def1's claims. In some cases, at an evening meeting Def1 would be told categorically that X was not true, but then repeat it the following morning, in a Tweet, or verbally or in some other way. Does the First Amendment enable a President to knowingly tell lies? On one occasion he failed to get the Vice President to use his role in Congress to stop the transition, then stated the following morning the Vice President was considering it -does Free Speech enable Def1 to lie about someone else's intentions?

The key, it seems to me, is not that Free Speech is a right, but that the intention of the lies was to deprive the citizens of the USA their Constitutional right to have their votes counted fairly, and for the outcome to represent their wishes.

But what the Indictment also documents, is that when Def1 did not get the response he wanted, either from State officials or the Vice President, he used the power of the Presidency to threaten them -with legal action in the case of Georgia, more sinister in the case of the Vice President. This is what the Indictment says about the latter-

"97.
Also on January 5, the Defendant met alone with the Vice President. When the Vice President refused to agree to the Defendant's request that he obstruct the certification, the Defendant grew frustrated and told the Vice President that the Defendant would have to publicly criticize him. Upon learning of this, the Vice-President's Chief of Staff was concerned for the Vice President's safety and alerted the head of the Vice President's Secret Service detail."

-This is chilling, because in others cases, such as in the case of the election worker in Georgia libelled more than 20 times in that notorious phone call, and in other cases, refusals to adopt Def1's lies led to death threats, forced removals from home, and, as was seen on the next day, January 6, mobs screaming 'Hang Mike Pence!'.

Surely, Free Speech cannot be used or legally justified, if the aim is to coerce others, or threaten, or merely insinuate that a violent act might follow? And violent acts did follow, and the Indictment claims that such acts were a direct consequence of Def1's 'Free Speech' rights.

In another case, officials in the Department of Justice were told they would be fired if they did not implement procedures that were known to be based on lies, that were known to be a violation of the Constitution and the Law. Is it Free Speech to threaten someone's livelihood?

I am no lawyer, but I am assuming there is a boundary line that separates the Free Speech of Def1 which claims 'We won every State by a lot', from the Free Speech that intimidates, threatens, and even threatens individuals with violence. That cannot be right.

[Stavros]

A useful interpretation, based on the President's Conduct, rather than his speech. The sections on the Fake Electors in the Indictment goes into a lot of detail but is nevertheless potentially one of the strongest cases against Def1.

Rep. Jamie Raskin Dismantles Trump's 'Comical' New Jan. 6 Claim (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rep-jamie-raskin-dismantles-trumps-060738245.html)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I don't think I will ever understand the support a liar and a con-man like Trump has among seasoned politicians and journalists. I can only assume they are as disenchanted by the USA as Trump is, and no longer have any faith in the system that was created in the aftermath of 1776. The problem is that while Trump appears to favour some form of Autocracy or Dictatorship, it is not clear what his Republican supporters want, though the Libertarians funded by the Koch dynasty and similar rich men, want an end to Government in its broadest sense of the word, a radical position which seems be derived from the earliest settlers who believed in self-government.

That said, is it even conceivable that faced with such serious consequences, Trump could do a deal, plead guilty to some of the charges and take a chance on the rest? Or even just throw in the towel on the basis that he will not be sent to prison?

The text of the indictment is here-

trump-indictment.pdf (d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net) (https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/08/trump-indictment.pdf)It because his supporters have been brainwashed into believing anything The MAGA King Donald Trump,and his enablers in US Congress,Senate and on the Propaganda Channel tells them. And are convinced he's the victim and target of a witch hunt of the deep state who is out to get him. He's not going to do that,because thinks he's innocent and didn't do anything wrong,which everyone else knows he did and is going to end up paying the price with his freedom by being convicted and serving time in federal prison.

[Stavros]

He's not going to do that,because thinks he's innocent and didn't do anything wrong,which everyone else knows he did and is going to end up paying the price with his freedom by being convicted and serving time in federal prison.


But as the former President's security team are not going to go to prison with him, if convicted and so sentenced, he would have to serve his time in a military prison.

As in: Guantanamo...

[filghy2]

I am no lawyer, but I am assuming there is a boundary line that separates the Free Speech of Def1 which claims 'We won every State by a lot', from the Free Speech that intimidates, threatens, and even threatens individuals with violence. That cannot be right.

There is. Trump is not being charged with falsely claiming the election was fraudulent, or with using legal/constitutional means to challenge the outcome. He (and others) are charged with conspiring to overturn the outcome through extra-constitutional means.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/03/trump-is-hoping-his-free-speech-defense-will-work-it-wont

[KnightHawk 2.0]

But as the former President's security team are not going to go to prison with him, if convicted and so sentenced, he would have to serve his time in a military prison.

As in: Guantanamo...Completely agree,they're not going to prison with Donald Trump,that's where a traitor and domestic terrorist leader like him belongs at.

[filghy2]

Even the non-right media has done nothing to paint Biden's administration in a positive light. Any good news on the economy is couched in terms of a looming recession. His age is always mentioned. Polling showing that voters don't want a Biden/Trump rematch is always mentioned. The man literally pulled us back from the brink, got landmark infrastructure legislation and the CHIPS Act passed, and gets zero credit.


They don't seem to learned much from 2016, when every negative about Hillary Clinton was amplified, while Trump's outrageous statements were downplayed because he wasn't taken seriously.

Many people seem to be in denial about what a second Trump term might entail. If he wins again there won't be any Republican 'adults' keeping him line. The key lesson he learnt from last time is the need to install Trump sycophants in every public position. The Republican establishment will be totally cowed into submission.

[Fitzcarraldo]

The Republican establishment will be totally cowed into submission.

That has already happened.

[Stavros]

How does one deal with the argument from Trump's defenders, when Trump was told there was no fraud in the election by the Attorney General, the head of National Intelligence, the head of Cyber Security, every official White House lawyer, and his Vice-President -do their opinions not have any weight at all on Presidential decisions if instead. the President brings in outsiders, 'crackpot lawyers' whose judgments Trump does believe? If this is the case, what is the job of the Attorney General when dealing with the President, or all the others?
If the prosecution ask Trump why he did not believe any of the formal officials in the administration, how will he answer that question?

I come back to something I mentioned some time ago re John Eastman. I have seem him called one of the leading experts on Constitutional Law, but he was working in a law school ranked 147 or something like that. To me, that suggests a minor figure with no claim to be an expert on anything. So how did he find himself re-located from California to the Oval Office of the White House? He clerked for Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court Justice sponsored by Harlan Crow. But I guess hundreds of clerks get their chance to work with a Supreme Court Justice, just as members of the House and Senate have interns. But the connection is there, if not Clarence himself, then perhaps his wife?

Last night on BBC-2's Newsnight, a lawyer defending Trump was never asked if there is any merit in the Indictment's claim that Trump conspired with others to stop the process of certification on January 6, Mark Urban asking other questions -but surely this is one of the key problems Trump has? It is one thing to deny the reality of the election result, but something different to then seek the means to prevent the election process from taking place, described in the US Constitution as Sedition, because while Congress does have the right to question outcomes, it cannot do so on a whim, on an argument that has zero evidence to support its claim.

Like the lies told in the Brexit campaign, the defenders must hope that if they lie, lie and lie again, people will either believe the lies, or just switch off, a win-win for the terrorists.

[Fitzcarraldo]

It is one thing to deny the reality of the election result, but something different to then seek the means to prevent the election process from taking place, described in the US Constitution as Sedition, because while Congress does have the right to question outcomes, it cannot do so on a whim, on an argument that has zero evidence to support its claim.



That is why he is being tried. The indictment actually says he had the right to say he won the election.

[Stavros]

That is why he is being tried. The indictment actually says he had the right to say he won the election.

Tell it to the 'experts' like Alan Dershowitz who insists this is a free speech case, or Kevin McCarthy or all the other men and women in denial who in any case don't regard the Siege of Congress as a big deal and now constantly cite JFK's success in Hawaii. There, a dispute over the result led to a recount which confirmed that JFK beat Nixon, so that the JFK electors were the legitimate representatives of Hawaii in the Electoral College. In none of the recounts in disputed cases in 2020 was the outcome different- Biden won, Trump lost, so Pence had no basis on which to 'pause' the certification process. But who among those self-invented historians cares about the facts?

If it was the Titanic, they would have dismissed the iceberg fantasy, and be ordering another round of Dom Perignon.

Fact Check: Did Vice President Richard Nixon Reject Hawaii's Election Results in 1960? (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-vice-president-richard-nixon-reject-hawaiis-election-results-1960-1559180)

[Fitzcarraldo]

Tell it to the 'experts' like Alan Dershowitz who insists this is a free speech case, or Kevin McCarthy or all the other men and women in denial who in any case don't regard the Siege of Congress as a big deal and now constantly cite JFK's success in Hawaii. There, a dispute over the result led to a recount which confirmed that JFK beat Nixon, so that the JFK electors were the legitimate representatives of Hawaii in the Electoral College. In none of the recounts in disputed cases in 2020 was the outcome different- Biden won, Trump lost, so Pence had no basis on which to 'pause' the certification process. But who among those self-invented historians cares about the facts?

If it was the Titanic, they would have dismissed the iceberg fantasy, and be ordering another round of Dom Perignon.

Fact Check: Did Vice President Richard Nixon Reject Hawaii's Election Results in 1960? (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-vice-president-richard-nixon-reject-hawaiis-election-results-1960-1559180)

It doesn't matter what the talking heads think. It matters what the jury thinks (if Trump isn't successful in delaying the trial until after the 2024 election).

[KnightHawk 2.0]

It doesn't matter what the talking heads think. It matters what the jury thinks (if Trump isn't successful in delaying the trial until after the 2024 election).Agree it doesn't his enablers in Congress,Senate and The Propaganda Channel thinks,it matters what the jury thinks. And Donald Trump's efforts to delay the trial after the 2024 Presidential Election is going to fail.

[Stavros]

It doesn't matter what the talking heads think. It matters what the jury thinks (if Trump isn't successful in delaying the trial until after the 2024 election).

So by stepping away from the debate, you ensure that Trump and his followers shape the daily news agenda. Surely this is a time when responsible people should be exposing the worthless drivel that is being promoted by Trump, by Dershowitz and those other 'talking heads' you don't much care about. It means Rudolph Giuliani can get away with his cheap, vulgar attacks on his former colleagues; that Trump can not only maintain his relentless abuse of the justice system, but also harass, intimidate, and even threaten people, albeit so far un-named individuals.

Where is the opposition to this full frontal assault of Democracy and the Rule of Law? Nowhere.

