Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Tell me how

WhomadeGod wrote: »

If its Trump v kamala Harris in 2024 how does that one play out?

No matter who is on either ticket in 2024, none of us know for sure how it will play out.

I strongly hope that Trump is nowhere near the ticket and that if he is, that he is unequivocally beaten. And that is the case whether he might be running against Biden, Harris or An Other.

If Harris assummed the Presidency after 2022 midterms and 2023 and early 2024 were calm and there was a secure economy, I would favour her to win. If she does not assume it, before being nominated as the candidate and the economy is in trouble or there is a significant military or racial topic at that time, I expect she would lose.

Irrespective of the economy, her position at the time of the campaign, if he ends up competing against her, he will combine all his previous misogny and racial prejudice in to yet another vitriolic campaign.

Itssoeasy

Seems like the January 6th commission is going to happen. I assume the GOP will want Hunter Biden to testify for some bizarre reason.

Itssoeasy

Just reading parts of the agreement that Joel Greenberg signed with the government. If I was Matt Gaetz and his lawyers were any bloody good they’d tell him to shut up.

Leroy42

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Just reading parts of the agreement that Joel Greenberg signed with the government. If I was Matt Gaetz and his lawyers were any bloody good they’d tell him to shut up.

Tell who, Matt? Because what can they say to to get Joel to stay quiet?

It is clear that he is cutting a deal, getting reduced time or whatever. What can Matt offer him?

Joel is out to look after himself, now that he is in a hole.

Itssoeasy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Tell who, Matt? Because what can they say to to get Joel to stay quiet?

It is clear that he is cutting a deal, getting reduced time or whatever. What can Matt offer him?

Joel is out to look after himself, now that he is in a hole.

Yes the congressman because he’s not going to help himself. Sorry I’ve read my post back and I can see how it could be read a different way. No to be clear from the 86 page court filling if Joel Greenberg wants to get the reduced sentence he’s going to have to sign like an Avery full of canaries and that will likely include Matt gaetz and all he knows about him.

Here’s the filling if anyone wants to read it.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20708965/greenberg-plea.pdf

aloyisious

The report from the Rachel Maddow Show and from MSNBC that some public servants from Palm Beach County are allegedly looking at ways and means that the county can use to avoid having to comply with a legal extradition request from a NYC prosecutor for the extradition of former President Trump from Florida may show how things are going on behind the scenes. While it may never happen except in the planning and research area, the notion that Trump would be taken into custody in Florida for the purpose of extradition to NYC must give cause to others from his cohort more likely to suffer the same procedure reason to worry.

It seems there are differing opinions as to the legality of any decision by a Florida Governor to refuse a NYC Prosecutor's request for the former Presidents extradition there, whatever about it being useful on one's political C.V that one successfully gave the bird to NYC.

Itssoeasy

In news that I’m sure will shock us all, it appears that Donald trump six days after the election ordered the withdrawal of American troops from several areas around the world before January 20th.

EltonJohn69

Itssoeasy wrote: »

In news that I’m sure will shock us all, it appears that Donald trump six days after the election ordered the withdrawal of American troops from several areas around the world before January 20th.

Did someone from Russia give him the order ???

Itssoeasy

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

Did someone from Russia give him the order ???

Russia ? Sure it’s as good a suggestion as any.

Jelle1880

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Yes the congressman because he’s not going to help himself. Sorry I’ve read my post back and I can see how it could be read a different way. No to be clear from the 86 page court filling if Joel Greenberg wants to get the reduced sentence he’s going to have to sign like an Avery full of canaries and that will likely include Matt gaetz and all he knows about him.

Here’s the filling if anyone wants to read it.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20708965/greenberg-plea.pdf

Seems he's already had his charges dropped from 33 to 6. So he's 100% cooperating and if that's true then Gaetz should get very worried.

Tell me how

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Seems he's already had his charges dropped from 33 to 6. So he's 100% cooperating and if that's true then Gaetz should get very worried.

I'm not so sure. Surely the GOP have an inside line on what is happening and would have pulled Gaetz from public view if they thought something serious was going to happen.

Nody

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not so sure. Surely the GOP have an inside line on what is happening and would have pulled Gaetz from public view if they thought something serious was going to happen.

The GOP are not exactly Gaetz fans though now are they? They don't seem him as a true R but rather as someone using the position to catapult himself into a TV show.

Quin_Dub

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not so sure. Surely the GOP have an inside line on what is happening and would have pulled Gaetz from public view if they thought something serious was going to happen.

The GOP have nothing to gain/lose from protecting Gaetz so why would they?

If anything they gain if he's convicted.

Depending on the level/severity of the conviction or findings they get to either blame it on a "Leftist conspiracy" or they can claim the higher ground by being able to say that they didn't go to bat for him.

He's on his own here.

Itssoeasy

Nody wrote: »

The GOP are not exactly Gaetz fans though now are they? They don't seem him as a true R but rather as someone using the position to catapult himself into a TV show.

No they aren’t. Minority leader Kevin McCarthy has said that they’ll wait and see what comes about so it’s not a full throated endorsement of the congressman gaetz but nor was it a jettisoning of him. I mean because McCarthy the only other GOP members I know have come out in defence of him are Marjorie Taylor greene and Jim Jordan which says it all.

And the GOP might try to say it’s a liberal conspiracy or whatever, but the issue is this investigation of Matt gaetz was started under Donald trump’s justice dept, but those pesky facts don’t matter.

Rjd2

Nody wrote: »

The GOP are not exactly Gaetz fans though now are they? They don't seem him as a true R but rather as someone using the position to catapult himself into a TV show.

A little more complicated than that.

