nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

ancapailldorcha

This thread is a continuation of the megathreads for discussing the end of the presidency of Donald Trump, the aftermath such as any legal cases brought against him, his legacy as president and any matters which relate to these subjects.

Please keep discussion civil and constructive and bear the charter in mind before posting.

Update 23/9/20:

Threadbanned users:

Outlaw Pete
everlast75
mcmoustache
lawrencesummers
RIGOLO
__________

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Itssoeasy

The vote for the January 6th commission is happening now and as it stands there’s 29 republicans voting yes with the democrats. So Kevin McCarthy didn’t get his conference in lock step it seems.

Itssoeasy

So the bill passed and 35 republicans voted with the democrats. So presumably it’s needs ten GOP senators in the senate for it to pass there which is doubtful being honest.

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So the bill passed and 35 republicans voted with the democrats. So presumably it’s needs ten GOP senators in the senate for it to pass there which is doubtful being honest.

They need more than a plain majority in the Senate?
Has to be 60/40?

Tell me how

amandstu wrote: »

They need more than a plain majority in the Senate?
Has to be 60/40?

That seems to be the case.

They'll get a couple Romney, Cheney, Murkowski maybe but that'll probably be it.

Ramasun

They're going to be investigating the Trump presidency for decades.

Brian?

amandstu wrote: »

They need more than a plain majority in the Senate?
Has to be 60/40?

60/40? What a ridiculous system.

41 of the senators could represent about 20% of the US population.

Quin_Dub

Brian? wrote: »

60/40? What a ridiculous system.

41 of the senators could represent about 20% of the US population.

It's a double dose of Minority rule.

Because each State gets 2 Senators regardless of size , you have more than half the Senators representing only about 30% of the people.

Then you layer the filibuster on top of that and a small cabal of maybe a dozen or so Senators can hold the entire legislative system to ransom.

It's an insane system.

StringerBell

It will be kicked back to just a house investigation, led by democrats so that fox/oann/trump/pot/whoever else can just label it an illegitimate witch hunt and poo poo any findings that come out if it.

Greatest democracy on earth folks.

Tim Ryan summed it up pretty well after the voter I thought.

amandstu

They can poo poo interpretations but not actual new evidence.

They can also highlight contradictory statements from the likes of McCarthy and O'Connel with the aim of consigning their and others' reputation to the gutter of history.

StringerBell

Of course they can, but will it matter?

Also, they will certainly refuse to engage with any evidence just citing it as a partisan witchunt, a continuation of the same one the "radical left" has been driven made by, consumed by, for the last 4 or 5 years at this stage.

What I am interested in actually is that the investigation has become a criminal matter into the trump organisation, for them to involve that team and go beyond the civil remedies (which are potentially stiff enough like) they must feel there is something there they can nail.

Quin_Dub

StringerBell wrote: »

Of course they can, but will it matter?

Also, they will certainly refuse to engage with any evidence just citing it as a partisan witchunt, a continuation of the same one the "radical left" has been driven made by, consumed by, for the last 4 or 5 years at this stage.

What I am interested in actually is that the investigation has become a criminal matter into the trump organisation, for them to involve that team and go beyond the civil remedies (which are potentially stiff enough like) they must feel there is something there they can nail.

Bottom line - For the vat majority of people , any outcome from a commission like this will have next to no impact on their opinions.

Those that believe it was the fault of Trump et al will continue to do so , and those that think it really wasn't a big deal and probably Antifa will continue to believe that too.

The only thing that the Democrats should be focused on is getting the voting legislation passed.

With the rules and laws as they are today , the GOP have the ability to put a giant sized Thumb on the scales in multiple key states enabling a potential Trump 2024 campaign to be competitive when it absolutely categorically should not be.

Without that change in place , nothing else really matters.

astrofool

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Bottom line - For the vat majority of people , any outcome from a commission like this will have next to no impact on their opinions.

Those that believe it was the fault of Trump et al will continue to do so , and those that think it really wasn't a big deal and probably Antifa will continue to believe that too.

The only thing that the Democrats should be focused on is getting the voting legislation passed.