Every day could see responsible people ask how Trump made his money in the 1990s, and follow the leads which suggest he laundered money for the Russian mafia through his New Jersey casinos. They could hammer home the fact that in the 2016 election, Trump sided with the Russians against the US making him, in effect, a traitor. They could highlight the fact that when the Covid virus began sweeping across the USA, Trump had the legal and moral duty to protect and defend the US- instead he insulted and abused the State of Washington; when the State of New York pleaded for Federal Personal Protection Equipment, Trump and Jared Kushner deliberately stopped it so as to make the Democrats look weak and useless. And when Trump insulted, abused and attacked Gretchen Whitmer his followers hatched a plan to kidnap and assassinate her, when Trump should have been working 14 hours a day to help Michigan. Then there are the multiple times Trump has fantasied about having sex with his daughter. Trump was best friends with Jeffrey Epstein and knew of his interest in young girls -did he ever inform law enforcement of his buddy's criminal activities? Nah. All of these could be the daily feed to prove Trump never was, and never will be fit for public office.

Trump is a liar and a crook.
Trump is a traitor to the USA.
Trump is a disgusting, incestuous beast.

But hey, I guess he will get away with everything, because it seems people are so exhausted by his permanent state of Narcissistic Glory, they prefer to switch off and hide under the sofa and hope he will just go away.

Trump's casino was a money laundering concern shortly after it opened | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/22/politics/trump-taj-mahal/index.html)

Exclusive: Trump Made Shocking Comments About Ivanka, Says Ex-Staffer (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-ivanka-naked-sexism-miles-taylor-book-nyt-anonymous-1809187)

[filghy2]

What are you wanting Fitz to do? Maybe you want something like this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXv7SZCRfe8

[Stavros]

What are you wanting Fitz to do? Maybe you want something like this?



No, that is just knee jerk hysteria. The point is that in effect, the election campaign has begun but there seems to be little attempt to take on Trump, De Santis and the various loud mouths who occupy their space, though an article in the NYT suggests Kamala Harris is keen to get involved. Democrts have allowed Trump to control the news cycle, when the news cycle should be forcing him to defend his record of treachery and failure, his disgusting personality.

If Trump wants everything to be about him, then expose him to the most brutal realities that can be used against him. he has after all been giving his opponents as much rope to hang him with as they need. To sit back and do nothing on the basis a jury will convict is just not good politics. And Biden can't do it and probably ought not to, focusing instead on what his admin's achievements are so far.

It's an open goal, but no scores for the right side of democracy and the rule of law.

[Fitzcarraldo]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4145223-former-federal-judge-trump-now-an-even-greater-danger-to-american-democracy/

[Fitzcarraldo]

Georgia on my mind:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-georgia-election-investigation-grand-jury-willis-d39562cedfc60d64948708de1b011ed3

[Stavros]

That phone call can't be faked, it stands out as a pure example of the drivel that Trump believed, but also a demonstration of his attempt to reverse the people's vote. The slander of the two election workers, and the participation of others in this conspiracy makes one wonder if any of the accused will flip on Trump, or go down with him.

I am possibly surprised Cleta Mitchell is not named, as she was on the phone call complaining to Raffensperger that his office had refused to provide her with some polling data, which he pointed out would have been against Georgia's election law.

But am I right in thinking it is the 'Racketeering' indictment that is the most serious -or is it so broad the defence could chip away at it?

But I assume every citizen of the USA is equal before the law, right? Not that Lindsay Graham seems to know this.

[Fitzcarraldo]

But am I right in thinking it is the 'Racketeering' indictment that is the most serious -or is it so broad the defence could chip away at it?

Yes, it is serious, and carries a mandatory 5-year prison term. The defense will claim lots of things.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

That phone call can't be faked, it stands out as a pure example of the drivel that Trump believed, but also a demonstration of his attempt to reverse the people's vote. The slander of the two election workers, and the participation of others in this conspiracy makes one wonder if any of the accused will flip on Trump, or go down with him.

I am possibly surprised Cleta Mitchell is not named, as she was on the phone call complaining to Raffensperger that his office had refused to provide her with some polling data, which he pointed out would have been against Georgia's election law.

But am I right in thinking it is the 'Racketeering' indictment that is the most serious -or is it so broad the defence could chip away at it?

But I assume every citizen of the USA is equal before the law, right? Not that Lindsay Graham seems to know this.The phone call Donald Trump made to Georgia Secretary Brad Raffensperger back on December 2nd 2020 pressuring him to find 11,780 votes is very real,despite what he and enablers claims. Yes you are correct.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Yes, it is serious, and carries a mandatory 5-year prison term. The defense will claim lots of things.Donald Trump's defense can make all the claims they want,but they're ain't going to stick.

[Luke Warm]

The Georgia trial will be televised. "Must See TV" Who will flip? I bet Rudy Giuliani will. He doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison. There are 30 unindicted co-conspirators in this case who could still face charges later. There will be a lot of pressure on them to talk.

[Stavros]

The Georgia trial will be televised. "Must See TV" Who will flip? I bet Rudy Giuliani will. He doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison. There are 30 unindicted co-conspirators in this case who could still face charges later. There will be a lot of pressure on them to talk.

What's the deal with Mark Meadows? I don't know much about him, but he seems either a willing accomplice, or another of those deluded people who joined the team thinking they could 'control' or 'moderate' the man who will not be told what to do. And is Trump allowed to insult and abuse judges, lawyers, prosecutors and witnesses? He gets away with so much I wonder if he thinks he is immune -?

[Stavros]

Last week I watched a football match in which the USA Women's team were beaten on penalties by Sweden. Can I state that in spite of the documented result, I sincerely believe the USA won that match? If I did so, the response would be -why?

So Sean Hannity says that Trump sincerely believes he won the State of Georgia in the 2020 election, but cannot explain why Trump believes this when all of the facts say he lost, and all of Trump's allegations about the means whereby he lost have been proven to be false. Hannity then goes on to describe the 'dual justice' system in the US on the basis it is biased against Trump whereas the evidence shows it is Trump who has been treated not just differently from other alleged felons, but favourably.

This denial of facts, of the truth has reached a point of absurdity. Hannity might as well claim 9/11 never happened, that what you saw on TV was all made up. But then, again, the question would follow: Why?

Is it so hard to admit to losing, to being wrong, to losing votes in a State they expected to win?

Sean Hannity Predicts Outcome Of Trump Trials And Names Specific GOP Challenge (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/sean-hannity-predicts-outcome-trump-104914264.html)

[Fitzcarraldo]

Oh, the right doesn't like that team anyway:
https://jezebel.com/republicans-celebrate-u-s-womens-soccer-teams-loss-w-1850713259

[Fitzcarraldo]

Will he or won't he?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trumps-legal-advisers-urge-cancel-press-conference-refute/story?id=102336380

[Stavros]

Will he or won't he?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trumps-legal-advisers-urge-cancel-press-conference-refute/story?id=102336380

I think he will chicken out of this stunt, given that he may be open to yet more litigation -but this is a man who hires lawyers by the dozen -and doesn't pay them, or expects the public to pay- and then ignores their advice!

[Fitzcarraldo]

I think he will chicken out of this stunt, given that he may be open to yet more litigation -but this is a man who hires lawyers by the dozen -and doesn't pay them, or expects the public to pay- and then ignores their advice!

That has worked out fabulously for him so far, so why change? So far he only seems to have been held accountable for one lawsuit. And the rubes will keep sending him money.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Will he or won't he?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trumps-legal-advisers-urge-cancel-press-conference-refute/story?id=102336380 The MAGA King Donald Trump won't,because he's going to do what he always does, which is play the victim and dupe his supporters into giving him money.

[filghy2]

The Georgia trial will be televised. "Must See TV" Who will flip? I bet Rudy Giuliani will. He doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison. There are 30 unindicted co-conspirators in this case who could still face charges later. There will be a lot of pressure on them to talk.

It looks like Giuliani's in financial trouble and Trump has refused to help, so that's another factor.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/17/rudy-giuliani-legal-fees-trump-mar-a-lago-visit

[filghy2]

Will he or won't he?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trumps-legal-advisers-urge-cancel-press-conference-refute/story?id=102336380

"Trump announced the planned press conference with a social media post shortly after he and 18 co-defendants were indicted late Monday in Georgia. He said he would present, "A Large, Complex, Detailed but Irrefutable REPORT on the Presidential Election Fraud which took place in Georgia.""

Right, that would be the irrefutable evidence of electoral fraud that for some reason he's kept to himself since November 2020. If there really was a "large, complex and detailed report" Trump would obviously not have read it.

[Fitzcarraldo]

"Trump announced the planned press conference with a social media post shortly after he and 18 co-defendants were indicted late Monday in Georgia. He said he would present, "A Large, Complex, Detailed but Irrefutable REPORT on the Presidential Election Fraud which took place in Georgia.""

Right, that would be the irrefutable evidence of electoral fraud that for some reason he's kept to himself since November 2020. If there really was a "large, complex and detailed report" Trump would obviously not have read it.

He's called it off now. He says it isn't necessary. :rolleyes:

[Stavros]

The argument now is that State Officials can refuse to allow Trump to be listed as a Candidate on Ballot papers in the 2024 election. Two articles, some both referencing the Federalist Society, are here, and base their argument on the Constitution's ban on any citizen who has engaged in Insurrection or given comfort and support to anyone else who has.

"“In our view, on the basis of the public record, former President Donald J. Trump is constitutionally disqualified from again being President (or holding any other covered office) because of his role in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 election and the events leading to the January 6 attack,” law professors William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen wrote for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751). “The case for disqualification is strong.”"
Legal scholars increasingly raise constitutional argument that Trump should be barred from presidency | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html)

Trump should be kept off the ballot | Maryland Daily Record (thedailyrecord.com) (https://thedailyrecord.com/2023/08/17/trump-should-be-kept-off-the-ballot/)

But will any State actually do this?

[Fitzcarraldo]

The argument now is that State Officials can refuse to allow Trump to be listed as a Candidate on Ballot papers in the 2024 election. Two articles, some both referencing the Federalist Society, are here, and base their argument on the Constitution's ban on any citizen who has engaged in Insurrection or given comfort and support to anyone else who has.

"“In our view, on the basis of the public record, former President Donald J. Trump is constitutionally disqualified from again being President (or holding any other covered office) because of his role in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 election and the events leading to the January 6 attack,” law professors William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen wrote for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751). “The case for disqualification is strong.”"
Legal scholars increasingly raise constitutional argument that Trump should be barred from presidency | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html)

Trump should be kept off the ballot | Maryland Daily Record (thedailyrecord.com) (https://thedailyrecord.com/2023/08/17/trump-should-be-kept-off-the-ballot/)

But will any State actually do this?

