Jump to content

US Politics: He's so indicted, he just can't abide by it...


Mindwalker
 Share

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

*nuclear policy being the one possible exception.

That is a huge fucking caveat when it comes to electing someone to the White House or to other positions in the US Government that have policy impact on the use of those weapons. “Incompetency” is unacceptable when they are in play.

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

If they were competent, it would no doubt suck even harder. If nothing else, a competent Trump might have found ways to steal the last election and might still be in the White House. Or, at the very least, a competent Trump would have found a way to have the Jan 6 insurrection without any possibility of being indicted for it.
Heck, a competent Trump might have won the election fair and square. My personal fear was always that he would generate an international conflict just before the election to benefit from the rally-round-the-flag effect.

I'm firmly in the camp that considers it better to have incompetent evil opponents. They might be a bit unpredictable and do a lot of damage through sheer stupidity, and their buffoonery might make them more popular, but in the final analysis they will almost always* be less dangerous than a more competent versions of themselves with the same political ideas and agenda.
 

*nuclear policy being the one possible exception.

 

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That is a huge fucking caveat when it comes to electing someone to the White House or to other positions in the US Government that have policy impact on the use of those weapons. “Incompetency” is unacceptable when they are in play.

Oh, yeah... https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4180726-trump-in-deposition-says-he-averted-nuclear-holocaust/

Quote

Former President Trump said he averted a “nuclear holocaust” with North Korea and “saved millions of lives” during his time as president, according to his newly released April deposition in his New York civil fraud case.

“I think you would have nuclear holocaust, if I didn’t deal with North Korea,” Trump said. “I think you would have a nuclear war, if I weren’t elected. And I think you might have a nuclear war now, if you want to know the truth.”

went from but, but Hillary, to I saved you from North Korea something something. And this just for the Trump Org trial in NY. I wouldn't be shocked if he revealed the existence of aliens during his Jan. 6 trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

A question then to ask, maybe too obvious a question, is why didnt he mention any of this in his campaign ads? Might easily have convinced 13000 people in Georgia to vote for him if he prevented their nice suburban homes for being torched.

Because he is way too humble for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Corvinus85 said:

I wouldn't be shocked if he revealed the existence of aliens during his Jan. 6 trial.

I wouldn't be shocked if he revealed he tried to hook up with one Captain Kirk style. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

A question then to ask, maybe too obvious a question, is why didnt he mention any of this in his campaign ads? Might easily have convinced 13000 people in Georgia to vote for him if he prevented their nice suburban homes for being torched.

Well, that's easy: because of his modesty, which is the greatest modesty of all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meaning of Letitia James case against the fascist grifter traitor.

Letitia James' new filing could blow up Trump's legal funding 'shell game'

If this case goes ahead, considering all the other cases filed on him, for which he's been indicted and arraigned, and if he loses, he loses everything.  Everything. As on the level Giuliani' already lost everything.l

Quote

 

.... The advancing civil suit against former President Donald Trump's family by New York Attorney General Letitia James could be as serious a problem for the former president as the criminal cases against him, argued Trump University investigator Tristan Snell on MSNBC's "The ReidOut" Wednesday — in part, because it could actually strip Trump of the ability to finance his legal cases. ....

.... James is currently seeking summary judgment in the case, asking for a ruling that Trump fraudulently misstated his assets and seeking an order barring him from doing business in New York, without a trial. ....

 

This means, among other financial fallout, he cannot collect rents from his properties, which seem to be his essential cash flow.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-civil-case-legal-funding/
 

Edited by Zorral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LongRider said:

Only if they look like Ivanka.  

Years ago sure, but the old fart couldn't tell his likely rape victim who successfully sued him in civil court apart from the ex-wife of his that didn't accuse him of rape.

Bad joke incoming: Maybe Tiffany finally has a chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A judge ruled that the Fulton County trial(s) will be live streamed and televised. (via Brian Tyler Cohen)

*hoarding popcorn right now*

Ah, here's the source ... I think (website not available in the EU thank you very much): https://www.ajc.com/gdpr.html

Edited by Mindwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

A judge ruled that the Fulton County trial(s) will be live streamed and televised. (via Brian Tyler Cohen)

*hoarding popcorn right now*

Ah, here's the source ... I think (website not available in the EU thank you very much): https://www.ajc.com/gdpr.html

Particularly in light of what I linked to above several hours ago --

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/30/nyregion/trump-deposition-excerpts.html

Quote

... Donald J. Trump sat for a seven-hour interview with the New York attorney general’s office in April, part of the civil fraud case against him and his company.  

The transcript shows a combative Mr. Trump, who was named as a defendant in the case alongside his company and three of his children, at times barely allowing lawyers to get a word in. The former president frequently seems personally offended by the idea that his net worth is being questioned."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

A judge ruled that the Fulton County trial(s) will be live streamed and televised. (via Brian Tyler Cohen)

*hoarding popcorn right now*

Ah, here's the source ... I think (website not available in the EU thank you very much): https://www.ajc.com/gdpr.html

Let's see how federal removal plays out.  The Georgia cases are heading for any almighty clusterfuck. 

