Donald Trump Private Citizen
- Thread starter DIY-HP-LED
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
But he didn’t spawn it. He unmasked what was and has been the program. That gives it problem-level staying power.Unfortunately, it will not end when the cell door slams behind Trump's ass, what he spawned needs to be knocked down too. The good news is the democrats stand a good chance of winning in 24 with fox fucked and on the ropes. Then there are the many pending republican indictments and trials, and the timing couldn't be better for a GOP legal shit storm in 23 & 24. There is also Ukraine, an issue that divides them from the base to the top, white Christians fighting big guberment with guns and guts is a profound part of their mythos. Russia also has hundreds of nukes pointed at them and that doesn't help their case at all!
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
All true, Trump revealed what was already there and put a sharp point on it. I said knock it down, ya can't eliminate it any more than covid. Winning a cycle and passing HR1, voting rights, and regulating TV and cable better will do a lot to keep it down and adding two new states while holding some impeachment investigations of SCOTUS justices would help a lot. The chances are good for 24 with pending republican court cases and fox in a box while being sued out of existence. The republicans are completely dependent on culture wars and going after fox will cut them off at the knees.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
personally I think it’s way early to make any calls re 2024.
1) the candidate fields for both parties are above average in fluidity
2) perception will be considerably shaped by prosecutions, especially if the long delay means that tier-2 figures are receiving the full DOJ treatment.
The one thing I’ll say with some confidence is that the GOP will field a hard maga.
The Democrats need to develop visibility for a (preferably younger) candidate palatable to the rest of America. While I have been pleased with Biden’s performance, especially in light of the tough situation he inherited, his popularity numbers are not good, and his veep’s are if anything worse.
printer
Well-Known Member
Pence says he’ll respect court’s decision on Jan. 6 testimony
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday said that he would respect a court’s decision regarding his testimony in front of the federal grand jury investigating former President Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021 rioting at the Capitol, saying he was not asserting executive privilege to block it.
Pence has thus far refused to comply with a subpoena from Jack Smith, the special counsel in the probe into Trump and Jan. 6.
But Pence said on ABC’s “This Week” that he is not asserting executive privilege to stop from testifying.
Instead, he is arguing that he does not have to testify for his actions on Jan. 6, when the 2020 election was certified despite pressure from Trump, because of the Constitution’s speech and debate clause, which blocks lawmakers from being held legally accountable for anything they say in official legislative proceedings.
“I’ve directed my attorneys to make a strong case in defense of my role as president of the Senate, presiding over a joint session of Congress on that day and in the preparation for that, and we’ll let the courts sort it out,” Pence said. “But I’ve actually never asserted that other matters unrelated to January 6, would otherwise be protected by speech and debate.”
When pressed about whether that meant he would be willing to testify about other things related to Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election, Pence said he would “respect the decisions of the court.”
“As I’ve said, we’re not asserting executive privilege, which may encompass other discussions,” Pence said.
The special prosecutor has started to target some of the members that were closest to the president on the day of the Capitol riots, including his daughter Ivanka Trump and son in law Jared Kushner. The targeting of high-profile witnesses is a signal to some observers that the investigation may be nearing a conclusion.
thehill.com
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday said that he would respect a court’s decision regarding his testimony in front of the federal grand jury investigating former President Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021 rioting at the Capitol, saying he was not asserting executive privilege to block it.
Pence has thus far refused to comply with a subpoena from Jack Smith, the special counsel in the probe into Trump and Jan. 6.
But Pence said on ABC’s “This Week” that he is not asserting executive privilege to stop from testifying.
Instead, he is arguing that he does not have to testify for his actions on Jan. 6, when the 2020 election was certified despite pressure from Trump, because of the Constitution’s speech and debate clause, which blocks lawmakers from being held legally accountable for anything they say in official legislative proceedings.
“I’ve directed my attorneys to make a strong case in defense of my role as president of the Senate, presiding over a joint session of Congress on that day and in the preparation for that, and we’ll let the courts sort it out,” Pence said. “But I’ve actually never asserted that other matters unrelated to January 6, would otherwise be protected by speech and debate.”
When pressed about whether that meant he would be willing to testify about other things related to Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election, Pence said he would “respect the decisions of the court.”
“As I’ve said, we’re not asserting executive privilege, which may encompass other discussions,” Pence said.
The special prosecutor has started to target some of the members that were closest to the president on the day of the Capitol riots, including his daughter Ivanka Trump and son in law Jared Kushner. The targeting of high-profile witnesses is a signal to some observers that the investigation may be nearing a conclusion.