Time will tell. I can't imagine my state of Florida removing him from the ballot, though.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

The argument now is that State Officials can refuse to allow Trump to be listed as a Candidate on Ballot papers in the 2024 election. Two articles, some both referencing the Federalist Society, are here, and base their argument on the Constitution's ban on any citizen who has engaged in Insurrection or given comfort and support to anyone else who has.

"“In our view, on the basis of the public record, former President Donald J. Trump is constitutionally disqualified from again being President (or holding any other covered office) because of his role in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 election and the events leading to the January 6 attack,” law professors William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen wrote for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751). “The case for disqualification is strong.”"
Legal scholars increasingly raise constitutional argument that Trump should be barred from presidency | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html)

Trump should be kept off the ballot | Maryland Daily Record (thedailyrecord.com) (https://thedailyrecord.com/2023/08/17/trump-should-be-kept-off-the-ballot/)

But will any State actually do this?It will be interesting to see if any state would remove Donald Trump from the ballot.

[natina]

Trump bared from being listed on USA ballets and running for office .

14 Amendment of constitution


The Constitution bars Trump from holding public office ever again


While some on the right portray accountability for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as just another partisan dispute, two prominent conservative legal scholars have made the case that the Constitution disqualifies former President Trump from public office.

Last week, law professors William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — both members of the conservative Federalist Society — argued in a law review article that Trump is already constitutionally forbidden from serving in public office because of Section Three of the 14th Amendment

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-constitution-bars-trump-from-holding-public-office-ever-again/ar-AA1fp0eb

[Stavros]

Trump bared from being listed on USA ballets and running for office .



Trump in a Tutu? The imagined image alone is scary.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Look at the hideous baby trying not to cry.
1428097

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Look at the hideous baby trying not to cry.
1428097That is one ass looking miserable pile of shit. Who is the embodiment of the imbeciles who voted for him.

[filghy2]

I think he was trying for the "If you go after me, I'm coming after you" look.

The man seems to have only two looks - the angry pout and the self-satisfied smirk.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

And right on cue,the MAGA King and Mediawhore Donald Trump is right back on Twitter selling t-shirts with his mugshot on them for $34.00. And the gullible fools who voted for him will be buying them.

[Stavros]

That is one ass looking miserable pile of shit. Who is the embodiment of the imbeciles who voted for him.

At least you have the unedited photo -quite a few in the press are editing out the Sheriff's badge. There is also some speculation about his recorded weight but I don't know much about that.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

At least you have the unedited photo -quite a few in the press are editing out the Sheriff's badge. There is also some speculation about his recorded weight but I don't know much about that.I noticed that speculation as well.

[Fitzcarraldo]

At least you have the unedited photo -quite a few in the press are editing out the Sheriff's badge. There is also some speculation about his recorded weight but I don't know much about that.

There's no way he only weighs 215 pounds.

[Mirgofino]

He looks like a man who has "lost the plot" since he was born.

[filghy2]

Actually, he's followed the plot he learned from his father and Roy Cohn - ignore all the rules, declare you own reality and go after anyone who crosses you.

[filghy2]

The psychopath look obviously goes over well with the MAGA crowd.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/26/trump-mugshot-fundraising-00113118

[Stavros]

The psychopath look obviously goes over well with the MAGA crowd.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/26/trump-mugshot-fundraising-00113118

How to become rich: persuade other people to give their money to you. One wonders if the money will be spent on legal fees, given Trump's reputation for not bothering to pay. All those billions he is worth, and he won't spend a dime on his own defence. Need to know anything else?

[Stavros]

Not an expert on this, but Mark Meadows wants his trial moved to a Federal Court because he claims he was acting in his capacity as a Federal official. I am not sure but what puzzles me, is that if the White House has lawyers who are on the Federal payroll, why would the Chief of Staff allow a group of other lawyers to both enter the Oval Office, and advise the President? On the Georgia call there was a woman named Cleta Mitchell who clearly did not know Georgia election law, and also there are people such as Giuliani, Sidney Powell and John Eastman, the latter two coming from some obscurity -was it Steve Bannon or Roger Stone who recommended them to Trump? And who told them? But crucially, as none of them were Federal officials, and Meadows knew this, his own behaviour suggests that in participating with them in the call, he stepped outside of his Federal responsibility to become part of the conspiracy to change an election result, which no President or member of his staff has the legal right to do.

I might be wrong, or does the law allow a President to interfere in State elections? And what is the role of the Chief of Staff in this, to advise, or just be an obedient servant? If Trump told Meadows to throw a cat out of the window, would he do so without question?

Mark Meadows testifies in bid to move Georgia election case to federal court | Mark Meadows | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/28/mark-meadows-trump-georgia-testimony-federal-court)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Not an expert on this, but Mark Meadows wants his trial moved to a Federal Court because he claims he was acting in his capacity as a Federal official. I am not sure but what puzzles me, is that if the White House has lawyers who are on the Federal payroll, why would the Chief of Staff allow a group of other lawyers to both enter the Oval Office, and advise the President? On the Georgia call there was a woman named Cleta Mitchell who clearly did not know Georgia election law, and also there are people such as Giuliani, Sidney Powell and John Eastman, the latter two coming from some obscurity -was it Steve Bannon or Roger Stone who recommended them to Trump? And who told them? But crucially, as none of them were Federal officials, and Meadows knew this, his own behaviour suggests that in participating with them in the call, he stepped outside of his Federal responsibility to become part of the conspiracy to change an election result, which no President or member of his staff has the legal right to do.

I might be wrong, or does the law allow a President to interfere in State elections? And what is the role of the Chief of Staff in this, to advise, or just be an obedient servant? If Trump told Meadows to throw a cat out of the window, would he do so without question?

Mark Meadows testifies in bid to move Georgia election case to federal court | Mark Meadows | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/28/mark-meadows-trump-georgia-testimony-federal-court)No the law doesn't allow a sitting president to interfere in state elections,a chief of staff's job is responsible for directing,managing and overseeing all policy development,daily operations and staff activities for the president. Mark Meadows would do without question.

[Mirgofino]

Yes. The paradox of losing the plot by following one.

[Stavros]

I know it is a different case from the one in the OP, but there is an intriguing aspect to the case in New York concerning the claim Trump made fraudulent claims about the value of his properties there. Earlier this year he told the Court-

"Interrogated about the truthfulness of financial statements he gave to banks, Trump repeatedly insisted that, legally speaking, it didn't matter whether they were accurate or not.“I have a clause in there that says, ‘Don’t believe the statement. Go out and do your own work.’ This statement is ‘worthless.’ It means nothing,” Trump testified. Given the disclaimer, he said, “you’re supposed to pay no credence to what we say whatsoever.”"
-He then added
""Do you know the banks were fully paid? Do you know the banks made a lot of money?" Trump testified. "Do you know I don’t believe I ever got even a default notice, and even during COVID, the banks were all paid? And yet you’re suing on behalf of banks, I guess. It’s crazy. The whole case is crazy.”"
Trump dismissive as New York attorney general accuses him of inflating his net worth by $2 billion (yahoo.com) (https://uk.yahoo.com/news/york-attorney-general-seeks-immediate-210048289.html)

But if this means with regard to the Banks that 'they knew the details were crap but they calculated they could all make money from it', should this bring all those involved into a criminal investigation by the IRS? After all, the key to all this is that property values were high when a loan was sought, and low when it came to paying taxes -if Trump is saying the truth is not important, and nobody else thought so too, then he cannot be the only person on trial -?? It is rather like the argument that the auditors who sign off on accounts that are wrong are not so much incompetent, as 'in on the act'. It implicates everyone involved, not just Trump.

But, at a basic level, what does it say of a 'businessman' who knowingly tells lies to obtain money and says 'it's up to you to prove it'? Is there no point in any of these transactions and the legal process when the truth actually has power?

[filghy2]

"Interrogated about the truthfulness of financial statements he gave to banks, Trump repeatedly insisted that, legally speaking, it didn't matter whether they were accurate or not.“I have a clause in there that says, ‘Don’t believe the statement. Go out and do your own work.’ This statement is ‘worthless.’ It means nothing,” Trump testified. Given the disclaimer, he said, “you’re supposed to pay no credence to what we say whatsoever.”"

That is just bizarre. If the lenders are supposed to know the valuation was false then what was the point of it? Obviously he did it because he thought it would be to his advantage.

I'm pretty sure that you are not legally protected from liability for false statements just because there is a disclaimer in the fine print somewhere.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Related:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/prison-joe-biggs-sedition-proud-boys-violence-capitol-1234815512/

[Stavros]

That is just bizarre. If the lenders are supposed to know the valuation was false then what was the point of it? Obviously he did it because he thought it would be to his advantage.

I'm pretty sure that you are not legally protected from liability for false statements just because there is a disclaimer in the fine print somewhere.

I understand your argument, but is there a due diligence obligation on lenders. Rather than just take Trump's valuation as stated, make their own investigation? It doesn't seem credible that anyone familiar with real estate prices in Manhattan would believe some of Trump's figures. When Deutsche Bank loaned Trump a billion dollars, did they work out if he could pay it back, and how? It may be that what Trump has exploited foe years, mostly through clever lawyers, is the legal fine print but also the 'I dare you' tactic of making claims he knows lenders won't bother to check, or calculate that either way they will get their money back. I suppose the irony is that while his lenders may have got their money back, he is notorious for not paying smaller bills to people who work for him, like his 'personal lawyers'.

And, ultimately, did he break the law? We still don't know what a Court may decide.

[filghy2]

Deutsche Bank has a long history of involvement in dubious practices (eg Russian money-laundering). I would not be surprised if there were questionable motives on their side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Bank

[Stavros]

The Mug shot, sold by a Mug

"Legal experts have warned that the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office owns the copyright for the image and so could sue Mr Trump for using it on t-shirts and other merchandise."
Trump gloats about leading DeSantis in polls as mug shot merch could land him in legal hot water: Live updates (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-gloats-leading-desantis-polls-100411432.html)

So what are they waiting for?

[Fitzcarraldo]

The Mug shot, sold by a Mug

"Legal experts have warned that the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office owns the copyright for the image and so could sue Mr Trump for using it on t-shirts and other merchandise."
Trump gloats about leading DeSantis in polls as mug shot merch could land him in legal hot water: Live updates (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-gloats-leading-desantis-polls-100411432.html)

So what are they waiting for?

The criminal prosecution is a higher priority than filing a lawsuit.

[Stavros]

The Politico article in the link looks into the fractures that might emerge among the 19 Defendants in the Georgia case.

What I don't know is what the legal status is of lawyers like John Eastman and Sidney Powell -if they are not on a Federal Contract, are they allowed to claim 'Attorney-Client Privilege'? Set aside the claim the law was broken, changing the rules, I don't really understand their status, or how they even got into the White House at all.

