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

aloyisious · 25-06-2021 5:48pm

Bridges burnt.... FORMER US VICE president Mike Pence has defended his role in certifying the results of the 2020 election, saying he’s “proud” of what he did on 6 January and declaring there’s “almost no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president.” Pence, a potential 2024 presidential contender, delivered his strongest rebuttal to date of former president Donald Trump’s continued insistence that he could unilaterally overturn the results of the last election, even though the Constitution granted him no such power.

Pence, in remarks at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library yesterday, directly addressed those who continue to blame him for Trump’s defeat to now-President Joe Biden, who won the Electoral College on a 306-232 vote. “Now, there are those in our party who believe that, in my position as presiding officer over the joint session, that I possessed the authority to reject or return electoral votes certified by the states,” Pence said. “But the Constitution provides the vice president with no such authority before the joint session of Congress. “And the truth is,” he continued, “there’s almost no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president. The presidency belongs to the American people and the American people alone.” Pence said he will “always be proud that we did our part, on that tragic day, to reconvene the Congress and fulfil our duty under the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

Jack1985 · 25-06-2021 6:06pm

NYT reporting that the Manhattan D.A. has informed Trump's lawyers that the organisation could be facing criminal charges in their inquiry. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/nyregion/trump-organization-criminal-charges.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Journo's currently circulating that an arrest could be imminent for the Donald himself.

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1408317135449899013?s=20

duploelabs · 25-06-2021 6:19pm

Jack1985 wrote: »

NYT reporting that the Manhattan D.A. has informed Trump's lawyers that the organisation could be facing criminal charges in their inquiry. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/nyregion/trump-organization-criminal-charges.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Journo's currently circulating that an arrest could be imminent for the Donald himself.

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1408317135449899013?s=20

Referencing both the New York Post and The Sun in a single post? They're hardly reliable sources

Tell me how · 25-06-2021 6:32pm

Jack1985 wrote: »

NYT reporting that the Manhattan D.A. has informed Trump's lawyers that the organisation could be facing criminal charges in their inquiry. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/nyregion/trump-organization-criminal-charges.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Journo's currently circulating that an arrest could be imminent for the Donald himself.

I'm refusing to get my hopes up until I see it formally announced that a warrant has been issued for him.

All this 'could be' or 'expect to' is just newspapers trying to generate traffic on the story.

I certainly hope it happens, I'm not at all confident that it will.

Jack1985 · 25-06-2021 6:34pm

duploelabs wrote: »

Referencing both the New York Post and The Sun in a single post? They're hardly reliable sources

The Sun reference is related to an aspect of that post, not in reference to Trump.

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm refusing to get my hopes up until I see it formally announced that a warrant has been issued for him.

All this 'could be' or 'expect to' is just newspapers trying to generate traffic on the story.

I certainly hope it happens, I'm not at all confident that it will.

Pretty much same sentiment here, I very much dread to see what reaction would occur to a DJT arrest too in the US domestically.

StringerBell · 25-06-2021 7:33pm

Gotta hand it to the sun, they know their audience. The picture they choose is absolutely perfect for their needs

The New York Post article thing is interesting if only for the reason that that particular publication would be considered a pro trump one all things considered.

aloyisious · 25-06-2021 11:07pm

Jack1985 wrote: »

NYT reporting that the Manhattan D.A. has informed Trump's lawyers that the organisation could be facing criminal charges in their inquiry. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/nyregion/trump-organization-criminal-charges.html?

The legal eagles asked for estimates by CNN on what is going on there is that some of the Trump employees might have been partly paid in a payment in kind manner with gifts instead of regular taxable salaries without the gifts being declared.

01-07-2021 1:41am

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm refusing to get my hopes up until I see it formally announced that a warrant has been issued for him.

All this 'could be' or 'expect to' is just newspapers trying to generate traffic on the story.

I certainly hope it happens, I'm not at all confident that it will.

