Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)

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

1…5758606263…115

Comments

  • #1772
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 13,470 ✭✭✭✭ StringerBell


    It's a bad sign for trump when fox don't cover your rantings live and the Republican politicians in the place you go decline the invite.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • #1773
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    StringerBell wrote: »
    It's a bad sign for trump when fox don't cover your rantings live and the Republican politicians in the place you go decline the invite.

    I'm sure that they will be called out as the MSM and RINOs that they are soon enough.


  • #1774
    Christy42
    Registered Users Posts: 7,647 ✭✭✭ Christy42


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    I'm sure that they will be called out as the MSM and RINOs that they are soon enough.

    I thought they were already when they called Arizona for Biden?


  • #1775
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Christy42 wrote: »
    I thought they were already when they called Arizona for Biden?

    The "news" section perhaps because of Arizona. But some of their hosts are still part of the chosen few apparently, given one of their resident conspiracy theorists, sorry hosts, Tucker is claiming that the NSA is monitoring him and wants him off the air.


  • #1776
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    ECO_Mental wrote: »
    Big day today apparently with indictments. Hopefully I wont be disappointed and let down it seems that this orange buffoon can almost get away with murder.


    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/30/trump-organization-tax-charges-expected-thursday/5366841001/



    Trump might not himself be charged today but from what I hear once there are criminal charges placed on a company things can start going very bad for that company very fast, as banks and lenders start calling in loans fearing they wont get paid. And I am presuming that he wont have the means to repay theses loans so the Trump Org will go bankrupt again!......


    Regarding Weisselberg I think he knows too much... who has being buying all those condos for cash?? all that Russian money that Trump Jr was bragging about... Most people would say that normal people should have turned by now but would you turn on the Russian mafia..or spend a couple of years in court (he can an afford it) and then maybe only a couple of years in prison. All depends on the severity of the charges. If they are serious and he is not turning then he must know some SERIOUS S**T

    If what is being reported/alleged about Don's signature being on some of the cheques used/issued by the Trump Org that the DA & Co found questionable is true, then it might follow that if his CFO testifies that he saw Don actually handwrite the signatures on the cheques and they are NOT rubberstamp type facsimiles it would directly link Don to the Trump Org scheme. Don wouldn't be able to deny personal knowledge and involvement in the scheme. The DA would just have to be coy about phrasing the question to Don, lead him step by step into agreeing with the DA's argument that he knew all about the scheme and the reason the scheme was set up by his Trump Org & his friend, it's CFO.

    He's known to have a knowledgeable fondness of putting his personal signature of cheques, even the ones issued by the federal Gov't under the Covid-19 scheme to workers left temporarily unemployed.


  • Advertisement
  • #1777
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭ duploelabs


    aloyisious wrote: »
    If what is being reported/alleged about Don's signature being on some of the cheques used/issued by the Trump Org that the DA & Co found questionable is true, then it might follow that if his CFO testifies that he saw Don actually handwrite the signatures on the cheques and they are NOT rubberstamp type facsimiles it would directly link Don to the Trump Org scheme. Don wouldn't be able to deny personal knowledge and involvement in the scheme. The DA would just have to be coy about phrasing the question to Don, lead him step by step into agreeing with the DA's argument that he knew all about the scheme and the reason the scheme was set up by his Trump Org & his friend, it's CFO.

    He's known to have a knowledgeable fondness of putting his personal signature of cheques, even the ones issued by the federal Gov't under the Covid-19 scheme to workers left temporarily unemployed.

    It would be poetic if the manifestation of his narcissism, his signature, was the element that negated plausible deniability and convicted him


  • #1778
    serfboard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,504 ✭✭✭ serfboard


    aloyisious wrote: »
    He's known to have a knowledgeable fondness of putting his personal signature of cheques, even the ones issued by the federal Gov't under the Covid-19 scheme to workers left temporarily unemployed.
    I suspect a Bertie Ahern defence will be used: “I didn’t really pay close attention to what I was signing” and “The boss used to get me to sign blank cheques” (Paraphrasing here, but language to that effect).


