Donald Trump's 2nd term

[bcuster]

Legal experts highlight "lurid" Jack Smith warning that may hint at "scandalous Trump crimes"

New filing includes an "interesting choice of hypotheticals," says attorney George Conway

www.yahoo.com

 

[Ax^]

Good links Bcuster but add a little quote from the link to show what your getting at
like below

Smith’s team in an 82-page filing over the weekend warned an appellate court against granting former President Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution because his post-election crusade was an official part of his presidential duties.

“That approach would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer; a President who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a President who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a President who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary,” the filing said.

 

[krtek a houby]

Good links Bcuster but add a little quote from the link to show what your getting at
like below

THANK YOU!

 

[bluescreen]

From that piece:
“Interesting choice of hypotheticals…” replied conservative lawyer and frequent Trump critic George Conway. “It took quite an imagination,” he quipped later.

 

[Ax^]

hypotheticals when anyone going to the loo in mar go largo

could just read the documents piled up around the Khazi


**for BcBuster Khazi = the head

 

[krtek a houby]

hypotheticals when anyone going to the loo in mar go largo

could just read the documents piled up around the Khazi


**for BcBuster Khazi = the head

Mar a Lago farrago

The Nazi and the khazi

The stacks in the jacks

 

[bcuster]

Dozens more Jeffrey Epstein documents are now public. Here’s what we know so far

The first 40 documents, of around 250 expected to eventually be unsealed, mention figures whose names were already known, including high-profile friends of Epstein’s and victims who have spoken publicly.

apnews.com

Trump factor in the court file, partly because Giuffre was questioned by Maxwell’s lawyers about inaccuracies in newspaper stories about her time with Epstein. One story quoted her as saying she had ridden in a helicopter with flirted with Trump.

 

[NoXion]

Who is RJK? He's not that Kennedy bellpiece is he?

 

[Ax^]

he is bobbies son so aye a Kennedy bellpiece

 

[krtek a houby]

Dozens more Jeffrey Epstein documents are now public. Here’s what we know so far

The first 40 documents, of around 250 expected to eventually be unsealed, mention figures whose names were already known, including high-profile friends of Epstein’s and victims who have spoken publicly.

apnews.com

Trump factor in the court file, partly because Giuffre was questioned by Maxwell’s lawyers about inaccuracies in newspaper stories about her time with Epstein. One story quoted her as saying she had ridden in a helicopter with flirted with Trump.

You're misquoting. Here's the actual quote;

Clinton and Trump both factor in the court file, partly because Giuffre was questioned by Maxwell’s lawyers about inaccuracies in newspaper stories about her time with Epstein. One story quoted her as saying she had ridden in a helicopter with Clinton and flirted with Trump. Giuffre said neither of those things actually happened. She hasn’t accused either former president of wrongdoing.

 

[krtek a houby]

Not a snowball's, but would be hilarious* if ruled against running

Supreme Court to rule if Trump can run for president

Lawsuits nationwide are seeking to disqualify Mr Trump, arguing that he engaged in insurrection.

www.bbc.co.uk

*Also might just tip Trumpists into serious violence, which obviously isn't hilarious

 

[tim]

Not a snowball's, but would be hilarious* if ruled against running

Supreme Court to rule if Trump can run for president

Lawsuits nationwide are seeking to disqualify Mr Trump, arguing that he engaged in insurrection.

www.bbc.co.uk

*Also might just tip Trumpists into serious violence, which obviously isn't hilarious

If banning a candidate who might beat you in a Presidential election is good enough for Putin, it's good enough for Biden, isn't it?

 

[Yossarian]

If banning a candidate who might beat you in a Presidential election is good enough for Putin, it's good enough for Biden, isn't it?

If the Supreme Court bans Trump from the ballot, which is incredibly unlikely, it won't be Biden's doing - it'll take a 5-4 majority in a court with six Republican appointees and three Democratic appointees, including one Biden appointee.