They know he is mad about the fame , but plenty of them are and are in the good books of those in power. Gaetz from all accounts has burned a lot of bridges with people over various things and also does clash with them over issues.

He is actually ok on climate change, drug legislation and forever war compared to the neocons which oddly hurts him with those whose political POV has not evolved over last few decades.

Its district is a safe Republican hold no matter who they would choose to replace him, so it wouldn't make a lot of tactical sense to go to bat for him .

aloyisious

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The GOP have nothing to gain/lose from protecting Gaetz so why would they?

If anything they gain if he's convicted.

Depending on the level/severity of the conviction or findings they get to either blame it on a "Leftist conspiracy" or they can claim the higher ground by being able to say that they didn't go to bat for him.

He's on his own here.

Reckon so, they've made a decision to steer away from any upcoming court trials, holding their peace until the big one [Don] or second biggest one [Rudy] as one's worth defending.

aloyisious

Albert Watkins, the lawyer for Jacob Chansley [the shaman] today described his client as being on the Autism spectrum and the other insurrectionists as being "short-bus people" with no previous criminal history subjected to four-plus years of propaganda the like the world has not seen since Hitler. He included the "F" word several times in his statement, before the term "Short-Bus People" and the last named historical person.

For the record, I have no idea what the term "short-bus people" means but assume it's a put-down derogatory expression.

Just realised that with the commission coming up, the statement would be one way of getting a clients angle in first.

gimli2112

for those of you curious I typed it into google and got this

A short bus is U.S. slang for a smaller school bus usually used for transporting disabled students.

Timberrrrrrrr

aloyisious wrote: »

Albert Watkins, the lawyer for Jacob Chansley [the shaman] today described his client as being on the Autism spectrum and the other insurrectionists as being "short-bus people" with no previous criminal history subjected to four-plus years of propaganda the like the world has not seen since Hitler. He included the "F" word several times in his statement, before the term "Short-Bus People" and the last named historical person.

For the record, I have no idea what the term "short-bus people" means but assume it's a put-down derogatory expression.

In America kids get the yellow school bus to school, the "special" kids had a different shorter bus, hence the term "short bus people"

amandstu

Are we there yet?

"New York state AG says probe of Trump Organization now criminal"

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0519/1222476-trump-organisation-under-criminal-investigation/

Brian?

gimli2112 wrote: »

for those of you curious I typed it into google and got this

A short bus is U.S. slang for a smaller school bus usually used for transporting disabled students.

It's exactly that, very similar to how people use "windowlickers" in Ireland.

Brian?

amandstu wrote: »

Are we there yet?

"New York state AG says probe of Trump Organization now criminal"

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0519/1222476-trump-organisation-under-criminal-investigation/

I have very little hope he'll end up being charged with anything at this stage.

serfboard

amandstu wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0519/1222476-trump-organisation-under-criminal-investigation/

From that article:

RTE wrote:

Some Republicans fear that failing to reject Mr Trump's rhetoric about voter fraud could hurt the party, even if a major key to high voter turnout is to motivate Mr Trump's fiercely loyal base.

This is what I don't get.

Why should Republicans bother voting anymore if the election results are going to be fraudulent?

And of course, there is also the ridiculous situation that you have people in Congress who were "elected" in the same fraudulent election in which Trump was defeated? If Biden is not legitimately in office, how come they are?

amandstu

serfboard wrote: »

From that article:

This is what I don't get.

Why should Republicans bother voting anymore if the election results are going to be fraudulent?

And of course, there is also the ridiculous situation that you have people in Congress who were "elected" in the same fraudulent election in which Trump was defeated? If Biden is not legitimately in office, how come they are?

Sure, but if there is any chance that this cult of Trump that has parasitized the Republic Party (it was ready and willing to be taken over inthat way) one should exercise extreme caution and prepare for the worst eventuality when the stakes are so high.

I doubt the GOP is recoverable now .It is like some kind of political Frankenstein creature the directionless steps of which are very difficult to predict.

Nody

serfboard wrote: »

From that article:

This is what I don't get.

Why should Republicans bother voting anymore if the election results are going to be fraudulent?

And of course, there is also the ridiculous situation that you have people in Congress who were "elected" in the same fraudulent election in which Trump was defeated? If Biden is not legitimately in office, how come they are?

Because brave patriotic republican forces stopped the simp cancel culture Libs from stealing the election in those locations of course (and if they lost the Libs successfully stole it by "insert conspiracy theories here"). You can read it straight out from Q culture approach for the explanation and that's assuming you even want to apply logic to the question (see the stop the vote / continue the vote chants in various states by the same group of people depending on if Trump was ahead or not). This is simply a repeat of Brexit vote where people think feelings = facts and reject any information that don't align with their world view no matter how inconsistent that ends up being.

Itssoeasy

Shock horror that Kevin McCarthy is against the January 6th commission. It’s not a shock because he would likely be called to testify seeing as we have an on the record(from the impeachment) description of his conversations with the former president.

Tell me how

What is needed for an investigative commission to go ahead? Is it a straight majority vote in both House and Senate or does it need more in senate?

Itssoeasy

Tell me how wrote: »

What is needed for an investigative commission to go ahead? Is it a straight majority vote in both House and Senate or does it need more in senate?

I assume it’s just a straight forward vote. I’ve no idea if forming of committees are different but I assume it is because we’d have heard of it being different. The senate may be where it dies.

Itssoeasy

I see Donald trump is calling the investigation into his business is corrupt. It still his go to phrase when ever something he/his company gets called out for being less than on the up and up.

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I see Donald trump is calling the investigation into his business is corrupt. It still his go to phrase when ever something he/his company gets called out for being less than on the up and up.

I'd say,given a choice between Trump's interests and corruption I might opt for corruption (the devil you know and all that)