Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - threadbans and mod warnings in OP

Options
1252628303189

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 14,785 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    Alot of legal firms wont go near Trump because of that vigilante group the 65 project.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,894 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    Would you supply Trump with goods or services on credit? Say, $250,000 worth



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,661 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    If that's true, why did trump's legal team not ensure a good jury was picked?

    I thought Trump knew the best people?

    I thought MAGA were going to be tired of winning? He's losing in every court case he's involved in.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,727 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Either that or he's a known swindler famous for not paying contractors and being too stupid to keep his hateful mouth shut. Some one of the two.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,785 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    Im not sure, Trump doesnt seem to be hiring good lawyers.

    He should be trying to get the best lawyers he can no matter the cost, its a false economy getting anyone else.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 60,636 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    Maybe if he didn't have a history of stiffing his lawyers when it comes to paying them he might actually be able to hire competent ones.

    Any competent lawyer isn't going to work for someone who has a very public history of stiffing on payments



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,811 ✭✭✭✭briany


    "that vigilante group"

    Fascinating.

    Let's look at the blurb on their website.

    A bipartisan effort to deter future abuse of the legal system by lawyers seeking to overturn legitimate elections. We will hold such lawyers accountable for past abuses and will work to revitalize the state bar disciplinary process so that lawyers, including public officials, who lie about election results and who fuel insurrection will face professional consequences.

    Criticism:

    Though the 65 Project claims to be bipartisan, 11 it is not targeting any Democratic-aligned attorneys who have challenged election laws or results in the past, and is advised exclusively by Democrats and Democratic allies. Texas attorney Paul Davis has described the project as “a desperate attempt by leftist hacks and mercenaries” and an effort “to neutralize anyone on the right with the ability to stand in the way of the left’s efforts to hide malfeasance in the 2020 elections and to clear the path for a repeat of similar malfeasance in the 2022 mid-terms.”

    But I have a big problem with this sentence,

    "an effort “to neutralize anyone on the right with the ability to stand in the way of the left’s efforts to hide malfeasance in the 2020 elections"

    Because that's never happened. No malfeasance was uncovered, and that is even after Cyber Ninjas did their own private audit in one 'county of concern'. They actually returned more votes for Biden.

    So, I would go so far as to say that any lawyer who has remained steadfast with Trump's big lie is not an ethical person and so is a legitimate candidate for scrutiny, and those such as Jenna Ellis have been subject to that to the point that they were actually prosecuted. I would say that such legal professionals should be given a wide berth by anyone.

    But let's leave that aside, because what you appear to be saying is that the 65 Project is going after, or would go after, anyone who would try to represent Trump in any capacity, not just promoting Trump's baseless conspiracy theories about the 2020 election? Then please list out where this has happened because I think it will make for an interesting discussion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,437 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Not just stiffing them, getting them disbarred as well.



  • Registered Users Posts: 808 ✭✭✭bog master


    Cross section of the community?

    or

    Cross section of society



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,085 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Discredited nonsense. Once again, any excuse to avoid holding Trump to account for his conduct with laws firms, with not paying bills, with being held in contempt, and his atrocious behaviour in court and history of ignoring legal counsel.

    https://www.salon.com/2023/06/15/its-mine-rejected-own-lawyers-advice-to-avoid-criminal-charges--and-it-badly-backfired/

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-hear-arguments-summary-judgment-new-york-ags/story?id=103347663

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,050 ✭✭✭Doc07


    5/10 if this is intentional satire.

    If it’s not, I’d say go easy on the Victory gin



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 9,163 CMod ✭✭✭✭Fathom


    From a scientific sample selection method, the small sample size of 12 plus 6 alternates would not be representative at the p<.05 probability for the population of Manhattan at the community level of analysis, much less the larger level of New York City, or the population level of New York State, or the metropolitan level that crosses states, or the United States country level. So to claim that the small “n” jury size can be representative statistically of Trump’s peers fails no matter what you may otherwise claim about the jury selection method.

    This is a limitation of the jury selection method, which the courts attempt to mitigate by an alternative qualitative method that includes opportunities for defense and prosecution and judge to question, qualify and challenge the peer qualifications of jurors. It’s an imperfect method, which if a disqualification is discovered during the trial, an alternate may be substituted, or if after the trial considered in appeal.

    Like it or not, the jury section system is imperfect and does not statistically represent Trump’s peers In Manhattan where he was charged, indicted, and convicted. Other defendants convicted in Manhattan of similar crimes as Trump in the past, present and future will be subject to the same problematic jury selection methods limitations, so to single him out and claim that he is being treated differently, without evidence that would be legally admissible in an appellate court is moot and only contributes to the MAGA conspiracy theories that claim, without legal evidence, that the Trump trial and/or its jury was “rigged.”



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,974 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ Brynlee Uptight Grindstone


    Nevermind your conspiracy theory claims and trying to get people banned, so you can live in your echo chamber. You don't know how to live in a democracy and accept that people have different views that you.

    Have a read of this post if it's not deleted already

    Pretty good article here that echoes the same points I have already made on why the case was bullshit and a witch hunt.