Not sure Biden would want to block Trump from running even if he could - the most likely Republican nominee if Trump is out of the picture is Nikki Haley, who is 30 years younger than Biden and is, in some polls, polling better against him than Trump in hypothetical head-to-heads.

 

[Rob Ray]

a candidate who might beat you

What an odd way of putting "a candidate who'd previously incited a large crowd he'd spent months lying to about election fraud, leading to a riot that stormed parliament and killed a bunch of people."

I mean if I'd done that, as an anarchist rather than a former president, I'd still be very much serving time. Getting on ballots wouldn't really be an option (not that I'd be aiming to, but still).

 

[phildwyer]

the trump bible if he lose the next election

Following the arrest of Trump, Nikki Haley denied knowing him three times, but after the third denial, she heard the rooster crow and recalled the prediction as Jesus turned to look at her, Nikki then began to cry bitterly

Doesn't really work, as Haley is Trump's main opponent rather than a disciple. Lindsey Graham as Judas on the other hand...

 

[phildwyer]

I didn't know about that story but I'm not in the least surprised. Some 26 women have accused him of rape, but of course the legal system is stacked against them. Still, at least one brave woman has prevailed, and now it is not libelous to call Trump a rapist. It is also accordingly appropriate to call Trump fans pro-rape filth.

Yes, this is the kind of hysteria they're going to rely on. No charge will be too wild, no language too inflammatory. The neo-cons are absolutely desperate to keep Trump out of office, and willing to employ any means in order to do so. They will throw around rape charges, they will trample the constitution underfoot, they will stop at nothing at all.

This is in itself a very good reason to look favorably on Trump's candidacy. But how can we explain it? The answer is that the neo-cons sincerely (and not unreasonably) see the prospect of Trump's re-election as an existential threat. Remember that they are animated by one over-riding and absolute imperative: they MUST destroy Iran before it acquires a nuclear bomb. That will require getting rid of Assad first, and possibly Putin too. They know that time is against them, and they simply cannot afford to lose another four years to Trump. Their backs are against the wall, and they are becoming both dangerous and desperate.

 

[Ax^]

if he get the GOP nomination he'll ask her to be his running mate so it works

 

[phildwyer]

Not sure Biden would want to block Trump from running even if he could - the most likely Republican nominee if Trump is out of the picture is Nikki Haley, who is 30 years younger than Biden and is, in some polls, polling better against him than Trump in hypothetical head-to-heads.

In which polls does Haley do better against Biden than Trump? Every one I've seen has her at least 30 points behind.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

In which polls does Haley do better against Biden than Trump? Every one I've seen has her at least 30 points behind.

Only in all of them. I think you're conflating her polling against Biden with her polling against Trump.


MSN:

MSN

www.msn.com

WSJ:

Opinion | Haley vs. Trump vs. Biden

She beats the President by 17 in the latest WSJ poll. Trump wins by 4.

www.wsj.com

Politico:

Why Nikki Haley polls better against Joe Biden than Donald Trump does

A POLITICO analysis shows the former South Carolina governor is winning swaths of moderate voters who'd pick Joe Biden if Donald Trump wins the GOP nomination.

www.politico.com

Keep in mind that the election is still months away.

 

[phildwyer]

Only in all of them. I think you're conflating her polling against Biden with her polling against Trump.


MSN:

MSN

www.msn.com

WSJ:

Opinion | Haley vs. Trump vs. Biden

She beats the President by 17 in the latest WSJ poll. Trump wins by 4.

www.wsj.com

Politico:

Why Nikki Haley polls better against Joe Biden than Donald Trump does

A POLITICO analysis shows the former South Carolina governor is winning swaths of moderate voters who'd pick Joe Biden if Donald Trump wins the GOP nomination.

www.politico.com

Keep in mind that the election is still months away.

I hadn't seen the head-to-head polls, no. But Haley has no chance of winning the nomination, so they're interesting but irrelevant.