With the rules and laws as they are today , the GOP have the ability to put a giant sized Thumb on the scales in multiple key states enabling a potential Trump 2024 campaign to be competitive when it absolutely categorically should not be.

Without that change in place , nothing else really matters.

It's all a side show in this day and age.

But isn't it worrying that insurrection against capitol hill has been reduced to such? The US bar for behaviour in office is so low that it may as well not exist, it's all about real time rewriting of reality in order to "win" against the other side.

Itssoeasy

The Capitol Hill security bill which is the increase in funding for Capitol Hill in light of what happened on January 6th barely passed(213-212) and it was the house democrats that made it close. The progressive caucus(which includes the squad) voted present instead of yes or no. I know this is the Donald trump thread but at times the democrats don’t help themselves.

Edit:just checked and it was three democrats voted no, of which the only one on the official list that I recognise is congresswoman Omar. AOC and rashida Talib voted present and two GOP didn’t vote so it could have easily not passed. I’ll be interested to find out what the issues with this funding bill was because unless it’s a genuine reason then trying to make some point isn’t helpful when it’s so tight.

Quin_Dub

astrofool wrote: »

It's all a side show in this day and age.

But isn't it worrying that insurrection against capitol hill has been reduced to such? The US bar for behaviour in office is so low that it may as well not exist, it's all about real time rewriting of reality in order to "win" against the other side.

Without question - The utter lack of common decency and morals on display daily in the House and Senate is frightening.

As you say , there seems to be nothing they will not say or do to deny the other side any kind of perceived victory.

Reality , Law , Honour and Decency have all seemed to take a distant second place to "Owning" the other side.

aloyisious

StringerBell wrote: »

Of course they can, but will it matter?

Also, they will certainly refuse to engage with any evidence just citing it as a partisan witchunt, a continuation of the same one the "radical left" has been driven made by, consumed by, for the last 4 or 5 years at this stage.

What I am interested in actually is that the investigation has become a criminal matter into the trump organisation, for them to involve that team and go beyond the civil remedies (which are potentially stiff enough like) they must feel there is something there they can nail.

Hopefully the criminal investigation will be based on documents the Trump family firm tried to stop the DA getting access until the court orders forced the handover. If the documents have certain signatories on the final pages, Trump denials will be worthless when the documents are entered into evidence in court as part of the [sealed] record until trials begin.

Itssoeasy

I saw it reported somewhere today(politico or cnn) that trump tried to fire FBI director Christopher Wray and then AG William Barr threatened to resign if it happened so it didn’t.

Itssoeasy

I see the queen of Q-anon majorie Taylor greene was talking again over the weekend and compared the mask mandates during Covid -19 to what happened to Jews in the Holocaust. And she doubled down and said any reasonable Jewish person would agree with her. She’s a nutter.

Quin_Dub

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I see the queen of Q-anon majorie Taylor greene was talking again over the weekend and compared the mask mandates during Covid -19 to what happened to Jews in the Holocaust. And she doubled down and said any reasonable Jewish person would agree with her. She’s a nutter.

She is , but she's also a fund-raising machine in a district that is beyond GOP safe.

She's one of if not the top GOP House fundraiser.

Tells you all you need to know really.

duploelabs

Quin_Dub wrote: »

She is , but she's also a fund-raising machine in a district that is beyond GOP safe.

She's one of if not the top GOP House fundraiser.

Tells you all you need to know really.

Reinforces the line 'fools and their money are easily parted'

aloyisious

Whilst it might be premature without an official announcement from his office, the online site, The New Civil Rights Movement, has posted a story that the Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance, has convened a Special Grand Jury for possible criminal charges against Don Trump. The inclusion of the word "possible" in its report indicates that TNCRM may be reaching conclusions without direct evidence, something Trump would use to talk about more fake news. The Washington Post has run with the report as well.

Itssoeasy

aloyisious wrote: »

Whilst it might be premature without an official announcement from his office, the online site, The New Civil Rights Movement, has posted a story that the Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance, has convened a Special Grand Jury for possible criminal charges against Don Trump. The inclusion of the word "possible" in its report indicates that TNCRM may be reaching conclusions without direct evidence, something Trump would use to talk about more fake news. The Washington Post has run with the report as well.

