hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,350
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyajinx on Apr 22, 2024 5:42:33 GMT -5
While some investors have lost more than half their money in Truth Social, likely some of Trump’s most ardent supporters, Trump himself is on the verge of taking in $1B+ in meeting “performance” goals. The stock tanks because the underlying company is worthless, and Trump keeps making money. It’s a never ending grift, and his supporters gleefully take it in the shorts. These people are perpetual marks for their cult leader. www.cnn.com/2024/04/22/business/trump-media-stock-truth-social/index.html
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,305
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 23, 2024 3:49:26 GMT -5
Grifter concedes. Loser. Trump attorneys agree to new conditions on $175 million bond NEW YORK, N.Y. — Attorneys for former president Donald Trump agreed Monday to several new conditions on his $175 million bond deal — probably ending a challenge from state officials that had imperiled Trump’s ability to appeal a massive civil fraud judgment. In the end, Trump’s attorneys agreed to five concessions demanded by the state, including making Knight the sole holder of the $175 million in cash rather than a trust operated by Trump. The two sides have until Thursday to finalize the arrangement. www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/04/22/trump-attorneys-bond-civil-fraud-appeal-conditions/
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,305
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 23, 2024 10:15:26 GMT -5
Grouchy Grifter and his shyster. Donald Trump’s social media posts about likely witnesses were the first order of business Tuesday when court resumed for the historic criminal trial of a former president, with a prosecutor suggesting Trump has been violating his gag order to get locked up for political purposes and the judge telling the defense they were losing credibility with their arguments. Merchan reserved a decision on the issue until a later time, but he made clear that he was not impressed by the arguments from Trump's legal team. When Blanche told him Trump was being careful about complying with the order, the judge told him, "You're losing all credibility with the court." www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-trump-trial-hold-hearing-gag-order-witness-testimony-resumes-rcna148854
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,548
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 24, 2024 2:01:40 GMT -5
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 24, 2024 5:41:20 GMT -5
He probably accepted the first lowball offer from the foreigners, because he’s a bad negotiator and probably doesn’t understand the value of this stuff, which seems boring compared to salacious rumors.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,305
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 24, 2024 6:22:43 GMT -5
Texas! Yee Haw! Just keep lowering that bar for attorney misconduct. No wonder a moron like Texas AG Ken Paxton escapes accountability and wins re-election. Pathetic morons. CNN — An appeals court in Texas ruled in favor of Sidney Powell last week, upholding a state court judge’s ruling that tossed out an attorney discipline petition against the lawyer for her involvement in former President Donald Trump’s election reversal efforts. www.cnn.com/2024/04/22/politics/sidney-powell-trump-election-lawsuits/index.html
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,305
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 24, 2024 7:20:13 GMT -5
Underneath the trial minutia and mounting evidence of former President Donald Trump is a raging debate about the political impact of the trial. I weighed in last week after I became very annoyed at people arguing that the trial could help Trump. How much it will hurt him and in which ways are up for discussion. Nevertheless, it is absurd to believe that being on trial for falsifying business records to cover up an extramarital affair with an adult film star would be a net positive (perhaps, I am still annoyed). In all of the discussion about how persuadable voters are consuming the allegations and would react to a hypothetical conviction, I think we are missing the forest for the trees.
The political damage to Trump is not what is said in the courtroom; it’s how he looks. After spending his whole life and three presidential campaigns cultivating an image of power and strength, the first week of the trial made the former president look weak, tired, and scared. -- Dan Pfeiffer
April 24, 2024
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,482
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 24, 2024 7:58:40 GMT -5
Underneath the trial minutia and mounting evidence of former President Donald Trump is a raging debate about the political impact of the trial. I weighed in last week after I became very annoyed at people arguing that the trial could help Trump. How much it will hurt him and in which ways are up for discussion. Nevertheless, it is absurd to believe that being on trial for falsifying business records to cover up an extramarital affair with an adult film star would be a net positive (perhaps, I am still annoyed). In all of the discussion about how persuadable voters are consuming the allegations and would react to a hypothetical conviction, I think we are missing the forest for the trees. The political damage to Trump is not what is said in the courtroom; it’s how he looks. After spending his whole life and three presidential campaigns cultivating an image of power and strength, the first week of the trial made the former president look weak, tired, and scared. -- Dan Pfeiffer April 24, 2024 Almost like the whole enterprise is political theatre engineered for that result irrespective of substance. The Documents case on the other hand is real.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 24, 2024 11:19:36 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy?
Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run?
I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls."
I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election.
|
|
|
Post by WilsonBlvdHoya on Apr 24, 2024 11:36:53 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. I'm no lawyer but I do know that these cases are not politically motivated. And the argument that somehow the rule of law is being twisted to "persecute" POTUS45 just plays into the baser elements of the tinfoil hat-wearing crowd that adores him so..... The enclosed link is a far more informed and nuanced reading of the 4 indictments (for sure, the lawyers rank the NY case as the least portentous/impactful).... www.amazon.com/Trump-Indictments-Historic-Documents-Commentary/dp/1324079207/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.LpPCRma5dxOanJ3WPD6aQx7476C_u5rxrQ6CmVjugTs.9eW2wvMtzFy9T4fqbt5G2rI6f-ZB0TB01YVabPtwGuE&dib_tag=se&qid=1713976206&refinements=p_lbr_one_browse-bin%3AAndrew+Weissmann&s=books&sr=1-1
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Apr 24, 2024 13:38:05 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. Acting as if the timing is politically motivated is either naive or ignorant. As a physician with a law degree, I have been to court several times. The campaign-finance violation could not be brought while Trump was president. If there was undue delay it was from 2020 to 2022 when the case was being investigated. Since it was filed it has proceeded as quickly as Trump's lawyers and the court would allow the case to proceed. In general, the law favors allowing both sides delay throughout court proceedings in the interest of fairness to both sides.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 24, 2024 13:39:40 GMT -5
I'm not saying that he didn't commit crimes, or that he should get a pass for them. I'm saying that, if he had been convicted in his impeachment trial and were ineligible to run, I don't think this case would be brought in New York. (I don't extend that view to the other ones.)
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,350
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyajinx on Apr 24, 2024 14:28:01 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. Acting as if the timing is politically motivated is either naive or ignorant. As a physician with a law degree, I have been to court several times. The campaign-finance violation could not be brought while Trump was president. If there was undue delay it was from 2020 to 2022 when the case was being investigated. Since it was filed it has proceeded as quickly as Trump's lawyers and the court would allow the case to proceed. In general, the law favors allowing both sides delay throughout court proceedings in the interest of fairness to both sides. This reminds of a video of a focus group of undecided voters that I saw a week or two ago. I’m not saying CThoya is guilty of this, as I know that he is well-versed on the 2024 election issues, but the profound ignorance of this group with respect to the timing of the Trump trials floored me. All eight of the voters said the prosecutions were politically motivated (no doubt from a constant diet of nonsense fed to them on social media), and they cited the timing of the trials as evidence. These people, who consider themselves informed, thought they should have been brought in 2020(!) and 2021. I could not believe people could be this misinformed considering Trump was president in 2020 and most of the crimes of which he’s been accused (and absolutely did) didn’t happen until 2021. Factor in fact finding and the endless delays that Trump himself has forced, and a reasonable and actual informed person would realize that there is no way these trials could have happened sooner. If the general electorate actually took the time to inform themselves rather than taking social media or their favorite news channel as gospel, there would be a 0% of Trump winning this election. It is so deeply frustrating.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,305
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 24, 2024 14:38:49 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. Acting as if the timing is politically motivated is either naive or ignorant. As a physician with a law degree, I have been to court several times. The campaign-finance violation could not be brought while Trump was president. If there was undue delay it was from 2020 to 2022 when the case was being investigated. Since it was filed it has proceeded as quickly as Trump's lawyers and the court would allow the case to proceed. In general, the law favors allowing both sides delay throughout court proceedings in the interest of fairness to both sides. The statute of limitations was tolled (or suspended) for about 9 months during COVID via emergency executive order. natlawreview.com/article/governor-cuomo-s-tolling-new-york-statutes-limitation-has-ended-what-did-it?amp=Moreover, New York law does identify a couple of ways to stop the statute of limitations clock. If the defendant was continuously outside New York state or if the defendant's whereabouts were "continuously unknown and continuously unascertainable by the exercise of reasonable diligence," then the clock is tolled. www.findlaw.com/state/new-york-law/new-york-criminal-statute-of-limitations-laws.htmlIn 1999, New York's highest court, The New York Court of Appeals, clarified that the reason behind the exception to the statute of limitations it the difficulty to apprehend a criminal offender who is outside of the state. On this interpretation, the word "continuous" doesn't mean a single uninterrupted period of time but a tally of all the days put together. By this logic, even though the alleged crime took place more than five years ago, Trump could still be prosecuted, as the limitations clock would have stopped when he changed residence to FL (October 2019) and the multiple times whenever he left New York. I assume the Grifter's shysters litigated and loss this defense and have preserved the issue on appeal should he be convicted.