 

[gosub]

Yes, this is the kind of hysteria they're going to rely on. No charge will be too wild, no language too inflammatory. The neo-cons are absolutely desperate to keep Trump out of office, and willing to employ any means in order to do so. They will throw around rape charges, they will trample the constitution underfoot, they will stop at nothing at all.

This is in itself a very good reason to look favorably on Trump's candidacy. But how can we explain it? The answer is that the neo-cons sincerely (and not unreasonably) see the prospect of Trump's re-election as an existential threat. Remember that they are animated by one over-riding and absolute imperative: they MUST destroy Iran before it acquires a nuclear bomb. That will require getting rid of Assad first, and possibly Putin too. They know that time is against them, and they simply cannot afford to lose another four years to Trump. Their backs are against the wall, and they are becoming both dangerous and desperate.

So basically its all a Zionist conspiracy.

 

[phildwyer]

So basically its all a Zionist conspiracy.

No. But the USA is no longer prepared to allow any militant anti-Zionist to control state power. Not Saddam, not Gaddafi, not Morsi, not Assad and certainly not the Ayatollahs. The stakes are too high now. And if Putin stands in the way of their removal, then Putin has to go too.

 

[Ax^]

and if trump wins he allows the anti-zionsts to stay in power

 

[phildwyer]

and if trump wins he allows the anti-zionsts to stay in power

Hard to say, but he did order US troops out of Syria, only for General Milley to disobey.

 

[Ax^]

jesus you whole position is just smoke and mirror is it not phil


get the war mongering Biden out to stop the Neo cons
but its american only choice to remain involved and remove leaders of dangerous states if required

you just switched from a desire to return of the american politics of isolationism during the clinton era
whilst also saying america must remove the leader of iran if it threaten israel


and people said you at least knew your stuff on the subject
disappointing

 

[Ax^]

having to wait a month for this gobshites response :/

him being banned for a month

 

[krtek a houby]

Yes, this is the kind of hysteria they're going to rely on. No charge will be too wild, no language too inflammatory. The neo-cons are absolutely desperate to keep Trump out of office, and willing to employ any means in order to do so. They will throw around rape charges, they will trample the constitution underfoot, they will stop at nothing at all.

This is in itself a very good reason to look favorably on Trump's candidacy. But how can we explain it? The answer is that the neo-cons sincerely (and not unreasonably) see the prospect of Trump's re-election as an existential threat. Remember that they are animated by one over-riding and absolute imperative: they MUST destroy Iran before it acquires a nuclear bomb. That will require getting rid of Assad first, and possibly Putin too. They know that time is against them, and they simply cannot afford to lose another four years to Trump. Their backs are against the wall, and they are becoming both dangerous and desperate.

Charges of rape are "hysteria", a threat to the constitution and "a very good reason to look favourably on Trump's candidacy"?

You sink lower and lower with every post.

 

[PR1Berske]

From the Washington Post

After Donald Trump was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll, his legal team and his defenders lodged a frequent talking point.

Despite Carroll’s claims that Trump had raped her, they noted, the jury stopped short of saying he committed that particular offense. Instead, jurors opted for a second option: sexual abuse.

“This was a rape claim, this was a rape case all along, and the jury rejected that — made other findings,” his lawyer, Joe Tacopina, said outside the courthouse.

A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood.


The filing from Judge Lewis A. Kaplan came as Trump’s attorneys have sought a new trial and have argued that the jury’s $5 million verdict against Trump in the civil suit was excessive. The reason, they argue, is that sexual abuse could be as limited as the “groping” of a victim’s breasts.

Kaplan roundly rejected Trump’s motion Tuesday, calling that argument “entirely unpersuasive.”

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

 

[gosub]

Surely we can end this thread on the basis that Biden has lowered inflation, increased employment, and generally improved the country; while Trump is a criminally minded insurrectionist who vows to be a dictator on day one of his presidency?

Just had fb feed making the same claim.....Is this a line Dems are actually pushing?

 

[Jeff Robinson]

There is nothing, abolutely nothing that wouldn't be justified as necessary to prevent this deranged cult from assuming power again: