rgio wrote:

It’s been pretty clear all along that anything/everything that’s happening with Trump will not convince a lot of people to change their votes - but the fence sitters or even minimally attached are the target. Sway them and the USA might have a chance.

He's not even trying to hide it

Polls are polls, however Trump support seems largely unaffected despite all the rhetoric.

 Steely_D wrote:
In the MAGAverse, witness intimidation, jury tampering, and endangering the lives of those involved with the case don't matter.  What matters, is that they believe he's being unfairly tried, and that his ignoring the court somehow makes him a martyr, instead of a menace.

Kurt is going to vote for Trump...whether he's in jail, found innocent, or encourages someone to murder a judge...it doesn't matter.  In his head, he think throwing Trump in jail will help him in the fall.  That logic only works for the cult members.  The people he needs help from...those in the middle who aren't sure... aren't going to support Trump for being an A-hole in and out of the courtroom.

 kurtster wrote:

It’s $9K fine so far.
Putting him jail, since he disrespects the court, would be reasonable. And the incredible lack of protest would underscore how deeply not-really-popular he may be.

 Steely_D wrote: 
  

Do eeet !!!

More decisions on his contempt of court coming. For now - guilty: contempt of court fines are $8000.
The single-term ex-President of the United States can’t follow a judge’s instructions, even briefly.

Justice Merchan explicitly called Trump’s claim that reposts don’t count as violations of the gag order “counterintuitive and absurd.”

Justice Merchan wrote that he was “keenly aware of, and protective of, Defendant’s First Amendment rights.” But nonetheless, he wrote that he would not tolerate continued violations of his orders and that if necessary and appropriate, he would “impose an incarceratory sentence.” In plain language, he is warning Trump that he will send him to jail if necessary.

 kcar wrote:
I think he assumed the left would provide him a lifestyle when he started telling the truth, only to find out they know he's a whore and wouldn't forgive him.

So he ran back to FOX... who will use anyone they can to sell Trump.

 rgio wrote:
+100.

I had to smh watching Bill Barr on CNN, looking like a fat wounded tarsier, lamely explain why he's now endorsing Trump. Apparently Barr is claiming that the Biden admin is forcing people to buy electric cars and stoves and that strikes Bill as a blow against democracy. 

I don't understand Barr's game—he's not going to get back into Trump's good graces, so most Republicans ignore him. Barr's not dumb so he can't really believe Trump would be a better president. Perhaps he thinks Trump will bring back power to people Barr likes. 

If so, that tracks with the stupid loyalty to Trump. I get that many Americans feel ignored or exploited by corporate powers, political parties and demographic trends. I don't understand why those Americans think Trump can or will do anything to address those concerns. Trump is good at one thing—scams. The only person who comes out ahead after dealing with Trump is Trump. 

But sure. Let's have another disaster like Covid, where millions died or lost their jobs. Let's let Russia take over Ukraine even though Russia will eventually take over the Baltics or Poland. Let's pretend our planet isn't on fire. Let's turn women into child-bearing chattel. At least we'll have a mascara-wearing blowhard whom the world despises and we can just dial the US back to the 50s. F$ck the future. F#ck democracy. 

 maryte wrote:

Now, now. He's only asking to be supreme dictator for the length of his term and to be able to take actions that insure his chosen pick gets the job next. Right?

All things aside. I feel compelled to give Trump a compliment.
 
Every time I hear the man speak…
 
…he makes me feel like a genius.

 maryte wrote:
+1

Shared from a friend on Facebook.  Pretty spot on.