In the case of Mark Meadows, his problem is that in addition to being a Federal Employee, he must also be aware of the Hatch Act, and the argument that a sitting President has no legal right to personally challenge any election result in any State, let alone get the senior official on the phone to seek a reversal of the outcome.

But this is quite astonishing, if true-

"Meadows made clear in his own testimony at last week’s hearing that Trump viewed the false electors as a significant part of his strategy to remain in power. He said he sent an email pushing the campaign to assemble those slates because he feared a tongue-lashing from Trump.
“What I didn’t want to happen was for the campaign to prevail in court action and not have this” lined up, he said.
“Why?” prosecutor Anna Cross asked him.
“Because I knew I’d be yelled at by the president of the United States,” he said."
Trump’s co-defendants are already starting to turn against him - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/05/trump-cases-defendants-flipping-00113910)

Seriously? If he is that terrified of the man, why didn't he just resign and let someone else do the dirty jobs as dictated to by Trump? Or, how about telling the man 'You can't do this, it's against the law'?

Pathetic.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Seriously? If he is that terrified of the man, why didn't he just resign and let someone else do the dirty jobs as dictated to by Trump? Or, how about telling the man 'You can't do this, it's against the law'?

Because he was afraid of him. He knew that if he didn't do what Trump wanted, Trump would try to ruin him.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

The Politico article in the link looks into the fractures that might emerge among the 19 Defendants in the Georgia case.

What I don't know is what the legal status is of lawyers like John Eastman and Sidney Powell -if they are not on a Federal Contract, are they allowed to claim 'Attorney-Client Privilege'? Set aside the claim the law was broken, changing the rules, I don't really understand their status, or how they even got into the White House at all.

In the case of Mark Meadows, his problem is that in addition to being a Federal Employee, he must also be aware of the Hatch Act, and the argument that a sitting President has no legal right to personally challenge any election result in any State, let alone get the senior official on the phone to seek a reversal of the outcome.

But this is quite astonishing, if true-

"Meadows made clear in his own testimony at last week’s hearing that Trump viewed the false electors as a significant part of his strategy to remain in power. He said he sent an email pushing the campaign to assemble those slates because he feared a tongue-lashing from Trump.
“What I didn’t want to happen was for the campaign to prevail in court action and not have this” lined up, he said.
“Why?” prosecutor Anna Cross asked him.
“Because I knew I’d be yelled at by the president of the United States,” he said."
Trump’s co-defendants are already starting to turn against him - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/05/trump-cases-defendants-flipping-00113910)

Seriously? If he is that terrified of the man, why didn't he just resign and let someone else do the dirty jobs as dictated to by Trump? Or, how about telling the man 'You can't do this, it's against the law'?

Pathetic.Because Mark Meadows is very afraid of his leader the MAGA King Donald Trump,because if he did resign,his leader would go after him.

[Stavros]

Because he was afraid of him. He knew that if he didn't do what Trump wanted, Trump would try to ruin him.

If you are right it only raises more questions about what kind of a man Mark Meadows is. He took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not Donald Trump, so are you saying he not only thinks, or thought Trump is greater than America, but that he was powerless to disobey him? There may be some twisted psychology at work here, though one recalls the way Mike Pence regarded Trump in terms of some odd belief that he treats him as a Christian, his humility and virtue will be rewarded, something Trump would neither understand nor care about.

No, there is something wrong here, and it may be distilled into the 6th of January, that day when according to his staff, he did nothing as the Capitol was besieged by Trump's disciples. Surely, at critical points in history, people in positions of power are called upon to make decisions that are based on conscience, on their duty and for the benefit of the country, not themselves. I just can't understand how Trump, known to his staff as a moron, a man known to all to be utterly obsessed with himself to the exclusion of everyone else, commanded such slavish loyalty even when the people concerned could see he was destroying their country and its Institutions.

Of all the people other than Trump and Giuliani who need to be punished, Meadows must be right up there. A worthless coward, a charmless sycophant, and now a pathetic loser desperate to avoid being held accountable for his atrocious behaviour when his country was being attacked.

And when the time comes, is Trump going to defend Meadows, or cast him as one of the many he blames for his fall?

[filghy2]

Moral cowardice has been the story of the Republican Party in recent years. Even when he was must vulnerable after January 6 those who really wanted him gone were afraid to act. If Mitch McConnell had persuaded a few others to back his words and support the impeachment the US would not be in this situation.

We all know the real source of Trump's power is the cult-like hold he has over about half of the Republican voters. The other half will largely acquiesce at the end of the day because they have been brainwashed into believing that the greater danger is the supposed liberal conspiracy to destroy their way of life.

[Fitzcarraldo]

If you are right it only raises more questions about what kind of a man Mark Meadows is. He took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not Donald Trump, so are you saying he not only thinks, or thought Trump is greater than America, but that he was powerless to disobey him? There may be some twisted psychology at work here, though one recalls the way Mike Pence regarded Trump in terms of some odd belief that he treats him as a Christian, his humility and virtue will be rewarded, something Trump would neither understand nor care about.

No, there is something wrong here, and it may be distilled into the 6th of January, that day when according to his staff, he did nothing as the Capitol was besieged by Trump's disciples. Surely, at critical points in history, people in positions of power are called upon to make decisions that are based on conscience, on their duty and for the benefit of the country, not themselves. I just can't understand how Trump, known to his staff as a moron, a man known to all to be utterly obsessed with himself to the exclusion of everyone else, commanded such slavish loyalty even when the people concerned could see he was destroying their country and its Institutions.

Of all the people other than Trump and Giuliani who need to be punished, Meadows must be right up there. A worthless coward, a charmless sycophant, and now a pathetic loser desperate to avoid being held accountable for his atrocious behaviour when his country was being attacked.

And when the time comes, is Trump going to defend Meadows, or cast him as one of the many he blames for his fall?

Meadows was a craven opportunist working for a craven opportunist. They flock together. Trump often uses mafia-type language when he speaks, denigrating "rats" who turned against him. Of course criminals don't like rats, because if someone talks, they don't get to continue with their crimes. None of Trump's crew cared about the Constitution. I can guarantee you that Trump has never even read it.

[Stavros]

The more desperate he gets, the more desperate the language, but the repeated use of extreme words in the end strips them of their meaning. Mark Milley? Guilty of Treason. NBC? Guilty of Treason. And so on. Either it looks like there will be a Saudi Arabian style orgy of executions if Trump is selected by whoever counts the votes to be 'President', or this is just fatuous waffle from a man whose use of the word 'deranged' appears to be more personal than he realizes. One just hopes some nutter with an AR-15 doesn't decide to save his country by wasting its people.

Trump vows to investigate NBC parent company for ‘treason’ (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-vows-investigate-nbc-parent-135856751.html)

[filghy2]

L'etat, c'est moi?

The idea of restructuring the entire US government (including the DoJ) to be under Trump's personal control is not just fatuous waffle. There is a plan to do just that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

[Helvis2012]

Lock him up!

[Stavros]

Score so far:

The Truth 1, Donald J. Trump 0.

"Donald Trump committed fraud for years while building the real estate empire that catapulted him to fame and the White House, a New York judge ruled on Tuesday in a strongly worded rejection of the former president’s bid to throw out a civil lawsuit against him.Judge Arthur Engoron found that Trump and executives from his company, including his sons Eric and Donald Jr, routinely and repeatedly deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork.

His ruling came in a civil lawsuit brought by Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, days before the start of a non-jury trial that will hear accusations that Trump, and the Trump Organization, lied for a decade about asset values and his net worth to get better terms on bank loans and insurance."
Donald Trump committed fraud as he built his real estate empire, New York judge rules | Donald Trump | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/26/trump-liable-fraud-new-york)

[filghy2]

The only question is why did it take so long? Even before he went into politics Trump seemed to have a remarkable ability to get away with ignoring the law.

[Fitzcarraldo]

The only question is why did it take so long? Even before he went into politics Trump seemed to have a remarkable ability to get away with ignoring the law.

Bribery, maybe? Also, in all civil cases he had enough money to wear down any opposition in legal action.

[Stavros]

Eric Trump values Mar-a-Lago at $1 Billion. So what does that make the White House worth?

Maybe Skittles should do night classes in maths, or night classes in basket weaving as he doesn’t yet have skills he will need to survive in this cruel, cruel world.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Score so far:

The Truth 1, Donald J. Trump 0.

"Donald Trump committed fraud for years while building the real estate empire that catapulted him to fame and the White House, a New York judge ruled on Tuesday in a strongly worded rejection of the former president’s bid to throw out a civil lawsuit against him.Judge Arthur Engoron found that Trump and executives from his company, including his sons Eric and Donald Jr, routinely and repeatedly deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork.

His ruling came in a civil lawsuit brought by Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, days before the start of a non-jury trial that will hear accusations that Trump, and the Trump Organization, lied for a decade about asset values and his net worth to get better terms on bank loans and insurance."
Donald Trump committed fraud as he built his real estate empire, New York judge rules | Donald Trump | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/26/trump-liable-fraud-new-york)The MAGA King Donald Trump's persona is a sham,and is not a successful business man as he claim. And now he is going to pay the price. Great day for the truth,very bad day for Donald Trump.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

The MAGA King,Domestic Terrorist Leader and Charlatan Donald Trump motion to have Judge Tanya Chutkan recuse herself has been denied by the judge her. He can use all the underhanded tactics too delay the trial all he wants,but they're going to backfire. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/27/politics/tanya-chutkan-donald-trump-recusal-motion/index.html

[Stavros]

Alina Hannah in court in NYC yesterday : “ “The value is what someone is willing to pay. The Trump properties are Mona Lisa properties” “.

a) there is only one Mona Lisa, but multiples of Trump or Trump branded properties, and if Mar-a-Lago is worth a billion $ the question is, outside of Saudi Arabia or the Gulf, is there anyone dumb enough to pay such a sum for a property that could be underwater in 10 years time?

b) value is not price, and cannot always be simply equated- I don’t know if Doral is one of the best golf courses in the US, but is it not conceivable that Trump properties now, regardless of their location and value, are priced below their worth because the Trump brand has become a negative in the market?

[Helvis2012]

Yes, Stavros, you make a very good point. Value is dictated by desire. Be it a painting, a property or anything else. For Trump, he's fucked. He was always a sham and now, the rest of the world will know it too.
Mar a Lago, (so fitting! The name sounds like a shitty club) will never fetch such a price, unless it becomes an attraction for the utterly stupid and/or children learning about treason and corruption in grade school. Hopefully, he's having a heart attack now, and dying peacefully in his sleep.