I heard it last night when the Washington post reported so I doubt there’s an issue of reaching conclusions. The CFO is going to have to decide whether he wants to spend time in jail or be able to spend time with his grandkids. Also, it seems that Ivanka trump has been caught being less than truthful because it’s reported that she claims she didn’t know alan wissellberg the CFO very well, except he was on the apprentice and his job title was made clear. A case of that trump amnesia that strikes them ?

aloyisious

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I heard it last night when the Washington post reported so I doubt there’s an issue of reaching conclusions. The CFO is going to have to decide whether he wants to spend time in jail or be able to spend time with his grandkids. Also, it seems that Ivanka trump has been caught being less than truthful because it’s reported that she claims she didn’t know alan wissellberg the CFO very well, except he was on the apprentice and his job title was made clear. A case of that trump amnesia that strikes them ?

Possibly convenient memories, more hopefully that the Trump team are not talking to each other/sharing information they have in a co-ordinated way. If so, giving the media a heads-up on a sudden Grand Jury meeting called by the D.A might keep the pressure on business partners and Trump-fans who are not family members and not likely to think they won't be thrown under the bus.

Itssoeasy

At the end of last week the former daughter in law of the trump CFO said she was being evicted by her father in law who is on the lease of the apartment she lives in presumably because she revealed she’s been talking to prosecutors. Sounds like the actions of an innocent person alright.

Celticfire

Itssoeasy wrote: »

At the end of last week the former daughter in law of the trump CFO said she was being evicted by her father in law who is on the lease of the apartment she lives in presumably because she revealed she’s been talking to prosecutors. Sounds like the actions of an innocent person alright.

Perhaps if she paid her rent she wouldn't have been evicted.

[Deleted User]

Celticfire wrote: »

Perhaps if she paid her rent she wouldn't have been evicted.

Any comment on the criminal investigation?

Leroy42

Celticfire wrote: »

Perhaps if she paid her rent she wouldn't have been evicted.

She didn't pay her rent? How do you know that?

Itssoeasy

Celticfire wrote: »

Perhaps if she paid her rent she wouldn't have been evicted.

What ? It’s got nothing to do with rent.

Celticfire

Itssoeasy wrote: »

What ? It’s got nothing to do with rent.

Nope..... nothing to do with rent.

Jennifer Weisselberg, the Trump Organization CFO's former daughter-in-law, is facing eviction.

Weisselberg has been living in an apartment on New York's Upper West Side since her divorce from Barry Weisselberg in 2018. According to a document from her divorce proceedings, Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization CFO, was a "guarantor" of the apartment but Jennifer was responsible for the monthly rent of $6,050.

In November 2020, Columbus Manor LLC, the owners of her building, sued both Jennifer and Allen Weisselberg for more than $54,000 in back rent.

On May 18, the company filed a new complaint that named only Jennifer as a defendant. The complaint does not reference Allen or back rent. Instead, it claims her lease expired on April 30 and says "no renewal lease is required." It seeks "an order of ejectment and the forthwith issuance of a writ of eviction" from her building, which is managed by Stellar Management.

Jennifer Weisselberg said in an interview with CBS News Thursday that while she had at first been paying the rent on her own, she fell behind in 2020 because of financial and legal issues.

Niebel said it's not unusual that the real estate company filed a new complaint that does not reference back-rent or Allen Weisselberg.

"It could be that it was paid, or it could be that the landlord said we don't care about the money, we just want you out," Niebel said.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jennifer-weisselberg-trump-organization-cfo-daughter-in-law-eviction/

But somehow your presumption holds more weight than actual facts.

Timberrrrrrrr

Celticfire wrote: »

Nope..... nothing to do with rent.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jennifer-weisselberg-trump-organization-cfo-daughter-in-law-eviction/

But somehow your presumption holds more weight than actual facts.

You would think that DT would appreciate a fellow rent grifter.

Itssoeasy

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You would think that DT would appreciate a fellow rent grifter.

And the timing is interesting seeing as if they were that much in debt and behind why did it take until around the time that her father in law is under the kosh because his position in the ongoing investigation.