Like most businesses and organised crime if set up correctly trump should be isolated in relation to tax evasion and other forms of fraud. Also like an investigation into a organised crime syndicate, they need Weisselberg to turn and spill for it to have any affect on trump,. Unless Weisselberg thinks trump is going to throw him under a bus*, or the district attorney’s office can prove enough that Weisselberg will see serious prison time along with financial loss, I don't think he will.

* trump will throw him under the nearest bus as soon as he thinks he needs to, why break the habit of a lifetime.

Tell me how · 01-07-2021 2:15am

DubInMeath wrote: »

Like most businesses and organised crime if set up correctly trump should be isolated in relation to tax evasion and other forms of fraud. Also like an investigation into a organised crime syndicate, they need Weisselberg to turn and spill for it to have any affect on trump,. Unless Weisselberg thinks trump is going to throw him under a bus*, or the district attorney’s office can prove enough that Weisselberg will see serious prison time along with financial loss, I don't think he will.

* trump will throw him under the nearest bus as soon as he thinks he needs to, why break the habit of a lifetime.

I think Trump is close to zero concerned about this. Did he allude to it at all in his recent rally and media appearances?

If he was concerned, he'd be calling it a witchhunt and would have already started to undermine Weisselberg.

amandstu · 01-07-2021 2:28am

Tell me how wrote: »

I think Trump is close to zero concerned about this. Did he allude to it at all in his recent rally and media appearances?

If he was concerned, he'd be calling it a witchhunt and would have already started to undermine Weisselberg.

Thought I might have heard of him calling this a witch hunt(but whenever I hear him say that I mishear it as "which cnut?")

duploelabs · 01-07-2021 6:52am

Tell me how wrote: »

I think Trump is close to zero concerned about this. Did he allude to it at all in his recent rally and media appearances?

If he was concerned, he'd be calling it a witchhunt and would have already started to undermine Weisselberg.

But it effectively means the end of Trump.org, this taking away that revenue stream. He can try and play it down but what kind of revenue will he be getting?

ECO_Mental · 01-07-2021 8:06am

DubInMeath wrote: »

Like most businesses and organised crime if set up correctly trump should be isolated in relation to tax evasion and other forms of fraud. Also like an investigation into a organised crime syndicate, they need Weisselberg to turn and spill for it to have any affect on trump,. Unless Weisselberg thinks trump is going to throw him under a bus*, or the district attorney’s office can prove enough that Weisselberg will see serious prison time along with financial loss, I don't think he will.

* trump will throw him under the nearest bus as soon as he thinks he needs to, why break the habit of a lifetime.

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

aloyisious · 01-07-2021 11:04am

Definitely a probability that Don will be ignoring Zvonimir Jurlina's YouTube video request to him to pay his trial legal fees over alleged burning and looting charges the FBI have laid against him over his Capitol activities. Jurlina's video: "I am a political prisoner. ... I can't get into any trouble. I can't do nothing bad. I can't do no drugs, no drinking to excess. I can't get into altercations with people. So, I'm a real American patriot. I would like to say, Donald Trump, please pay for my legal fees because this all happened because of you. Okay? How about that? And I did nothing wrong. Let's go. Let's go, I did nothing wrong.".

01-07-2021 12:13pm

Tell me how wrote: »

I think Trump is close to zero concerned about this. Did he allude to it at all in his recent rally and media appearances?

If he was concerned, he'd be calling it a witchhunt and would have already started to undermine Weisselberg.

The witchunt claim has already started (not that they have stopped since before the election in the first place)

As other posters have said Weisselberg could well be up to his neck in this, so I think it will need the possibility of serious prison time and financial loss for him to turn, so you won't see trump undermining Weisselberg until he thinks it's going to happen.