  • #1779
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 15,743 ✭✭✭✭ astrofool


    serfboard wrote: »
    I suspect a Bertie Ahern defence will be used: “I didn’t really pay close attention to what I was signing” and “The boss used to get me to sign blank cheques” (Paraphrasing here, but language to that effect).

    Well, he did have to take a senility test.

    But, if it's a tucker "my show is just entertainment" or rudy "there is fraud unless I'm under oath, then there's no fraud" style defense, would anyone be surprised?

    Would his supporters then realize they're following a moron grifter? I mean, it doesn't even look like this was subtle, it was just hampered by endless lawsuits to try and stop the law and then hiding behind the presidency.


  • #1780
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    astrofool wrote: »
    Well, he did have to take a senility test.

    But, if it's a tucker "my show is just entertainment" or rudy "there is fraud unless I'm under oath, then there's no fraud" style defense, would anyone be surprised?

    Would his supporters then realize they're following a moron grifter? I mean, it doesn't even look like this was subtle, it was just hampered by endless lawsuits to try and stop the law and then hiding behind the presidency.

    So far, they have shown an inclination to support Trump regardless of what he has done, is likely to do and has professed they would let him away with, even when it is all plainly illegal and would tend to deny them of all the rights they believe he would defend to the end. I really think a very large percentage of them would CHOOSE TO deny the truth of what they are seeing in front of them. I don't hold out much hope for the GOP group supporting him from changing their allegiance from him back to the U.S republic and that will be to their eternal shame.


  • #1781
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 16,702 ✭✭✭✭ VinLieger


    astrofool wrote: »
    Well, he did have to take a senility test.

    But, if it's a tucker "my show is just entertainment" or rudy "there is fraud unless I'm under oath, then there's no fraud" style defense, would anyone be surprised?

    Would his supporters then realize they're following a moron grifter? I mean, it doesn't even look like this was subtle, it was just hampered by endless lawsuits to try and stop the law and then hiding behind the presidency.

    Without thinking I know the argument they would use "he's such a good businessman he signs so many cheques and does so many deals he can't pay attention to everything he signs".....


  • Advertisement
  • #1782
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 38,126 ✭✭✭✭ Itssoeasy


    I just watched the video the New York Times did surrounding the events of January 6th through video and audio from the day and it’s 40 minutes long and it’s even more damming when you see everything put in order and from several angles. For example there were nearly 10 breaches of the building which I wouldn’t have guessed because the main pictures of the day were the two fronts main entrances. For a country like America which proclaims itself to the greatest country in the world and all the rest, it’s frightening to see ordinary citizens of that country seemingly lose all logic and reason.

    And also the leadership of the capitol police and the metro police have serious questions to answer. They apparently left their rank and file officers to fend for themselves against a crowd which made a completely unfair fight.


  • #1783
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭ amandstu


    My suspicion is that Trump conducted a slow coup d'état by infiltrating the levers of power by appointing yes men(in temporary posts).

    So when push came to shove ,the leadership who should have organized a proper defence of Parliament were sufficiently demoralised and disorganized that they carried out their job imperfectly.

    He was unsuccessful with the electoral bodies and State governors (even Pence) etc who stood up and carried out their duty to their office.


  • #1784
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 30,636 CMod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Without thinking I know the argument they would use "he's such a good businessman he signs so many cheques and does so many deals he can't pay attention to everything he signs".....

    100%. Let's not forget what should have been the slam dunk argument for Clinton against Trump; that he didn't pay taxes. Which the man simply responded when challenged during a debate, "that's makes me smart". Undoubtedly his support bumped up a couple of points after that. I think it's easy sometimes to forget just how ...worshipped (for want of a better word) the monied class of American life is over there. Tycoons, entrepreneurs, whatever you want to call them. Working the system is part of the myth.


  • #1785
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 24,181 ✭✭✭✭ Timberrrrrrrr


    pixelburp wrote: »
    100%. Let's not forget what should have been the slam dunk argument for Clinton against Trump; that he didn't pay taxes. Which the man simply responded when challenged during a debate, "that's makes me smart". Undoubtedly his support bumped up a couple of points after that. I think it's easy sometimes to forget just how ...worshipped (for want of a better word) the monied class of American life is over there. Tycoons, entrepreneurs, whatever you want to call them. Working the system is part of the myth.