[Stavros]

This is getting silly now. The Telegraph has the staff to do the simple research to show why Trump cannot become the next Speaker of the House. But who takes the Telegraph seriously these days anyway? It appears on the yahoo site, given that most Telegraph articles are hidden behind a paywall. Who would want to pay for this crap?

Trump to be nominated as next House speaker (yahoo.com) (https://uk.style.yahoo.com/donald-trump-nominated-next-speaker-141852603.html)

Hold on, here's why Trump can't become House speaker – for now (nypost.com) (https://nypost.com/2023/10/04/hold-on-heres-why-trump-cant-become-house-speaker-for-now/)

[Stavros]

"Lawyers for Donald Trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) have urged a federal judge to dismiss the criminal case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, advancing a sweeping interpretation of executive power that contends that former presidents are immune from prosecution for conduct related to their duties while in office."
Trump endorses Jim Jordan for House speaker but race remains wide open – US politics live (theguardian.com) (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2023/oct/06/trump-jim-jordan-house-speaker-race-republicans-biden-latest)

Duties? What duties? Correct me if I am wrong, but a sitting President has no role in the processing of the election, from the count through to the declarations, the Electoral College, and the Certification of the College results in Congress. The only duty a President has, is to accept the result.

[Stavros]

Flippin' Heck! Whose next in line to turn over like a guilty dog, their paws in the air, tongue out of mouth?

Donald, where's ya troosers?

Release the Kraken! Nark the Ravens! By the waters of Babbalong we sat down to dye...

Score so far:

Democracy 2, Autocracy 0

"Lawyer Sidney Powell (https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-georgia-lawsuits-0ed38af7f94b596308475aa8b28c871c) pleaded guilty to reduced charges Thursday over efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election in Georgia, becoming the second defendant in the sprawling case to reach a deal with prosecutors."

Sidney Powell pleads guilty in case over efforts to overturn Trump's Georgia loss and gets probation (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/sidney-powell-pleads-guilty-deal-140555333.html)

[Fitzcarraldo]

Can't wait for his cronies to testify against him.

[Stavros]

Is this man ever going to be treated equally before the law? His outrageous insults and threats must surely 'have their day in court'? Or is even the justice system terrified of this con-man who dares everyone to do the right thing, knowing he is wrong?

"Donald Trump refused to take down a post attacking the law clerk of the judge overseeing his bank fraud trial (https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-donald-trumps-team-twisted-his-new-york-bank-fraud-trial-into-a-farce) in New York—blatantly violating the court’s gag order (https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-slaps-trump-with-gag-order-after-he-spreads-lie-about-court-clerk-on-truth-social)—and lawyers on both sides have just been notified that hell is nigh."
Trump Is About to Be Ripped to Shreds by NYC Bank Fraud Trial Judge (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-ripped-shreds-nyc-bank-023316622.html)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Can't wait for his cronies to testify against him.Same here,and one by one they'll be turning on him to save their own asses.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Is this man ever going to be treated equally before the law? His outrageous insults and threats must surely 'have their day in court'? Or is even the justice system terrified of this con-man who dares everyone to do the right thing, knowing he is wrong?

"Donald Trump refused to take down a post attacking the law clerk of the judge overseeing his bank fraud trial (https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-donald-trumps-team-twisted-his-new-york-bank-fraud-trial-into-a-farce) in New York—blatantly violating the court’s gag order (https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-slaps-trump-with-gag-order-after-he-spreads-lie-about-court-clerk-on-truth-social)—and lawyers on both sides have just been notified that hell is nigh."
Trump Is About to Be Ripped to Shreds by NYC Bank Fraud Trial Judge (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-ripped-shreds-nyc-bank-023316622.html) REPOST: The Pathological Lying Charlatan And Petulant Child Donald Trump's threats and insults againist Federal Judges,Special Prosecutors,District Attorneys and Witnesses,will have their day in court and be used against him,and will land him in prison and also send a strong message,that nobody is above the law including him.. And the despicable comments he is making againist the people who is prosecuting him,are being used to raise money for his campaign and rile up his supporters.

[Stavros]

Update on the score:

Democracy 3. Autocracy 0

Is this the political equivalent of ten-pin bowling?

Who's next? Eastman? Giuliani?

"The surprise announcement that former Donald Trump lawyer Kenneth Cheebro has agreed to a plea deal in his Georgia racketeering case is a "serious threat" to the former president and his legal team which may be faced with seeing one of their key Jan. 6 defense strategies be made null and void (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/20/us/politics/chesebro-plea-deal-georgia-trump.html)..."
Trump faces new 'serious threat' his key Jan. 6 defense strategy could be dismantled (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/trump-faces-new-serious-threat-his-key-jan-6-defense-strategy-could-be-dismantled/ar-AA1iC7fi?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=25e40ebaac544b7188accf9cca658cb5&ei=30) (Spelling mistake in original).

[Stavros]

"Former President Donald Trump claimed Sidney Powell (https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/19/politics/sidney-powell-plea-takeaways/index.html)was “never” his attorney in a social media post Sunday, three days after she pleaded guilty in the Georgia election subversion case.".
After Sidney Powell pleads guilty in Georgia case, Trump claims she was 'never' his attorney, despite their past ties | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/22/politics/trump-sidney-powell/index.html)

Next: Trump says 'Giuliani was never my lawyer, and I can prove it -check my account, I never paid him'...

"Midnight shakes the memory

As a madman shakes a dead geranium".

[Stavros]

And again

Democracy 4, Autocracy 0
(*I am adding the New York real estate to the stats)

Yet Another Trump Election Lawyer Has Taken a Plea Deal (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/yet-another-trump-election-lawyer-134252063.html)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

And again

Democracy 4, Autocracy 0
(*I am adding the New York real estate to the stats)

Yet Another Trump Election Lawyer Has Taken a Plea Deal (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/yet-another-trump-election-lawyer-134252063.html)Jenna Ellis filpped,and there will be more that will flip.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

"Former President Donald Trump claimed Sidney Powell (https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/19/politics/sidney-powell-plea-takeaways/index.html)was “never” his attorney in a social media post Sunday, three days after she pleaded guilty in the Georgia election subversion case.".
After Sidney Powell pleads guilty in Georgia case, Trump claims she was 'never' his attorney, despite their past ties | CNN Politics (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/22/politics/trump-sidney-powell/index.html)

Next: Trump says 'Giuliani was never my lawyer, and I can prove it -check my account, I never paid him'...

"Midnight shakes the memory

As a madman shakes a dead geranium". More deflection and denial from Donald-PLCANPC-Trump.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Justice Arthur F.Engoron fined Donald-PLCAPC-Trump $ 10,000 dollars for breaking the gag order,unfortunately this isn't going to do anything to deter him from making threats and insults againist prosecutors,federal judges and their staffs,and witnesses,because he thinks he's above the law. The only option is to put him in jail for contempt of court,but even that comes with some risks. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/25/nyregion/trump-cohen-gag-order-engoron.html

[Stavros]

One of the interesting aspects of the NYC trial, is that because it is a private, and not a public, listed company, the Trump Org is not subject to the same level of regulation, and while its Financial Officers are liable for the decisions they make, the same level of corporate responsibility that affects Public firms may not apply here -so in theory, the Trumps could get away with it, while their Financial Officers do not.

But it also then puts the onus of responsibility on the accountancy firms, with the question -were they obliged to perform the due diligence that would have exposed the claims made by Trump(s) to be false? They are saying they relied on what the Trump(s) told them, but is this enough? And is it the case they did not investigate the claims because they stood to make a lot of money from property the higher it is valued?

It would suggest that not only were the Trumps engaged in fraud, but so too were the Banks and the Accountancy firms without whom the Trump scams would never have worked.

Could one consequence of this be an investigation into the behaviour of Banks and Accountancy firms, and is this particular trial the argument for more regulation of private companies, precisely to ensure they do not engage in fraud, and that the Executives of the firm must take Corporate Responsibility for the behaviour of their firm?

Indictment of Trump Organization Executive Puts Focus on CFOs’ Liability - WSJ (https://www.wsj.com/articles/indictment-of-trump-organization-executive-puts-focus-on-cfos-liability-11625259965)

Trump fraud trial explores who was responsible for his financial statements | PBS NewsHour (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-fraud-trial-explores-who-was-responsible-for-his-financial-statements)

[Stavros]

Is the US Justice system neutral or politically biased?

Trump and his supporters attack Judge Engoron and his clerk as a 'Democrat operative and hack'.

Does this mean Trump appointed judges can be denounced by Democrats for being Republican operatives and hacks?

None of which undermines the facts in the case in New York City, maybe that's why Trump and his friends are always changing the subject....?

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Is the US Justice system neutral or politically biased?

Trump and his supporters attack Judge Engoron and his clerk as a 'Democrat operative and hack'.

Does this mean Trump appointed judges can be denounced by Democrats for being Republican operatives and hacks?

None of which undermines the facts in the case in New York City, maybe that's why Trump and his friends are always changing the subject....?The United States Justice System is neutral. That's exactly the reason Donald-PLCAPC-Trump and his enablers and defenders are always changing the subject,because it's part of a strategy to continue to gaslight his supporters into believing anything he says,and giving him their money.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

George-The Fraud-Santos knows his time in the US House Of Representatives will be coming to an end very soon,because his whole political career was built on lies,and his persona is a sham that has been exposed and is falling apart,and the evidence against him is overwhelming and his fellow colleagues want him expelled from Congress. George-The Fraud-Santos can play the victim card all he wants by calling the ethnics report a political smear campaign,it isn't going to help him keep his job.

[Stavros]

I don't know how the Jan 6 Trial will unfold, but I wonder if one of the aims of the attack on the Capitol, was to provoke Trump in his last act as President to stay in power by invoking the Insurrection Act. There was some speculation that Michael Flynn had thought about this long before the event, and it may be that in those 'missing hours' when Trump we are told was watching the insurrection on TV, that in fact he may have been communicating with Flynn, possibly too Bannon and Stone, and may just have chickened out of declaring martial law, or was persuaded not to by Kushner or other around him, as we know he is susceptible to arguments and can never make up his own mind.

This time, however, he is proposing to be more aggressive in his use of the US Military when 'vermin' crawl all over Main St USA and he don't like it.

But if he was chicken the first time round, will he actually do it the next time -if there is a next time? -Though I still think Haley will be the Candidate.

Trump hints at expanded role for the military within the US. A legacy law gives him few guardrails (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-hints-expanded-role-military-050336201.html)

[Stavros]

This is just plain silly.

Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and 'kings' would pay $1B for Mar-a-Lago, Trump expert to testify at NY fraud trial (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/elon-musk-bill-gates-kings-205638676.html)

[Luke Warm]

Though I still think Haley will be the Candidate.