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by hoyarooter on Apr 24, 2024 20:24:50 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. What's just damn frustrating is that we are stuck with NY as the first case heard. The documents case should have been first, but Trump lucked into Loose Cannon as the judge, and she's just bent on delaying the case as long as possible. Then the Supreme Court actually agreed to hear the ridiculous immunity claim, and delayed the oral arguments until tomorrow, so that decision won't come down until the end of June, resulting in interminable delays of what I choose to call the insurrection case. In a just world, the documents case would be ongoing now, followed by the insurrection case, and Trump's ass would be in jail well before the election, so he could continue to compare himself to Nelson Mandela.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 24, 2024 21:30:16 GMT -5
I'm no fan of Trump, but I kind of agree with Elvado here. This case sure does feel like a politically motivated prosecution. A campaign-finance violation from eight years ago? Involving underlying conduct that has been in the public record for years now? Really? That's the charge that's going to topple his candidacy? Put another way, does anyone think New York State bothers to prosecute him for this if he's convicted by the Senate and ineligible to run? I don't think it's really all that difficult to imagine that some voters are buying into the "Trump is being persecuted" angle that his campaign is pushing, and that this trial is "reminding" them that "all Democrats are corrupt and they're after Trump because they can't beat him at the polls." I also agree with Elvado that the documents case is real, and that it should have nothing but negative effects for Trump. But unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on the election. What's just damn frustrating is that we are stuck with NY as the first case heard. The documents case should have been first, but Trump lucked into Loose Cannon as the judge, and she's just bent on delaying the case as long as possible. Then the Supreme Court actually agreed to hear the ridiculous immunity claim, and delayed the oral arguments until tomorrow, so that decision won't come down until the end of June, resulting in interminable delays of what I choose to call the insurrection case. In a just world, the documents case would be ongoing now, followed by the insurrection case, and Trump's ass would be in jail well before the election, so he could continue to compare himself to Nelson Mandela. Agree wholeheartedly. They have him dead to rights in the documents case, and those charges (and the implications of that conduct) are really serious!
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,482
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 25, 2024 4:24:58 GMT -5
What's just damn frustrating is that we are stuck with NY as the first case heard. The documents case should have been first, but Trump lucked into Loose Cannon as the judge, and she's just bent on delaying the case as long as possible. Then the Supreme Court actually agreed to hear the ridiculous immunity claim, and delayed the oral arguments until tomorrow, so that decision won't come down until the end of June, resulting in interminable delays of what I choose to call the insurrection case. In a just world, the documents case would be ongoing now, followed by the insurrection case, and Trump's ass would be in jail well before the election, so he could continue to compare himself to Nelson Mandela. Agree wholeheartedly. They have him dead to rights in the documents case, and those charges (and the implications of that conduct) are really serious! Agree wholeheartedly on the documents case. That said, griping about Judicial conduct strikes me funny here.
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,350
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyajinx on Apr 25, 2024 4:48:10 GMT -5
Agree wholeheartedly. They have him dead to rights in the documents case, and those charges (and the implications of that conduct) are really serious! Agree wholeheartedly on the documents case. That said, griping about Judicial conduct strikes me funny here. In what way would that strike you as funny?
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,600
|
Post by guru on Apr 25, 2024 7:30:19 GMT -5
Agree wholeheartedly on the documents case. That said, griping about Judicial conduct strikes me funny here. In what way would that strike you as funny? These people have no sense of humor - which is one of their scariest characteristics, actually - so what they find “funny” doesn’t usually translate.
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,350
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyajinx on Apr 25, 2024 7:50:24 GMT -5
In what way would that strike you as funny? These people have no sense of humor - which is one of their scariest characteristics, actually - so what they find “funny” doesn’t usually translate. Which explains the popularity of the wildly unfunny Babylon Bee.
|
|