Some defendants want a speedy trial (a constitutional right) and severance from the other defendants.  There's no way that Oct. 23 works for Trump or Meadows.   

Others want removal to federal court as a prelude to asserting immunity under the Supremacy clause.  You can assert immunity in either venue but getting into the 11th circuit is favorable for Trump who has appointed a clear majority of serving judges there.  

Based on the Judge's comments I expect Meadows to succeed in his removal petition.  And that's a slippery slope problem for all the other federal office holders.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

The meaning of Letitia James case against the fascist grifter traitor.

Letitia James' new filing could blow up Trump's legal funding 'shell game'

If this case goes ahead, considering all the other cases filed on him, for which he's been indicted and arraigned, and if he loses, he loses everything.  Everything. As on the level Giuliani' already lost everything.l

This means, among other financial fallout, he cannot collect rents from his properties, which seem to be his essential cash flow.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-civil-case-legal-funding/
 

It won't impact his political fundraising or his Super PAC funding the defense of the other Jan. 6 traitors as well.  But yes, he's under siege.  

Now that Meadows has waived his fifth amendment rights in federal court one of the most important questions is whether he'll be able to escape sitting for depositions with the Special Counsel.  He's probably sat for an interview, and a proffer of evidence as Giuliani did.  But that was on his own terms.  

It's one thing to survive cross-examination when you've sprung it as a surprise on the Fulton County DA.  It's another to escape sustained and repeated questioning by the DOJ.  The path he's started walking on will lead to him testifying against Trump eventually or perjuring himself.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That is a huge fucking caveat when it comes to electing someone to the White House or to other positions in the US Government that have policy impact on the use of those weapons. “Incompetency” is unacceptable when they are in play.

By incompetent I don’t mean incompetent at doing basic stuff to keep up civil infrastructure —which they don’t want to—I’m talking about being incompetent enacting disastrous outcomes for civil society and democratic republicanism . 
Ideally the type of person who’d be at the head of the Republican Party would be someone like @Wilbur, who if we sit I think we would find disagreement on economic issues, some foreign policy in regards to migration, religion, but he wouldn’t in power try to subvert the democratic results of an election and launch us into an autocracy with an increasingly overtly and intentionally racist policy and rhetoric.  I’m fine with having an opposition that aren’t  demons but if I’d have to face demons I’d rather those demons be incompetent, narcissistic, and reckless when trying to do evil shit and significantly less appealing to the wider public.

Edited by Varysblackfyre321
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It won't impact his political fundraising or his Super PAC funding the defense of the other Jan. 6 traitors as well.  But yes, he's under siege.  

By law he can't use those monies to pay the interest, etc. on his debts and loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It won't impact his political fundraising or his Super PAC funding the defense of the other Jan. 6 traitors as well.  But yes, he's under siege.  

Now that Meadows has waived his fifth amendment rights in federal court one of the most important questions is whether he'll be able to escape sitting for depositions with the Special Counsel.  He's probably sat for an interview, and a proffer of evidence as Giuliani did.  But that was on his own terms.  

It's one thing to survive cross-examination when you've sprung it as a surprise on the Fulton County DA.  It's another to escape sustained and repeated questioning by the DOJ.  The path he's started walking on will lead to him testifying against Trump eventually or perjuring himself.   

One has to wonder what Meadow's life expectancy becomes at the point he starts testifying against Trump. Can't you just envision Trump waving a wad of cash around on national television, moaning that somebody needs to 'do something' about that 'traitor?' And Trump might actually be stupid enough to attempt something like this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Rippounet said:

If they were competent, it would no doubt suck even harder. If nothing else, a competent Trump might have found ways to steal the last election and might still be in the White House. Or, at the very least, a competent Trump would have found a way to have the Jan 6 insurrection without any possibility of being indicted for it.
Heck, a competent Trump might have won the election fair and square. My personal fear was always that he would generate an international conflict just before the election to benefit from the rally-round-the-flag effect.

I'm firmly in the camp that considers it better to have incompetent evil opponents. They might be a bit unpredictable and do a lot of damage through sheer stupidity, and their buffoonery might make them more popular, but in the final analysis they will almost always* be less dangerous than a more competent versions of themselves with the same political ideas and agenda.
 

*nuclear policy being the one possible exception.

Definitely would have won the 2020 election, since the general rule of thumb is you have to bee seen to be a failure, by and large, to be booted out after just one term. If he was seen as competent by the electorate, especially seen as competent in handling the pandemic, he could have won more bigly than Reagan in 1984.

Our govt was seen as competent in handling the pandemic and won the 2020 election as well as being the first party to win >50% of the popular vote since 1951. Being seen as competent during a disaster or emergency is very good for the incumbent. Trump could have coasted in in 2020 if he had simply remained neutral on expert medical advice and shut his mouth on the quack stuff without actually doing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...