Republican voters in 2024 are never going to nominate
- a woman
- non-Caucasian (Indian)
- who routinely criticizes Trump

The candidates will be Trump and Biden, why is that hard to accept? Nothing is going to happen to Donald Trump before the election, he certainly will not be going to prison or anything like that. You seem to be grasping at straws, first with DeSantis and now with Haley. It’s going to be Trump versus Biden, barring a medical catastrophe on either side.

[filghy2]

I don't get it either. If Republican voters haven't been turned off Trump by anything that's happened over the past 2 years - January 6, multiple criminal charges, open signalling of authoritarianism - what on earth is going to make them change their minds in the next few months? Given the recent polls, even the electability argument for choosing someone else has been weakened.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I don't get it either. If Republican voters haven't been turned off Trump by anything that's happened over the past 2 years - January 6, multiple criminal charges, open signalling of authoritarianism - what on earth is going to make them change their minds in the next few months? Given the recent polls, even the electability argument for choosing someone else has been weakened.Nothing,because they've been brainwashed over the last 8 + years by Donald Trump
,into believing anything he says even though they know it's a lie,and they see him as their savior and think he has their best interest,but in reality he is just using them and doesn't give a shit about them.

[Stavros]

Sidney Blumenthal confirms Trump cannot seek election again, Colorado was right, and the Supreme Court cannot sophisticate its way out of this.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/trump-provoke-crisis-legitimacy-us-110034887.html

[Stavros]

Another Blumenthal article on the 14th Amendment's origins and why it applies to Trump, contrasted with a Telegraph article which in effect says the opposite on the basis that the Amendments and Sections cited by Colorado, for example, only intended to refer to former Confederates....

Prosecutors are charging Trump using laws made to fight the KKK. Here’s why | Sidney Blumenthal | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/15/why-prosecutors-charging-trump-kkk-confederate-laws)

Trump’s enemies want to destroy democracy to save it (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-enemies-want-destroy-democracy-162655058.html)

[Stavros]

Is the 'controversy' in Georgia going to derail the case against Trump? I also see Willis is up for re-election this year.

Allegations of a romantic relationship between DA Fani Willis and prosecutor are bad optics, but likely won't impact Trump's case, experts say (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/allegations-romantic-relationship-between-da-232913874.html)

Is this a gaffe or just more evidence that Trump is plain stupid? But he can't be prosecuted for it.

Riot Roh-Roh: Trump Drags Nikki Haley In Massive Jan. 6 Blunder (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/riot-roh-roh-trump-drags-050801244.html)

[tslvr]

I wonder if the found 150,000 unfolded mail in Gerogia ballots all marked the same way for every issue and candidate are real or fake?

[Fitzcarraldo]

I wonder if the found 150,000 unfolded mail in Gerogia ballots all marked the same way for every issue and candidate are real or fake?

Citation needed.

[Stavros]

More Trump Election Distortions - FactCheck.org (https://www.factcheck.org/2021/07/more-trump-election-distortions/)

[KnightHawk 2.0]

Is the 'controversy' in Georgia going to derail the case against Trump? I also see Willis is up for re-election this year.

Allegations of a romantic relationship between DA Fani Willis and prosecutor are bad optics, but likely won't impact Trump's case, experts say (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/allegations-romantic-relationship-between-da-232913874.html)

Is this a gaffe or just more evidence that Trump is plain stupid? But he can't be prosecuted for it.

Riot Roh-Roh: Trump Drags Nikki Haley In Massive Jan. 6 Blunder (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/riot-roh-roh-trump-drags-050801244.html)No it isn't,because it just another distraction from Donald Trump and his co-conspirators to the Georgia Election Case dismissed.

[Luke Warm]

I wonder if the found 150,000 unfolded mail in Gerogia ballots all marked the same way for every issue and candidate are real or fake?

What a wonderful imagination you have!


Citation needed.

To quote Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, “we don’t have evidence, we have theories” about supposed election fraud. These people live in a fantasy world.

[Stavros]

So he doesn't need to be in office, and could probably be in prison and still be influencing or trying to influence policy, as with the Border, only there is no policy, just 'oppose whatever Biden wants'. McConnell may actually, if only this time, defy the man he worships, but I guess his days in the Senate are now coming to a close.

"Congressional negotiators said a border deal was within reach on Thursday, despite efforts by Donald Trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) and his allies on Capitol Hill to derail the talks."
US border policy deal within reach despite efforts by Trump to derail it, senators say | Mitch McConnell | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/25/congress-mexico-border-ukraine-israel-aid-mcconnell)


"A bipartisan Senate deal to pair border enforcement measures and Ukraine aid faced potential collapse Thursday as Senate Republicans grew increasingly wary of an election-year compromise that Donald Trump, the likely Republican presidential nominee, says is “meaningless.”
Senate deal on border, Ukraine at risk of collapse due to election year | AP News (https://apnews.com/article/congress-border-security-ukraine-trump-a8601ec6629ddc5b769028ca99ad9879)

Is he going to be making the Party do as he wants when he is in his grave?

[Fitzcarraldo]

I guarantee this will not teach him to STFU:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-carroll-defamation-trial-e4ea8b93cdeb29857864ffd8d14be888

[Stavros]

Will he ever pay a dime? He will appeal, and that takes time, and as he is rumoured either to never pay his lawyers or delay he payments, Ms Carroll could be waiting for years for a payment, if he ever makes it. Like Giuliani, these guys don't believe the law applies to them, they treat it with contempt. They do want they want and dare the legal system to do something about it.

[Stavros]

What a pair!

Rudy Giuliani targets Donald Trump for ‘unpaid legal fees’ in new bankruptcy filing (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rudy-giuliani-targets-donald-trump-222205218.html)

[Fitzcarraldo]

Will he ever pay a dime? He will appeal, and that takes time, and as he is rumoured either to never pay his lawyers or delay he payments, Ms Carroll could be waiting for years for a payment, if he ever makes it. Like Giuliani, these guys don't believe the law applies to them, they treat it with contempt. They do want they want and dare the legal system to do something about it.

Time will tell, but he has multiple judgments against him already, and many more pending. I realize he never pays them, but attorneys require payment without an appeals process. He owes legal fees, and every appeal will add to the fees.

[Fitzcarraldo]

What a pair!

Rudy Giuliani targets Donald Trump for ‘unpaid legal fees’ in new bankruptcy filing (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rudy-giuliani-targets-donald-trump-222205218.html)

Best of luck to him.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

What a pair!

Rudy Giuliani targets Donald Trump for ‘unpaid legal fees’ in new bankruptcy filing (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rudy-giuliani-targets-donald-trump-222205218.html)Indeed it sure is. A pair of despicable and disgusting human beings.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I guarantee this will not teach him to STFU:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-carroll-defamation-trial-e4ea8b93cdeb29857864ffd8d14be888No it won't,because he'll what he always does: distract,deflect,deny and project and take no responsibility.

[filghy2]

The chances of Trump's criminal cases being resolved before the election are declining.
https://www.vox.com/politics/24055503/trump-trials-fani-willis-jack-smith-alvin-bragg
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/05/chutkan-trump-trial-date-2024-00139665

[Fitzcarraldo]

No one is above the law:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-capitol-riot-presidential-immunity-appeal-46c2d7fc7807cd3262764d35e47f390e

[Fitzcarraldo]

Good stuff here:
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/02/06/politics/takeaways-donald-trump-immunity-appeals-court/index.html

[Stavros]

Trump's defence:

But that's not what Lincoln said in the movie! "I am the President of the United States, clothed in immense power...". If he could do it, why can't I?

-but see also
Lincoln: Clothed with immense power? Really? – Denny Burk (https://www.dennyburk.com/lincoln-clothed-with-immense-power-really/)


"Clothed in immense power" scene - Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjpSjznqORU)

[Stavros]

I am sure I read somewhere that to prevent Congress from doing its business is defined as insurrection, only now I can't find the passage which I thought was in the Constitution. But this is surely a desperate measure and one that might play well in the boondocks but not in the rest of the US -??

62 Trump allies say he did not incite insurrection on January 6 (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/62-trump-allies-say-he-did-not-incite-insurrection-on-january-6/ss-BB1hSpj7?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=ACTS&cvid=41b978b33ca5462cab6c9537fdf5de03&ei=21)

[Fitzcarraldo]

https://jackmillercenter.org/fourteenth-amendment/

Excerpt:

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

[Stavros]

I know this, but I am sure I read something else about anyone trying to stop the work of Congress.

[filghy2]

I know this, but I am sure I read something else about anyone trying to stop the work of Congress.

Most of those convicted over January 6 where charged with conspiracy to obstruct Congressional proceedings rather than sedition. That may be what you are thinking of.

[Stavros]

Thanks as I realize now it was the word sedition I was thinking of, and this:

"Currently, the federal government criminalizes seditious conspiracy in 18 U.S.C. § 2384 (https://www.law.cornell.edu//uscode/text/18/2384), which states, “[i]f two or more persons in [the U.S.], conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.” "
sedition | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sedition#:~:text=To%20prevent%20this%2C%20he%20and ,authority%2C%20or%20to%20impede%20the)

If the individuals who smashed their way into the Capitol have been found guilty of sedition, can it also be applied to the man who encouraged them or even the Vice President to prevent the Certification -a legal act under the Constitution- from taking place?

When is free speech not just an attack on some idea of the US, but embedded in an act that attempts to prevent the process of law?

[Stavros]

Is anyone surprised that Trump has decided other people should pay his fines?

A 'GoFundMe' page has been set up by the wife of a real estate businessman, Grant Cardone but while $409,000 has been received so far the link below claims this will not even pay off the interest on the fine.
Donald Trump GoFundMe is Not Even Paying off the Interest on His Fine (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-civil-fraud-fine-gofundme-1871059)

A key point for me is that not only has Trump been in debt to some level for most of his business life, both he and his father have constructed buildings which, for the most part, used other people's money, most commonly through tax breaks from New York City, and loans from tax-payers and banks. It is one of the reasons why the Trump family were embedded in Democrat Party politics in New York -because it was financially beneficial for them to be so.
Trump’s hubris has brought about the downfall of his family’s business empire | Sidney Blumenthal | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/17/trump-hubris-family-empire-new-york)

But what these aspects of Trump's business culture reveal, is a distinct absence of any discourse on 'Free Enterprise' and the rule of 'Market Forces'. I can understand the discourse in American politics on the relative powers of the State and the Citizen, but there is a distinct absence of the kind of arguments that formed the heart of Thatcher and Reagan's ideology, summed up in 'Markets Know Best' -for it seems to me that Trump is allergic to Free Enterprise if it means taking a risk with his capital when building an apartment block, or promoting a new product or services -again and again, he not only used and uses loans and tax breaks that minimise the volume of his own capital in the ventures, when they fail he recoups his losses from the tax payer through compensation legislation, indeed.