    District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran for office in an overwhelmingly Democratic county by touting his Trump-hunting prowess. He bizarrely (and falsely) boasted on the campaign trail, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.” 

    The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge.

    Standing alone, falsification charges would have been mere misdemeanors under New York law,
    which posed two problems for the DA. First, nobody cares about a
    misdemeanor, and it would be laughable to bring the first-ever charge
    against a former president for a trifling offense that falls within the
    same technical criminal classification as shoplifting a Snapple and a bag of Cheetos from a bodega. Second, the statute of limitations on a misdemeanor — two years — likely has long expired on Trump’s conduct, which dates to 2016 and 2017.

    So, to inflate the charges up to the lowest-level felony (Class
    E, on a scale of Class A through E) — and to electroshock them back to
    life within the longer felony statute of limitations — the DA alleged
    that the falsification of business records was committed “with intent to
    commit another crime.” Here, according to prosecutors, the “another
    crime” is a New York State election-law violation,
    which in turn incorporates three separate “unlawful means”: federal
    campaign crimes, tax crimes, and falsification of still more documents.
    Inexcusably, the DA refused to specify what those unlawful means
    actually were — and the judge declined to force them to pony up — until
    right before closing arguments. So much for the constitutional
    obligation to provide notice to the defendant of the accusations against
    him in advance of trial. (This, folks, is what indictments are for.)

    In these key respects, the
    charges against Trump aren’t just unusual. They’re bespoke, seemingly
    crafted individually for the former president and nobody else.

    The judge donated money — a tiny amount, $35, but in plain violation of a rule prohibiting
    New York judges from making political donations of any kind — to a
    pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation, including funds that the
    judge earmarked for “resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.”

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trump-was-convicted-but-prosecutors-contorted-the-law.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,974 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Except that it was

    Hilarious that you only begin opposing voire dire 7+ weeks after it was done and the verdict is in.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,974 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    interesting that Alan Dershowitz didn’t defend him don’t you think? 😂



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,771 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    So that bolding still indicates the only criminal in this situation is Donald Trump... So why is the judge going to jail? All your bolding relates to the DA btw. So far it's seeming like a conspiracy theory to claim anyone besides Trump has behaved criminally. You're free to have different views but you've claimed somebody will be going to jail for no tangible reason. 🤔

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,302 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    The jury found Trump guilty. Not the judge. Do you fall down a lot? Genuine question.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,302 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    This thread has once again left me wondering what it would take for people to open their minds to the fact that dear Donald might've done something wrong. It doesn't seem that we're ever going to get there now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,974 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Haberman reveals Trumps handlers never ever want him mentioning the Jan 6 committee hearings. They apparently see it as radioactive for him

    https://www.mediaite.com/tv/maggie-haberman-reveals-one-trump-grievance-that-is-never-a-topic-his-advisers-want-him-talking-about/

    Hard to blame them, the hearings were impeccably done and incredibly informative and damning.

    A Fox columnist writes that Trump is “principally responsible” for January 6 and is “unfit for high office” but bizarrely, perhaps for clicks, suggests he now “entertains” voting in Trump for November because… how dare the criminal justice system find its way to Trump. Wow 😂

    https://www.mediaite.com/trump/fox-news-contributor-calls-trump-unfit-for-high-office-but-might-vote-for-the-ex-president-because-of-felony-conviction/



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,507 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Ehh, saw an interview with sycophant toad Bill Barr who was confronted with all the things he's said about CFTrump and still, he said he'd vote for him. Considering Barr has no chance at a cabinet position in a CFTrump cabinet, he's probably just lackeying away for the Federalist society.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,582 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Can they not hold their feet to the fire before they are voted back into office?(not that it would prevent Trump from putting in non-elected jobsworthes to those positions.

    Also not all members of the Senate or Congress are up for reelection at any one time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,974 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    we sure aren’t.

    Online elsewhere where his supporters have even less of a mask on they’re already looking to assassinate the jurors - you know “law and order”

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-supporters-try-doxx-jurors-violent-threats-conviction-rcna154882



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,582 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Ah so, they have to redesign the whole jury system in the wake of Trump's trial ?(because he did not get the one juror to vote for acquital)

    Truly Trump is the new Moses with his acolytes feeding deleriously from the faeces leeking from his orifices



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,582 ✭✭✭amandstu




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,582 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Is all this just an American disease or is it coming our way too?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,811 ✭✭✭✭briany


    One sure fire way to have it come our way is to assume it could never do so.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,582 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Pouring fuel on the fire,perhaps but I wonder will they get a taste of our Diplock courts if any real physical harm comes to these jurors?

    Hope they have eyes on whatever traitors are doxxing them.("traitors" to the rule of law ,that is)



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,876 ✭✭✭Rawr


    I’m still of the mind that many of them know damned well that Donnie has done wrong and will again. But since admitting any failure may be seen as weakness by them, they double down this childish rabbit hole of «nah-ah! It is you that is wrong not us….because reasons» Then proceed to piss-away a tremendious amount of imagination to cobble together said «reasons».

    It’s quite pathetic.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭combat14


    bespoke charges right before presidential election if it sounds like political interference thats because it blatantly is .. whats more the american voters know this too

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


Advertisement