“Republicans courting the idea that presidents have absolute immunity, while making arguments in the SCOTUS that assassinations and coups would fall firmly in that purview while there is a sitting Dem president is a tacit admission they trust Dems to act responsibly. More poignantly that they believe Biden isn't the demagogue they claim. It's also a tacit admission of their corrupt intent. The fact that some of you cheer this on is absolutely shameful. You are no patriot. This is democracy ending and would give a president the very real power to be a dictator. It's a mirror of what happened before the night of the long knives in which Hitler murdered his political opponents and assumed the role of supreme leader. And for what? A husk of a dimwit of a man. An incontinent narcissist who cares nothing for you and only wants to prevent himself from going to jail for his very real crimes. I'm done beating around the bush with some of you. Continued support of Trump, and the broader support of the Republican party IS A CHARACTER FLAW. You can vie for conservative ideas, but supporting an institution that would use you to end democracy is deplorable. Don't tell me you're a patriot while supporting Trump. The two are mutually exclusive. If that hurts your feelings find the unfriend button, you won't be missed.”

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Great excerpt. You wonder whether it's ever occurred to the right-wing six on SCOTUS that in hundreds of years of American history, we've never had a prosecution of a president or presidential acts after the president left office. And yet somehow we must be wery, wery careful to protect against that hypothetical. 

 islander wrote:

ikr?

 Red_Dragon wrote:

It's dizzying trying to keep up with the spin. Everything must be enumerated in the constitution, except presidential immunity,  which is infered.

Trump's lawyers are before the Supreme Court today arguing Trump should be given 'absolute immunity' from the law.
Even for crimes he committed when he wasn't president.
And the Supreme Court is entertaining this idea.
We're actually entertaining this bullshit.
There isn't any immunity for Presidents.
There isn't any immunity from the law for any elected office — including that of Supreme Court Justice, so long as we're on the subject.
There's no immunity from the law for any citizen, not in the Constitution, not in law, not in tradition, not in any legal precedent.
There's no immunity. None. There never was.
Presidential Immunity is not a thing that has ever existed outside of Trump's fevered brain.
Unless...
Unless the Supreme Court creates it specifically for Donald Trump today.
And when I say Supreme Court, I'm using the term in the same many that I would "fucking clown show" because Alito is literally wondering out loud on the record if presidents can PARDON THEMSELVES FOR CRIMES THEY COMMIT WHILE IN OFFICE.
And it's entirely possible this Supreme Court made up in the majority of unqualified grifters might actually create immunity just for Donald Trump.
Clown show might be overly generous.
Here's the question I want asked: What illegal acts would a president need to routinely commit in order to execute the duties of the office?
What does the president need immunity FROM?
What? Be specific. Give examples. Show your work.
But no one can beyond "The president should be able to order the SEALs to murder his political opponents, theoretically, you know, for national security or something, probably."
That's not hyperbole. That's LITERALLY the argument that keeps coming up and we keep entertaining it like that's actually a thing we would want a president to be able to do. Right? And in fact, that's exactly what Trump's lawyer DID argue, that the president should be immune from the law if he orders the assassination of his political rivals.
That is LITERALLY the argument.
And the Court is entertaining it.
But you never hear these people giving an example of anything else. Just murder your opponents. That's it.
Without immunity, argues Trump, presidents must worry over every decision, wondering if they'll be hauled before the nation to justify their actions under the law.
Well, GOOD!
GREAT idea, let's do THAT.
If you're going to murder your political opponents, I'd like you to maybe have to think about that for a bit, yeah?
What? No? Okay, guess not.
When Lyndon Johnson lied us into Vietnam over the Gulf of Tonkin, when George W. Bush did the same with WMDs in Iraq, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
They never were and never will be. I guess that's immunity.
And it shouldn't be that way.
I want my elected leaders sweating it every day.
I want them cautious, deliberate, and accountable. I want them to demand the intelligence and the assumptions and the plan to be checked and rechecked and checked again to the most rigorous of standards.
I want them to worry over their decisions and to give grave consideration to the law over every action no matter how small.
Look, Folks, we shouldn't be in court arguing for our elected leaders to be given unlimited power...
...instead we must demand they be held to highest standards of public accountability at all times.
You want a better nation, be a better citizen.

~Jim Wright

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Disposition Matrix v3.0