So he has lost a court case and has been fined, but is looking to other people to pay it.

That his properties are declining in value because the 'brand' is tainted, is no surprise, and it would be ironic if a man who values his personal wealth on those assets now has to admit they are worth much less, not because of market forces, but because of his criminal record.

Lastly, is it not illegal to use the Flag of the United States on a commodity for sale that is not the flag itself, that it is illegal to print the flag on a pair of trainers? Is this another 'I dare you to take me to court' tactic or does Trump genuinely not know the law? It may be another way of raising the money to pay his fine, but is it legal?
What Is the US Flag Code and Is Violating It Illegal? – NBC Connecticut (https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/what-is-the-us-flag-code-and-how-does-it-work/2649925/#:~:text=People%20commonly%20violate%20the%20Flag, is%20customized%20for%20their%20uniform.)

[Stavros]

I have been reading about this case, but I can't work out what the problem is -so what if Willis had/has an affair with another lawyer on the case? The case isn't about them, it is the argument that Trump broke election law in Georgia by trying to change the outcome of the vote. If for the sake of argument, Ms Willis dropped dead of a heart attack tonight, does the case die with her?

It just seems amazing to me that a President thinks he can ring up the election officials in any State and tell them to change the vote, while lying about the outcome and defaming the election workers who were only doing their job. Is it because the substance of the case are so compelling that Trump's lawyers have decided to derail the process through attacks on its personnel? And I guess that the two people concerned being Black is just 'coincidental'-??

Nathan Wade's ex-law partner expected to testify as defense aims to oust Fani Willis from Trump case (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nathan-wades-ex-law-partner-162916545.html)

[Fitzcarraldo]

I have been reading about this case, but I can't work out what the problem is -so what if Willis had/has an affair with another lawyer on the case? The case isn't about them, it is the argument that Trump broke election law in Georgia by trying to change the outcome of the vote. If for the sake of argument, Ms Willis dropped dead of a heart attack tonight, does the case die with her?

It just seems amazing to me that a President thinks he can ring up the election officials in any State and tell them to change the vote, while lying about the outcome and defaming the election workers who were only doing their job. Is it because the substance of the case are so compelling that Trump's lawyers have decided to derail the process through attacks on its personnel? And I guess that the two people concerned being Black is just 'coincidental'-??

Nathan Wade's ex-law partner expected to testify as defense aims to oust Fani Willis from Trump case (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nathan-wades-ex-law-partner-162916545.html)

I think it's just an attempt to smear the investigator.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I have been reading about this case, but I can't work out what the problem is -so what if Willis had/has an affair with another lawyer on the case? The case isn't about them, it is the argument that Trump broke election law in Georgia by trying to change the outcome of the vote. If for the sake of argument, Ms Willis dropped dead of a heart attack tonight, does the case die with her?

It just seems amazing to me that a President thinks he can ring up the election officials in any State and tell them to change the vote, while lying about the outcome and defaming the election workers who were only doing their job. Is it because the substance of the case are so compelling that Trump's lawyers have decided to derail the process through attacks on its personnel? And I guess that the two people concerned being Black is just 'coincidental'-??

Nathan Wade's ex-law partner expected to testify as defense aims to oust Fani Willis from Trump case (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nathan-wades-ex-law-partner-162916545.html)Another attempt by Donald Trump and his Co-Conspirators to get the Case against them thrown out,an attempt that will backfire on them.

[Stavros]

Prime Minister of Hungary, Victor Orbán after visiting Trump in Mar-a-Lago (was this a breach of diplomatic protocol?) has lavished praise on the former, now indicted President, while re-writing history for his benefit, thus:

"During Trump's time in office, there was peace in the Middle East and Ukraine, and these wars would not exist today if he were leading the United States, Orban said in a message posted on Facebook.
Trump had "offered respect in the world and thus created the conditions for peace," according to Orban."
Hungary's Orban hails Trump as 'president of peace' after US meeting (yahoo.com) (https://www.yahoo.com/news/hungarys-orban-hails-trump-president-122858610.html)

That's odd -wasn't it Trump who bragged about defeating ISIS? How did the US do that, by talking?

And who bragged that US forces in action in Iraq had -with military violence- killed 'Caliph' Al-Baghdadi in Syria in 2019?

As for the role played in the defeat of ISIS by Russian and US Aerial bombardments in Syria and Iraq, and the crucial role in both played by Kurdish militias, is that not important enough to be acknowledged?

And who bragged about the killing -with military violence- of the head of Iran's Republican Guard, Qasem Suleimani, in Iraq in January 2020?

It was part of a sequence of warlike actions that were taking place at the time. Here is a short summary of some the moments that took place when according to Orbán the Middle East was 'at peace':

"The strike occurred during the 2019–2022 Persian Gulf crisis, which began after the U.S. withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_the_Joint_Comprehens ive_Plan_of_Action) in 2018, reimposed sanctions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions_against_Iran), and accused Iranian elements of fomenting a campaign to harass U.S. forces in the region in 2019. On 27 December 2019, the K-1 Air Base (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-1_Air_Base) in Iraq, which hosts Iraqi and U.S. personnel, was attacked (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_K-1_Air_Base_attack), killing an American contractor. The U.S. responded by launching airstrikes across Iraq and Syria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2019_United_States_airstrikes_in_Iraq_and _Syria), reportedly killing 25 Kata'ib Hezbollah militiamen. Days later, Shia militiamen and their supporters retaliated by attacking the U.S. embassy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_the_United_States_embassy_in_Baghdad) in the Green Zone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Zone)."
Assassination of Qasem Soleimani - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani)

As for the 'conditions of peace', was it not President Trump who not once in four years questioned Israel's Siege of Gaza, who increased tensions between Israel and the Palestinians by moving the US Embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem?

Was it not the business deal that Jared Kushner arranged between Israel and some of the Gulf States that has been cited as one of the causes of the explosion of war between Israel and the Palestinians that has shattered the 'Containment' strategy Netanyahu believed had worked in Israel's favour?

The war has undermined Israel's security, its financial situation, and peace between it and the Palestinians, while Hamas has provoked the most devastating assault on Palestinian life and property since 1948, with no end in sight.

And who surrendered to the Taliban, even giving them the date when US military forces would leave Afghanistan, a date honoured by President Biden? Peace in Afghanistan?

Far from creating the conditions for peace, x-President Trump paved the way for war through his provocative and incompetent actions, and inactions. Trump inherited an agenda that retained many of the longstanding issues in the Middle East that had not been dealt with or resolved. During his Presidency, his attempt to change that agenda through 'radical' actions failed.

Israel and Palestine are at war; there is no peace in Syria or Iraq; the war in Yemen has continued, indeed on one level expanded with Iranian backed Houthis now attacking shipping in the Red Sea; Lebanon is close to becoming a failed state

-Trump waged war in the Middle East and has blood on his hands. He can't waltz through the ballrooms of Florida with Orbán in arms and think isn't life great.

But he won't be indicted for the lives lost in the Middle East, though he will face the music for his domestic crimes. The sooner the better.

[Stavros]

In the first link, the possibility is discussed, that Donald Trump might file for Bankruptcy to delay -avoid?- coming up with the money he owes the citizens of New York City. In the UK it used to be a simple case that if an MP was declared Bankrupt he or she could not sit in the House of Commons or vote -the law has since been modified but the basic position is that you can't become an MP if bankrupt so I wonder why in the US there has not been a similar provision in the Constitution to bar from standing any candidate who is Bankrupt, and I would also have hoped they could have added that the candidate should not be in debt to x amount of dollars.
In other words, Trump could declare himself bankrupt and still run indeed, be elected President? A Bankrupt President -the irony!
The link also suggests that while he may own outright some of the properties in NYC, he may also be in debt due to mortgaging or some other leveraging not publicly disclosed, while in other cases he only owns a percentage of the real estate= hence the proposition that in reality Trump's asset values might not be as high as he claims when you drill into the numbers.
Could Trump be forced into bankruptcy? Hear why former investment banker thinks so (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/could-trump-forced-bankruptcy-hear-204028355.html)

The other link is to a statement made by one of Trump's lawyers, Alina Habba regarding the New York property judgment-

""It is intentionally to interfere in the election, to hurt President Trump, to try and ruin his company, and ruin a person and a family whose private company, not public company, has made the skyline of New York changed forever," Habba added."
Fox News Asks Alina Habba If Donald Trump's Bond Will Come From Russia (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-asks-alina-habba-if-donald-trumps-bond-will-come-russia-1881601)

Did Trump change the skyline of New York -surely she means Manhattan?- 'forever'? And was that dramatic change the work of a private company all on its own, led by its visionary CEO? Or were the buildings Trump -and Habba- claim as his legacy, constructed using money from the taxpayer's of New York through construction loans Trump used, plus loans that Trump got from a bank or banks to pay the bills of the various companies -none owned by Trump- who did the actual construction, one of which, a cement company was owned as a legitimate business by two of the most notorious/famous Mafia Dons in the city, etc etc.

I haven't been to NYC for years now, but I was always struck by the diversity of its architecture, but also felt that those tall glass and concrete towers were the least interesting when set in the overall context of the city. There is more subtlety in many NYC buildings than the towers allow.

Do readers here have a favourite building? I detest the Guggenheim -a multi-storey car part masquerading as an art gallery. Grand Central Station has great sightlines depending on where you are standing and the time of day. It's a tough one to unpack though.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Do readers here have a favourite building? I detest the Guggenheim -a multi-storey car part masquerading as an art gallery. Grand Central Station has great sightlines depending on where you are standing and the time of day. It's a tough one to unpack though.

The Chrysler Building is my favorite.

[blackchubby38]

Do readers here have a favourite building? I detest the Guggenheim -a multi-storey car part masquerading as an art gallery. Grand Central Station has great sightlines depending on where you are standing and the time of day. It's a tough one to unpack though.

