I confess to back pedaling into Trump territory when I wanted to leave discussions about him in the garbage can. My thread on the read-only break room site has 9,600 replies so I thought I'd bring up a new one.
He's not going away.
Haberman's book is out based on interviews. I won't read it, but the excerpts are interesting. Especially what he says about McConnell, a description that's against the Terms of Service here, but I actually don't disagree with. LOL
Quote
“At one point, Trump made a candid admission that was as jarring as it was ultimately unsurprising. ‘The question I get asked more than any other question: “If you had it to do again, would you have done it?”’Trump said of running for president. ‘The answer is, yeah, I think so. Because here’s the way I look at it. I have so many rich friends and nobody knows who they are.’ … Reflecting on the meaning of having been president of the United States, his first impulse was not to mention public service, or what he felt he’d accomplished, only that it appeared to be a vehicle for fame, and that many experiences were only worth having if someone else envied them.”
The judge overseeing Donald Trump's civil fraud trial issued a gag order Tuesday barring Trump from making comments about court staff after the former president posted a social media attack on the judge's principal law clerk that included her photo.
"This morning one of the defendants posted to his social media account a disparaging, untrue and personally identifying post about a member of my staff,” said Justice Arthur Engoron, addressing Trump as he sat in the courtroom, about 15 feet from the clerk, Allison Greenfield.
Quote
Trump posted the claim about Greenfield while the trial was still in its morning session. Shortly after the court broke for lunch, the judge called the parties back, without allowing reporters to reenter. Court resumed following the lunch break and a 45-minute delay.
Quote
Engoron's decision lands at the precise moment a federal judge in Washington, D.C., is weighing prosecutors' request for a more severe gag order on Trump, who they've accused of repeatedly harassing and intimidating witnesses, tainting the D.C. jury pool and fueling threats against prosecutors and the court.
It's just unbelievable that people will vote for this man to be president.
In the U.S., public official enforce the law with both civil actions and criminal actions as they deem appropriate. In this case, the NY attorney-general did bring a separate criminal case against the Trump Organization and one or more of its top officials, and has another criminal case pending against Trump himself, but decided not to bring criminal charges for this case.
Civil enforcement actions are routine for government officials in every U.S. state and local government, and for the federal government. Most kinds of white collar legal violations are predominantly enforced through civil enforcement rather than criminal charges, in part, because this is perceived as less harsh and because it affords the government a wider range of remedies.
There are many legal protections for defendants in criminal enforcement actions brought by the government, that are not present in civil actions.
For example, in a civil action:
the case has to be proven by a preponderance of the evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt;
the defendant can be compelled to testify (or have a refusal to testify held against the defendant);
the defendant can be compelled to provide documents in the defendants' possession;
a finding of no liability can be appealed;
fewer steps of the case must be conducted in person in open court;
economic damages can be awarded be beyond a statutory fine and "restitution" which is narrowly defined as actual out of pocket losses, and can instead include, for example, disgorgement of unjust gains received and punitive damages;
civil consequences such as the termination of licenses, injunctive relief, placing assets and companies in receivership, and orders to judicially dissolve companies are available;
there is not a right to a speedy trial in a civil action;
the scope of the right to trial by jury in a civil action is narrower and permits judges to enter "summary judgment" prior to a trial on the merits; and
indigent defendants are not entitled to counsel at state expense (probably not an issue in this case).
Also, even if there are arbitration clauses between the offender and the victim, a civil action by a government official to enforce the same rights is not subject to the arbitration clause.
But, some remedies available to the state are different in a criminal action than in a civil action:
a losing defendant cannot be incarcerated simply for losing (brief incarceration could be authorized for the separate offense of defying the court during the case);
the collateral effects of being a felon if convicted do not apply.
Found on the internet. Take it with a grain of salt.
It's just unbelievable that people will vote for this man to be president.
He gives them veiled promises to keep out/remove the browns and the heathens. He has convinced they are victims and only he can save them. If you fear for your way of life and your soul, then you are vulnerable to the piper's song.
Maybe for decades Trump was on the up and up. He had very high incomes and was quite successful. Maybe money and power eventually made his cocky and corrupt with a complex of invincibility.
Is Trump the only business they have ever gone after? Is the narrative "let's conduct a witch hunt to stop him from becoming President" going to be effective if there's nothing there and things are just made up?
I want people held accountable for wrongdoing regardless of timing. Again, like any adult that would say "I look forward to proving my innocence in a court of law" he plays the victim and convinces Americans the legal system around the country has decided to go after him. Just like the democratic system intact for hundreds of years in many states have decided to rig the election.
Yes, in the fraud case it is pretty easy to see this is a witch hunt. James ran on a "I'll get Trump" platform.
State prosecutors declined this case. And nothing so far has come from a DOJ referral.
Watch this and try and tell me this woman isn't out to get Trump.
Kinda ironic that in this video she also calls Trump a "illegitimate President".
She sure talked big. Claimed she could charge him with obstruction of justice and money laundering.
All she has now is a civil case in which no one has claimed to have been damaged.
Watch this and try and tell me this woman isn't out to get Trump.
I don't need to watch a video to show me she isn't out to get Trump. CNN ran an article too about what she said in 2018 during her campaign. She's had concerns about his business dealings for a long time. She's showing that live and in person by bringing up this law suit that she's out to get Trump. Duh
But yeah, she talked a big talk and came up relatively empty handed.
If you need me to tell you it's a witch hunt, then I will. That seems to be more important to you rather than the alleged charges.
Witch hunt or not I decline to be distracted by that as the question in my head is "is he innocent of the charges or not". If he is innocent of the charges, the he will clearly be able to prove they were made up and maybe there's some way to retaliate with a counter suit. Like I said, a mature person would say "I'm innocent and look forward to proving it in a court of law".
As far as business dealing go, inflating your income, then paying off the loans, it's small white collar stuff and it's attention on my radar is a .01 on a scale of 0 to 10. It's dishonest and wrong, but not like trying to overthrow an election or stuff like that.
This pays out the time-line of this civil case, which really seems to be troubling for Trump. I bet if he acts really angry and riles up his supporters with colorful social media posts the judge will go easy on him in this next phase of the proceedings.
Texas Rep. Troy Nehls said in a statement Tuesday afternoon his first order of business when the House reconvenes "will be to nominate Donald J. Trump for Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives."
"President Trump, the greatest President of my lifetime, has a proven record of putting America First and will make the House great again," he said.
Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., followed suit in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Tuesday evening: "@realDonaldTrump for Speaker."
In speeches, interviews and on social media in recent weeks, Trump:
Said former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley committed "treason" and suggested he be executed.
Called for Judge Engoron to be disbarred, thrown out of office and criminally prosecuted, in addition to attacking the judge's clerk.
Labeled New York Attorney General Letitia James — who's suing Trump for fraudulently inflating his wealth and assets on financial records — a "racist" and "a monster."
Said special counsel Jack Smith — who's prosecuting Trump in the Jan. 6 and classified documents cases — is "deranged" and a "psycho" who "looks like a crackhead."
Posted online, "IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU!" — one day after swearing in federal court that he would not intimidate witnesses in the election interference case.
Mocked Paul Pelosi after he was brutally assaulted by a home intruder who was searching for Pelosi's wife, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
Called for police to shoot shoplifters on sight.
Said migrants illegally crossing into the U.S. are "poisoning the blood of our country."
Given the magadonian propensity for violence and general harassment, do you think it has something to do with fear for their and their families' lives?
toomuchbaloney
16,122 Posts
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/03/trump-fraud-trial-gag-order-00119735
It's just unbelievable that people will vote for this man to be president.