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.”
False reports about the jury instructions in former President Donald Trump's hush money trial have been spreading across right-wing media, leading to threats against the judge overseeing the case.
Several conservative news personalities, including some affiliated with Fox News, falsely claimed that Judge Juan Merchan, as one Fox News anchor put it in a viral post on X, "told the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict" Trump.
Quote
In response to inaccurate reporting that Trump could be convicted without unanimous agreement that he committed a crime, one user on Gab, a site popular with far-right extremists, said Wednesday it was "time to find out where that judge lives and protest as the left calls it." Another user posted: "I hear bad stuff happens to judges in their driveways." On Telegram, one user called for "a military tribunal" for Merchan and on the official Telegram channel of Steve Bannon's WarRoom, a user said Merchan "and all involved" should be hanged.
How many radicalized extremists are there in the Trump cult? Is the number increasing?
In his filing, Bragg sets out four potential object offenses: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA); violations of New York Election Law § 17-152; violations of federal, local, and state tax law; and additional falsifications of business records outside the Trump Organization. Merchan allowed Bragg to move forward with the first three theories but tossed out the last one.
The source goes on to discuss the alleged crimes in greater detail. What did your sources tell you about the prosecutions allegations?
Beerman said:
No. Not until credentials and training on the topic at hand are disclosed.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
NRSKarenRN said:
Fireworks going off in my neighborhood....
Any booms I hear would more likely be gunshots or explosions (I live in a gold mining community). Most of my neighbors are probably pretty upset that Joe Biden did this to poor Mr Trump.
Those are strong opinions on something you aren't following.
I did not following closely, not that I wasn't following. I was more aware of it and not following it on a day to day basis. The hung jury opinion was based on a conversation I had with a friend who felt this way, and I agree, but I was wrong about it being a hung jury.
I remain correct that people are saying it's rigged and that long before the verdict people were prepped to feel this way. The speaker called it a shameful day.
In the end it's not going to matter. Polls show people are not going to change how they vote and even the Democratic Party is saying he will be the nominee and to get out and vote.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Beerman said:
Skirted the question. I wanted to know what the jury actually heard in court about alleged crimes.
I'm only serious with the other question if you're going to demand credentials before allowing opinions as you did another member.
So, you aren't really serious, you're going to prop up a strawman to hide behind. So Trumpian.
Baloney. I didn't skirt your question. I attempted to answer it but you decided that's not exactly what you wanted. I wonder why you don't find that content yourself if your own media choices aren't giving you that information? It appears that you aren't really interested in the information, it's just a point of contention to imply something that's not quite true.
Since you want to spread a made up claim about me, you should at least make an attempt to quote my exact words which demanded credentials from a member who is not allowed to post until the credentials are seen. Can you make up my words too, or are you just going to twist them?
So, you aren't really serious, you're going to prop up a strawman to hide behind. So Trumpian.
Baloney. I didn't skirt your question. I attempted to answer it but you decided that's not exactly what you wanted. I wonder why you don't find that content yourself if your own media choices aren't giving you that information? It appears that you aren't really interested in the information, it's just a point of contention to imply something that's not quite true.
Since you want to spread a made up claim about me, you should at least make an attempt to quote my exact words which demanded credentials from a member who is not allowed to post until the credentials are seen. Can you make up my words too, or are you just going to twist them?
I asked specifically for the benefit of EVERYONE here (and I stated that in my question) might not be following closely what the jury heard about alleged crimes he was covering up. From what I have heard, not much was presented and yet the jury was to decide if he was indeed covering up a crime. Here is the most recent item on that I have read:
"Jed Sugarman, a professor at Boston University School of Law who said he identifies as politically progressive, thought the election fraud aspect was exaggerated for political effect, and that the underlying crimes warranting a felony charge were never clarified."
Trump failed to prove himself innocent, and that's why he lost. That isn't how the criminal justice system is supposed to work
"The single biggest problem that the defence had in this case,” said Mitchell Epner, a New York civil litigator, "was that Donald Trump was their client.”
...
"Jed Sugarman, a professor at Boston University School of Law who said he identifies as politically progressive, thought the election fraud aspect was exaggerated for political effect, and that the underlying crimes warranting a felony charge were never clarified.
Prosecutors' victory, he believed, came down to bringing the case in a liberal-leaning jurisdiction and selecting a favourable jury.
"I just donated $300k to Trump. I'm prepared to lose friends. Here's why," Sequoia founder Shaun Maguire wrote in an extended post on X.
"Back in 2016 I had drunk the media Kool-Aid and was scared out of my mind about Trump. As such I donated to Hilary Clinton's campaign and voted for her. By 2020 I was disillusioned and didn't vote – I didn't like either option. Now, in 2024, I believe this is one of the most important elections of my lifetime, and I'm supporting Trump," he added"
toomuchbaloney
16,109 Posts
Oh look...more radicalized Trump supporters.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/false-right-wing-reports-trump-trial-jury-instructions-fuel-threats-ju-rcna154678
How many radicalized extremists are there in the Trump cult? Is the number increasing?