01-07-2021 12:16pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Definitely a probability that Don will be ignoring Zvonimir Jurlina's YouTube video request to him to pay his trial legal fees over alleged burning and looting charges the FBI have laid against him over his Capitol activities. Jurlina's video: "I am a political prisoner. ... I can't get into any trouble. I can't do nothing bad. I can't do no drugs, no drinking to excess. I can't get into altercations with people. So, I'm a real American patriot. I would like to say, Donald Trump, please pay for my legal fees because this all happened because of you. Okay? How about that? And I did nothing wrong. Let's go. Let's go, I did nothing wrong.".

That reads like I can't do all the illegal stuff I love because I was stupid enough to follow trump, and now I'm going broke.
My heart bleeds for them.

StringerBell · 01-07-2021 4:29pm

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.

01-07-2021 10:40pm

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.

Christy42 · 01-07-2021 11:00pm

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?

01-07-2021 11:28pm

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.

aloyisious · 03-07-2021 8:04am

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.

duploelabs · 03-07-2021 11:36am

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

serfboard · 03-07-2021 4:41pm

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).

astrofool · 03-07-2021 6:06pm

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.

aloyisious · 03-07-2021 11:07pm

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.

VinLieger · 04-07-2021 5:28pm

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".....

Itssoeasy · 04-07-2021 6:42pm

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.

amandstu · 04-07-2021 6:53pm

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.

pixelburp · 04-07-2021 6:57pm

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.

Timberrrrrrrr · 04-07-2021 7:06pm

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.

aloyisious · 06-07-2021 6:02am

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?

Itssoeasy · 06-07-2021 12:14pm

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.

Quin_Dub · 06-07-2021 2:41pm

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.

Tell me how · 06-07-2021 2:53pm

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.

duploelabs · 06-07-2021 3:30pm

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

Tell me how · 06-07-2021 3:47pm

duploelabs wrote: »

FYI Frank trump hired wessenberg

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

aloyisious · 06-07-2021 4:17pm

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....

Leroy42 · 06-07-2021 4:55pm

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.

Tell me how · 06-07-2021 4:58pm

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.

06-07-2021 11:16pm

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.

Kermit.de.frog · 15-07-2021 11:58am

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

relax carry on · 15-07-2021 2:21pm

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?

Drexel_3 · 15-07-2021 2:27pm

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

Quin_Dub · 15-07-2021 2:31pm

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

If true that essentially validates the infamous Steele Dossier.

Drumpot · 15-07-2021 2:57pm

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.

dogbert27 · 15-07-2021 4:20pm

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! 😄

Itssoeasy · 15-07-2021 4:26pm

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

Now that is very interesting and nice that they have screenshots of the documents and little details that would confirm it’s authenticity. Trump will hate this because as we know he’s an utter self made person who’s never ever lost at anything or made any mistakes.

I see that Oklahoma republicans want an audit of the election results in their state in 2020 despite the fact Trump won ever county and winning the state as a whole running away with it. What logic is there to casting doubt on results in a state you won easily ?

briany · 16-07-2021 10:53am

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117615351#Comment_117615351

I don't think the purpose of these audits is to prove any widescale election fraud. It's really all about sowing doubt at this stage, and keeping the base stoked.

Of course, even if you leave aside the complete lack of evidence for widespread electoral fraud thus far, the search for fraud is clearly a partisan one, i.e. the audits are not being carried out to see if Trump got a billion votes postmarked from Moscow. It's all about those bamboo ballots.

Retr0gamer · 16-07-2021 1:51pm

Look to the UK for a PM who is like trump but actually has some intelligence.

Brussels Sprout · 16-07-2021 6:03pm

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117619777#Comment_117619777

..but no morals whatsoever. His whole shtick is to tell everyone what they want to hear all the time and then do something completely different. I know that that is the stereotypical criticism of politicians in general but Johnson take it to the next level.

Itssoeasy · 21-07-2021 12:45pm

His inauguration chairman Tom barrack has been charged with acting as foreign agent for UAE without going through the official channels and getting the trump administration to give them favourable treatment, and he’s charged with lying to the FBI about those actions. If it hasn’t happened already, I assume the “I hardly knew him defence” from trump will be the strategy.

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

Comments