Pence says he’ll respect court’s decision on Jan. 6 testimony
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday said that he would respect a court’s decision regarding his testimony in front of the federal grand jury investigating former President Trump’…
thehill.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I dunno what to say to that, other than they haven't been judging him on performance, which has been excellent by any measure, both domestically and on foreign policy. He could do better with Mr. Glad as VP, but it is what it is. It is still early alright, but we are beginning to see the shape of the landscape. I don't see how Trump can avoid indictment and conviction on everything he is charged with, so scratch him for 24, he will be in a cage by then for something or other. J6 trials and elector fraud cases will cut the heart out of several state republican organizations. Foxnews is in very serious trouble with an even bigger second voting machine company lawsuit just filed, discovery will be a breeze for them and even more will come out. By 24 they could be muted with the Murdoch's gone to save the company and them finding Jesus. After 24, legislation might make their business model illegal or problematic.
This will play out like a story from the onion of a decade ago... Life is stranger than fiction and Trump kinda proved it repeatedly.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Does he have a choice that I don't know about? I wonder will he plead the 5th to any questions?Pence says he’ll respect court’s decision on Jan. 6 testimony
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday said that he would respect a court’s decision regarding his testimony in front of the federal grand jury investigating former President Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021 rioting at the Capitol, saying he was not asserting executive privilege to block it.
Pence has thus far refused to comply with a subpoena from Jack Smith, the special counsel in the probe into Trump and Jan. 6.
But Pence said on ABC’s “This Week” that he is not asserting executive privilege to stop from testifying.
Instead, he is arguing that he does not have to testify for his actions on Jan. 6, when the 2020 election was certified despite pressure from Trump, because of the Constitution’s speech and debate clause, which blocks lawmakers from being held legally accountable for anything they say in official legislative proceedings.
“I’ve directed my attorneys to make a strong case in defense of my role as president of the Senate, presiding over a joint session of Congress on that day and in the preparation for that, and we’ll let the courts sort it out,” Pence said. “But I’ve actually never asserted that other matters unrelated to January 6, would otherwise be protected by speech and debate.”
When pressed about whether that meant he would be willing to testify about other things related to Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election, Pence said he would “respect the decisions of the court.”
“As I’ve said, we’re not asserting executive privilege, which may encompass other discussions,” Pence said.
The special prosecutor has started to target some of the members that were closest to the president on the day of the Capitol riots, including his daughter Ivanka Trump and son in law Jared Kushner. The targeting of high-profile witnesses is a signal to some observers that the investigation may be nearing a conclusion.
Pence says he’ll respect court’s decision on Jan. 6 testimony
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday said that he would respect a court’s decision regarding his testimony in front of the federal grand jury investigating former President Trump’…
I hear Jack can be very aggressive and Pence was in on a lot of this shit and could be culpable for something, especially if Jack goes for conspiracy among republican politicians in congress. From what I can gather Mark Meadows is not cooperating, but he is yet to be indicted and hit between the eyes with a probable life sentence for being Trump's fall guy. If Mark cooperates there could be a lot of very worried republicans, access to Trump was through him and he was in on all the various conspiracies and schemes. I find it hard to believe that the FBI hasn't collected his phone and searched his house by now, though if he deletes anything he could be looking at 20 years for obstruction of justice.
printer
Well-Known Member
Trump DC hotel dispute with House Democrats lands at Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is poised to decide if it will take up a case on whether Democratic lawmakers should be able to obtain documents related to former President Trump’s former D.C. hotel — a popular meeting place for GOP power-players during his administration that was a few blocks from the White House.
The Democratic lawmakers filed the lawsuit in 2017 after asking the General Services Administration (GSA) to produce various financial records related to Trump’s hotel in the Old Post Office Pavilion, which is owned by the federal government.
The lawmakers have accused the former president of hiding a significant amount of debt during the GSA’s initial bidding process for the hotel. They have also raised concerns about how Trump managed potential conflicts of interest while he served as president, including doing business with foreign governments who stayed at the hotel at the same time they were seeking to influence U.S. foreign policy. Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
Supreme Court justices discussed the request at a closed-door conference on Friday. If the court makes a decision about whether it will take up the case, it will be announced Monday, but it wouldn’t be heard until next term. Four of the nine justices must agree to take up the case. Three of the majority-conservative justices now sitting on the bench are Trump nominees.
At stake is whether the case could open presidential administration’s up to more scrutiny by Congress, even by a political party that is not in power.
Several lawmakers who kicked off the lawsuit have since left Congress or died and the Trump Organization eventually sold the lease following his presidency.
thehill.com
The Supreme Court is poised to decide if it will take up a case on whether Democratic lawmakers should be able to obtain documents related to former President Trump’s former D.C. hotel — a popular meeting place for GOP power-players during his administration that was a few blocks from the White House.
The Democratic lawmakers filed the lawsuit in 2017 after asking the General Services Administration (GSA) to produce various financial records related to Trump’s hotel in the Old Post Office Pavilion, which is owned by the federal government.
The lawmakers have accused the former president of hiding a significant amount of debt during the GSA’s initial bidding process for the hotel. They have also raised concerns about how Trump managed potential conflicts of interest while he served as president, including doing business with foreign governments who stayed at the hotel at the same time they were seeking to influence U.S. foreign policy. Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
Supreme Court justices discussed the request at a closed-door conference on Friday. If the court makes a decision about whether it will take up the case, it will be announced Monday, but it wouldn’t be heard until next term. Four of the nine justices must agree to take up the case. Three of the majority-conservative justices now sitting on the bench are Trump nominees.
At stake is whether the case could open presidential administration’s up to more scrutiny by Congress, even by a political party that is not in power.
Several lawmakers who kicked off the lawsuit have since left Congress or died and the Trump Organization eventually sold the lease following his presidency.
Trump DC hotel dispute with House Democrats lands at Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is poised to decide if it will take up a case on whether Democratic lawmakers should be able to obtain documents related to former President Trump’s former D.C. hotel — a popular …
thehill.com
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
I took it to mean he wouldn’t appeal the court’s decision but your right, pence is a slippery fucker.Does he have a choice that I don't know about? I wonder will he plead the 5th to any questions?
Actually not perjury, I guess. At least I found this AFTER shooting my mouth off showing Count 8 as being: "Making an excessive campaign contribution":
Code:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-eight-counts-including-criminal-taxGood eye, nonetheless. TY.
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
I did some checking too, after my post. I was going to edit the post and add I was wrong but decided to wait for you to call me on it.Actually not perjury, I guess. At least I found this AFTER shooting my mouth off showing Count 8 as being: "Making an excessive campaign contribution":Good eye, nonetheless. TY.Code:https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-eight-counts-including-criminal-tax
RIU is awesome, ain't it?
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Looks like they will be taking these things too, why didn't they take them when they raided Mar A Largo, they know it's government property, it was given to the country, not him. If he claims ownership over them, they are bribes. Raid his homes and take the shit, then let him sue to get it back, a warrant should not be hard to obtain. Maybe this will come later while he's in shit up to his ears and they get some convictions on him.
Trump BUSTED for Violating Federal Law with New MASSIVE Foreign Grift
Trump BUSTED for Violating Federal Law with New MASSIVE Foreign Grift
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I’m having trouble linking the CNN article, but that man’s legal team is seeking the dismissal of the Georgia special grand jury’s findings as somehow unconstitutional.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Trump’s Lawyer MISSING as E. Jean Carroll case gets MAJOR UPDATE
36,667 views Mar 20, 2023
Michael Popok of Legal AF reports on a breaking development and major blow to Trump in the E Jean Caroll case with the Federal Judge ruling that the civil and defamation case based on Trump’s 2022 post-prez comments ARE going to trial on 4/25, while the original defamation case based on comments made while trump was president will be stayed awaiting some appellate rulings.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Donald is rapidly approaching the point where his legal issues are a full-time job, and he will be spending more and more time in court, and then all of it in prison eventually. I still think it will make the SS job easier and cheaper if Donald was in a cage, it will make up some for blowing their budget with golf outings. He might have a kind of house arrest for a while, but as the charges, convictions and time stack up, other arrangements will have to be made. If it's house arrest, who pays for the house? Donald will be bankrupt soon enough and Mar A largo sold off or seized. I will be harder to defend himself from a multitude of lawsuits in prison and hard to run from office there too, especially if he is broke.
In any case it will be state custody before federal custody and different people making the calls, a judge will make the first calls and own Donald's ass until a verdict or sentencing.
In any case it will be state custody before federal custody and different people making the calls, a judge will make the first calls and own Donald's ass until a verdict or sentencing.
topcat
Well-Known Member
He will. Milquetoast Mike.I wonder will he plead the 5th to any questions?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Despite Trump's calls for protests, few efforts emerge, as supporters worry: 'It's a trap'
Rather than organizing protests, prominent Trump supporters online are driving a different narrative: That any public events are a law enforcement "trap."
www.usatoday.com
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
Perhaps they are smarter than we thought?Despite Trump's calls for protests, few efforts emerge, as supporters worry: 'It's a trap'
Rather than organizing protests, prominent Trump supporters online are driving a different narrative: That any public events are a law enforcement "trap."www.usatoday.com
View attachment 5273269