The Twin Tow... Oh yeah, that's right.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

In the first link, the possibility is discussed, that Donald Trump might file for Bankruptcy to delay -avoid?- coming up with the money he owes the citizens of New York City. In the UK it used to be a simple case that if an MP was declared Bankrupt he or she could not sit in the House of Commons or vote -the law has since been modified but the basic position is that you can't become an MP if bankrupt so I wonder why in the US there has not been a similar provision in the Constitution to bar from standing any candidate who is Bankrupt, and I would also have hoped they could have added that the candidate should not be in debt to x amount of dollars.
In other words, Trump could declare himself bankrupt and still run indeed, be elected President? A Bankrupt President -the irony!
The link also suggests that while he may own outright some of the properties in NYC, he may also be in debt due to mortgaging or some other leveraging not publicly disclosed, while in other cases he only owns a percentage of the real estate= hence the proposition that in reality Trump's asset values might not be as high as he claims when you drill into the numbers.
Could Trump be forced into bankruptcy? Hear why former investment banker thinks so (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/could-trump-forced-bankruptcy-hear-204028355.html)

The other link is to a statement made by one of Trump's lawyers, Alina Habba regarding the New York property judgment-

""It is intentionally to interfere in the election, to hurt President Trump, to try and ruin his company, and ruin a person and a family whose private company, not public company, has made the skyline of New York changed forever," Habba added."
Fox News Asks Alina Habba If Donald Trump's Bond Will Come From Russia (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-asks-alina-habba-if-donald-trumps-bond-will-come-russia-1881601)

Did Trump change the skyline of New York -surely she means Manhattan?- 'forever'? And was that dramatic change the work of a private company all on its own, led by its visionary CEO? Or were the buildings Trump -and Habba- claim as his legacy, constructed using money from the taxpayer's of New York through construction loans Trump used, plus loans that Trump got from a bank or banks to pay the bills of the various companies -none owned by Trump- who did the actual construction, one of which, a cement company was owned as a legitimate business by two of the most notorious/famous Mafia Dons in the city, etc etc.

I haven't been to NYC for years now, but I was always struck by the diversity of its architecture, but also felt that those tall glass and concrete towers were the least interesting when set in the overall context of the city. There is more subtlety in many NYC buildings than the towers allow.

Do readers here have a favourite building? I detest the Guggenheim -a multi-storey car part masquerading as an art gallery. Grand Central Station has great sightlines depending on where you are standing and the time of day. It's a tough one to unpack though.The Empire State Building.

[Stavros]

The Twin Tow... Oh yeah, that's right.


Ok, look, I did not think the Twin Towers had any architectural merit, but they were a 'totemic' part of the Manhattan. I cannot forget the moment when I left NYC for the second time (I had flown in from London, travelled across the US and Canada and then back to NYC). When I turned round on the bus to JFK there was the whole of the Manhattan skyline from the Twin Towers at one end, with a deep red Sun about to set over Harlem, it was so beautiful I admit I was close to tears. That skyline has gone now, but the subtleties of the Manhattan building fabric (I don't know the other Boroughs) remains a fascinating aspect of the city. I might also say that my recollection of a section of 6th Avenue was of a cluster of rectangular towers typical of modernist brutalism, and I think one of them is now owned by Jared Kushner, which might make sense even if he didn't have to pay for it.

[Stavros]

The Empire State Building.


Hmm...liking a building doesn't mean it is a beaut.

[Stavros]

Further to a point I made the other day, and bearing in mind I don't know a lot of details about US regulations, I came across this today. Senator Robert Casten (D) made these points about transparency and the obligations in the US-

""The presumptive @GOP (https://twitter.com/GOP) nominee for President is desperate for $464M (and counting) which he cannot personally access," Casten posted on X. "That fact alone makes him a massive national security risk; any foreign adversary seeking to buy a President knows the price."

"All lawmakers and even congressional candidates are required to post regular reports of their assets and liabilities, but Casten said Trump's finances have never been fully reported to the public and should be more worthy of investigation (https://www.rawstory.com/st/raw_story_investigates) than President Joe Biden's family members."
Trump flagged as 'massive security risk' after he's unable to post bond in fraud judgment - Raw Story (https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-national-security-risk/?utm_source=msn)

My guess is that Trump will do anything he can not to part with a Dime of the money he owes through fines. By contrast, JD Rockefeller, by the time he died, had given away $550.5 million dollars, and his Foundation has never ceased spending millions a year on a variety of philanthropical projects, where the Trump Foundation was closed down -as the New York Times reported it in 2018-

"The Donald J. Trump Foundation, once billed as the charitable arm of the president’s financial empire, agreed to dissolve on Tuesday and give away all its remaining assets under court supervision as part of an ongoing investigation and lawsuit by the New York attorney general.The foundation was accused by the attorney general, Barbara Underwood, of “functioning as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests,” and of engaging in “a shocking pattern of illegality” that included unlawfully coordinating with Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign."
Trump Foundation Will Dissolve, Accused of ‘Shocking Pattern of Illegality’ - The New York Times (nytimes.com) (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/nyregion/ny-ag-underwood-trump-foundation.html)

Rockefeller, even after the 1911 judgment that led to the break-up of the Standard Oil empire, always claimed the firm had not broken ant--trust law, but he never complained about the decision, Standard Oil re-invented itself as multiple separate companies, and the old man retired soon after. Whatever you think of Rockefeller, the contrast with Trump could not be more Stark -one of them having more associations with organized crime and convicted criminals -some of who may be part of the 2024 campaign- than the other.

A favourable view and quite a good overview of the Rockefeller story is here-
John D. Rockefeller and the Oil Industry (fee.org) (https://fee.org/articles/john-d-rockefeller-and-the-oil-industry/)

[Stavros]

I am puzzled by the process known as 'Jury Vetting', which begins in Manhattan today in the criminal case against Trump.

I understand that there are rules in the US, and also in the UK about the members of the Jury, for example if there is a suspicion that one or members of the Jury is known to the Defendant, or has been 'nobbled' by associates of the Defendant, and so on. There has long been a belief that in complex financial cases Jurors should at least be familiar with the language and concept, even the practices of the financial system, but it could be argued it is up to the lawyers and the Judge to render complex issues into language simple enough for the Jury to reach a decision.

Can Trump get a fair trial in New York? The question is in effect, an insult to the process: it should not matter if the Juror has voted or not voted, has strong views either way, but that the job of the Jury is to make a judgment based on the evidence in Court. If the trial was in Texas, would it be the case that Trump knows the Jury is on his side and doesn't complain about the process?

In the case of OJ Simpson, probably, at the time, the most famous American to be put on trial for murder, the alternative case is offered, that the mostly Black Jurors were pre-disposed to acquit because they knew of, or had personal experience of the conduct of the LAPD which was often the target of the Defence argument -consider the outrageous claim of 'Genocidal Racism' that Johnny Cochran used. Ultimately, though, it is argued that the Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Simpson did it, though critics still lament the decision. After all, either the LAPD has nobody else in the frame for the murder, or they didn't do their job properly and missed the evidence someone else did it.

Either way, it seems to me you cannot ask a Juror if they are biased toward the defendant, as on that basis, Trump -or any other well known person- would never be tried in a Court of Law. I think that is called 'Immunity'.

[Stavros]

I found this after posting the above, it reviews some of the questions that can be asked of Jurors, though I am not sure all of them are relevant.

A jury of his peers: A look at how jury selection will work in Donald Trump's first criminal trial (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jury-peers-look-jury-selection-035802781.html)

[Stavros]

How can it be possible for Fox News to challenge a juror -in any trial? Would it not be possible for Jury Vetting to take place in a court room without the Press in attendance? Is there no reasonable way that this process can take place without putting the Jurors in danger, and by ensuring that they are entitled to be chosen?

Trump trial juror excused over concerns of identification after being targeted on Fox News – live (theguardian.com) (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/apr/18/donald-trump-trial-updates)

[filghy2]

There are laws against jury tampering that could be applied, though judges have clearly been reluctant to do this against Trump.

It's interesting to see what details the media are allowed to publish on jury members. In some cases it seems to be enough that acquaintances could be able to identify them.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/18/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/what-we-know-about-the-jury-00153194

[Stavros]

There are laws against jury tampering that could be applied, though judges have clearly been reluctant to do this against Trump.

It's interesting to see what details the media are allowed to publish on jury members. In some cases it seems to be enough that acquaintances could be able to identify them.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/18/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/what-we-know-about-the-jury-00153194

I don't get it -the ID of the Jury is or should be irrelevant, but I guess this is how Americans want it. I also think it is odd that the Court allows Trump to step outside and immediately talk to camera -can't they stop this? He has his own media channel, he can whine and complain as much he wants to there.

[Fitzcarraldo]

1452637

[KnightHawk 2.0]

I don't get it -the ID of the Jury is or should be irrelevant, but I guess this is how Americans want it. I also think it is odd that the Court allows Trump to step outside and immediately talk to camera -can't they stop this? He has his own media channel, he can whine and complain as much he wants to there.Completely agree,the New York State Courts should remove the cameras and microphones outside the courtroom,so Donald Trump can't bitch and moan about how unfair he's being treated.

[filghy2]

It looks like the Supreme Court is likely to give a ruling on his immunity claim that will at least allow him to delay his Federal trial until after the election.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/25/trump-supreme-court-immunity-takeaways-00154470
https://www.vox.com/scotus/24140309/supreme-court-donald-trump-immunity-jack-smith
It's quite amazing that the right-wing judges seem more concerned about the risk of politically-motivated prosecutions that they are about the potential consequences of allowing the President to be above the law.

[Stavros]

"Daniel was asked whether they ran into each other again at the tourament. She said that they did, in one of the gift rooms.
"Like I mentioned, every party came through, there’s so many photos of the girls with all the celebrities that came through that day …He did remember us from the golf course – he remembered me specifically, that I was the smart one.
“We did have our DVDs, our adult films there, he did ask for one I directed".

Daniels said it was called Three Wishes. They spoke very briefly.

At one point, one of Trump’s bodyguards came over and said “Mr Trump was interested in having me join him for dinner.” Hoffinger asked Daniels: What was your answer? “No.”".
Stormy Daniels testifies about meeting Trump at celebrity golf tournament – live (theguardian.com) (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/may/07/donald-trump-hush-money-trial-fine-gag-order-violations-live)

I wonder what his other two wishes were...

3 Wishes (Video 2006) - IMDb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0855692/)

[Stavros]

"Stormy Daniels later said Donald Trump told her she reminded her of his daughter Ivanka"...

(must be 'reminded him'?)

Hail to the Beast!

[Stavros]

I think the key argument must be that as the Constitution does not give the President any role to play in the General Election process, the President has no 'official business', and therefore cannot be immune from prosecution with regard to Trump's illegal interferences in the election, and this extends to the speeches, and media comments he made in advance of the attack on the Capitol that cannot be separated from the violent sedition that took place on that day.

Whether or not the filing by Jack Smith make a difference remains to be seen and argued over.

FED UP: Trump slapped with BAD NEWS from DC judge (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYiZUtKRFZM)

[Stavros]

"If Trump wins the election, he is likely to direct the justice department to drop the charges."
Special counsel reveals new details of Trump bid to overturn 2020 election | Donald Trump | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/02/trump-crimes-2020-election-unsealed-filing)

But can a President order the DoJ to do it?

[Stavros]

Trump January 6 case: five key points in the latest filing against former president | Donald Trump trials | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/03/trump-january-6-court-filing)