    There was a poster/Trump supporter on this or one of the other threads who tried to argue that it is an American workers duty/right to cheat on thier taxes. When you're up against that kind of thinking then you're never going to convince them that what Trump did was illegal.


  • #1786
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    There was a poster/Trump supporter on this or one of the other threads who tried to argue that it is an American workers duty/right to cheat on thier taxes. When you're up against that kind of thinking then you're never going to convince them that what Trump did was illegal.

    According to what MSNBC's Joe Scarburough has reported on Trump's speech at his weekend rally, Trump said he didn't know Alan Weisselberg had to pay taxes on fringe benefits [like autos and apartments] that Trump Org gave to its employees. This "I didn't know" from the man who said he wrote the tax laws reads like "I leave all that to my accountant to deal with", Alan who?


  • #1787
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 38,126 ✭✭✭✭ Itssoeasy


    aloyisious wrote: »
    According to what MSNBC's Joe Scarburough has reported on Trump's speech at his weekend rally, Trump said he didn't know Alan Weisselberg had to pay taxes on fringe benefits [like autos and apartments] that Trump Org gave to its employees. This "I didn't know" from the man who said he wrote the tax laws reads like "I leave all that to my accountant to deal with", Alan who?

    Well he can’t really use the “I barely knew X” anymore. I mean he will try but IMO it won’t work. And when journalist Tim O’ Brien got trump under oath a few years ago after trump sued him over a book he wrote, trump admitted under oath that he and Alan wesselberg work very close together so the notion that Alan wesselberg did this on his own back and Donald trump knew nothing about it is ridiculous.


  • #1788
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,631 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Quin_Dub


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Well he can’t really use the “I barely knew X” anymore. I mean he will try but IMO it won’t work. And when journalist Tim O’ Brien got trump under oath a few years ago after trump sued him over a book he wrote, trump admitted under oath that he and Alan wesselberg work very close together so the notion that Alan wesselberg did this on his own back and Donald trump knew nothing about it is ridiculous.

    You are of course , correct . But if push comes to shove it won't stop him claiming that he "left all that stuff to others and just signed what was put in front of him"

    His ability to simultaneously be the sharpest ,greatest business mind ever seen and also be a clueless figurehead is staggering.


  • #1789
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 20,401 ✭✭✭✭ Tell me how


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Well he can’t really use the “I barely knew X” anymore. I mean he will try but IMO it won’t work. And when journalist Tim O’ Brien got trump under oath a few years ago after trump sued him over a book he wrote, trump admitted under oath that he and Alan wesselberg work very close together so the notion that Alan wesselberg did this on his own back and Donald trump knew nothing about it is ridiculous.

    Of course it is, Trump probably hired Wesselberg specifically because he showed an affinity for showing scant regard for the law and focusing on benefitting Trump. But we've seen this before with Michael Cohen and he ended up in a jail cell and Trump continued as President.

    We saw Trump admit to sexually assaulting women and he was still elected to be President. What we 'know' to be fact and what happens in reality as a consequence of these facts do not have to correlate, and we have seen that time and again.


  • #1790
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭ duploelabs


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Of course it is, Trump probably hired Wesselberg specifically because he showed an affinity for showing scant regard for the law and focusing on benefitting Trump. But we've seen this before with Michael Cohen and he ended up in a jail cell and Trump continued as President.

    We saw Trump admit to sexually assaulting women and he was still elected to be President. What we 'know' to be fact and what happens in reality as a consequence of these facts do not have to correlate, and we have seen that time and again.

    FYI Frank trump hired wessenberg


  • #1791
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 20,401 ✭✭✭✭ Tell me how


    duploelabs wrote: »
    FYI Frank trump hired wessenberg

    You think he'd still have had his job if Donald didn't like what he saw?


  • Advertisement
  • #1792
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,183 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    Tell me how wrote: »
    You think he'd still have had his job if Donald didn't like what he saw?

    Allen has an interesting resume, according to Wikipedia. He began working for Fred in 1973, and went on to be CFO and V/P of Trump Casinos, and treasurer of the Donald J Trump Foundation. In 2017 in a deposition to NY State investigators, he said he was NOT aware that he was a board member for at least the past [then] 10 0r 15 years. It'd be good for any prosecution to find out if he was paid or given benefit in kind for his duties as a board member during the 10 0r 15 years. I can't imagine him being Pro-bono to Don like Rudi Giuliani reportedly is but....


  • #1793
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,118 ✭✭✭✭ Leroy42


    Tell me how wrote: »
    You think he'd still have had his job if Donald didn't like what he saw?

    You don't understand.

    Trump is the most successful businessman ever, knows more about tax law than anyone, knows more about NY politics than anyone.

    But at the same time Trump knows nothing about his business, hasn't the foggiest idea about tax law and NY politics is a total mystery to him.


  • #1794
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 20,401 ✭✭✭✭ Tell me how


    aloyisious wrote: »
    Allen has an interesting resume, according to Wikipedia. He began working for Fred in 1973, and went on to be CFO and V/P of Trump Casinos, and treasurer of the Donald J Trump Foundation. In 2017 in a deposition to NY State investigators, he said he was NOT aware that he was a board member for at least the past [then] 10 0r 15 years. It'd be good for any prosecution to find out if he was paid or given benefit in kind for his duties as a board member during the 10 0r 15 years. I can't imagine him being Pro-bono to Don like Rudi Giuliani reportedly is but....

    I think he's as big a crook as Donald is and will plead ignorance where he thinks it might give him an out to do so.

    Thus far though he does seem to be going against the old adage of there being no honour amongst thieves as we'd probably be hearing if he was trying to save his own skin at the cost of Donalds by now.


  • #1795
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    aloyisious wrote: »
    According to what MSNBC's Joe Scarburough has reported on Trump's speech at his weekend rally, Trump said he didn't know Alan Weisselberg had to pay taxes on fringe benefits [like autos and apartments] that Trump Org gave to its employees. This "I didn't know" from the man who said he wrote the tax laws reads like "I leave all that to my accountant to deal with", Alan who?

    Eh no surprise, seems like it was only yesterday that he was saying that he knows more about tax codes and laws than anyone else in history, and now having to back down. it's not like something like this hasn't happened to him before.


  • #1796
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users Posts: 22,377 ✭✭✭✭ Kermit.de.frog


    Extraordinary headline in the Guardian this morning with apparent written evidence Putin personally signed off on an operation to help put a "mentally unstable" Donald Trump in the White House

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house



  • #1797
    relax carry on
    Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭ relax carry on


    https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117613535#Comment_117613535

    My favourite bit of the article.

    There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”.

    Imagine if Trump still had access to Twitter?



  • #1798
    Drexel_3
    Registered Users Posts: 201 ✭✭ Drexel_3


    Can't help but feel this was an intentional leak and is part of the plan. Republicans won't believe it or just won't care about it and refuse to do anything about it.

    They will continue to dig in and it will deepen the divide between republicans and democrats (and society). Just like they wanted



  • #1799
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,631 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Quin_Dub


    https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117613535#Comment_117613535

    If true that essentially validates the infamous Steele Dossier.



  • #1800
    Drumpot
    Registered Users Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭ Drumpot


    https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117614630#Comment_117614630

    The thing with Trump that I wonder about is whether he is as unhinged and dangerous as he looks. There is such a divide in USA and opinions on Trump, he could be wearing no Clothes doing an interview and people would still find a way to dismiss and justify it.

    Is it a coincidence that he seems to get on with Autocrats? You think of that Coup in January that he encouraged, how anybody can excuse or dismiss it is a clear indication of how deluded people who follow him actually are. Its not about intelligence , its about allegiance. The instability that man is causing is quite impressive as he is not particularly intelligent. I do not know if its better hes not that bright or if things would be worse with a character Like Trump who actually knows what they are doing.



  • Advertisement
  • #1801
    dogbert27
    Registered Users Posts: 4,689 ✭✭✭ dogbert27


    https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117614555#Comment_117614555

    I think it was unfortunate that Comey said in his book that he took Trump's question of "do you think I look like someone who needs to use prostitutes?" as rhetorical!


    Would be a lot funnier if he took it literally and gave his honest answer! 😄



Advertisement