The Donald Trump thread

[Wales-Bales]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

It should be pretty simple, there's hundreds of pages of posts here. If Cyril and lardy are always being proven wrong then pick one out.

He won't because he simply can't.

Spoken like a true propagandist, but you cannot defeat the truth

[lardy]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Just using Trump's own words, this seems to be the plan to 'win' the presidency.

Claim victory on election night as he is probably going to be ahead on in person voting, before the postal votes are counted. And the quick snatch of a supreme court judge, in complete opposition to what numerous big cheese republicans have said on the matter in the past four years, is crucial to that. Trump's own words. He's not hiding the strategy.

The base case now is Trump loses popular vote, falsely challenges legitimacy of key votes and wins reelection via partisan Supreme Court. That is the most likely scenario now. Not a stretch. Probable, barring some extreme actions. https://t.co/nDeDMURlOk

— Hamilton Nolan (@hamiltonnolan) September 19, 2020

The tweet didn't load well, but these are Trump's words:

“We're going to have a victory on November 3rd the likes of which you've never seen,” Trump told a rally in Fayetteville, N.C. “Now, we're counting on the federal court system to make it so that we can actually have an evening where we know who wins. Not where the votes are going to be counted a week later or two weeks later.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/20/ginsburgs-death-gives-gop-an-edge-in-2020-legal-fights-418672

[Wales-Bales]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

The tweet didn't load well, but these are Trump's words:

“We're going to have a victory on November 3rd the likes of which you've never seen,” Trump told a rally in Fayetteville, N.C. “Now, we're counting on the federal court system to make it so that we can actually have an evening where we know who wins. Not where the votes are going to be counted a week later or two weeks later.”


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...-fights-418672

Same old Dems, always cheating

[Heisenberg]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/nyregion/donald-trump-taxes-cyrus-vance.html

Trump Could Be Investigated for Tax Fraud, D.A. Says for First Time
The assertion by the Manhattan district attorney offered rare insight into the office’s investigation of the president and his businesses.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which has been locked in a yearlong legal battle with President Trump over obtaining his tax returns, suggested for the first time in a court filing on Monday that it had grounds to investigate him and his businesses for tax fraud.

The filing by the office of the district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., offered rare insight into the office’s investigation of the president and his business dealings, which began more than two years ago.

Mr. Vance, a Democrat, has never revealed the scope of his office’s criminal inquiry, citing grand jury secrecy. The investigation has been stalled by the fight over a subpoena that the office issued in August 2019 for eight years of the president’s tax returns.

Lawyers for Mr. Trump have said the subpoena should be blocked, calling it “wildly overbroad” and politically motivated. Mr. Vance responded to that argument in a carefully worded new filing that did not directly accuse Mr. Trump or any of his businesses or associates of wrongdoing and took pains to avoid disclosing details about the inquiry.

However, prosecutors listed news reports and public testimony that alleged misconduct by Mr. Trump and his businesses. The reports, prosecutors wrote, would justify a grand jury inquiry into a range of possible crimes, including tax and insurance fraud and falsification of business records. It was the first time the office had suggested tax fraud might be among the possible areas of investigation.

“Even if the grand jury were testing the truth of public allegations alone, such reports, taken together, fully justify the scope of the grand jury subpoena at issue in this case,” prosecutors wrote.

Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, declined to comment on the district attorney’s filing.

The president has said he expects the dispute over the subpoena will end up in the Supreme Court. “This is a continuation of the witch hunt, the greatest witch hunt in history,” Mr. Trump said last month.

The conflict began when Mr. Vance’s prosecutors issued the grand jury subpoena to Mr. Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, seeking the tax returns and other financial records.

Mr. Vance’s office has been investigating hush-money payments that were made before the 2016 election to two women who claimed they had affairs with Mr. Trump.

More recently, prosecutors suggested in court papers that their inquiry was broader, including a focus on possible financial crimes and insurance fraud. The prosecutors said they viewed Mr. Trump’s records as central to their investigation.

After the subpoena was issued, Mr. Trump sued in federal court to block it, arguing that as a sitting president, he had blanket immunity from any criminal investigation. The judge, Victor Marrero of Federal District Court in Manhattan, roundly dismissed the claim, which had not been tested in the courts before, and the president appealed.

The dispute ultimately reached the Supreme Court, which in July handed down a landmark decision ruling against Mr. Trump.

“No citizen, not even the president, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority.

But the justices said that Mr. Trump could return to the lower court and raise other objections to the subpoena’s scope and relevance. Mr. Trump’s lawyers went back to Judge Marrero, arguing that the document request was political and “so sweeping that it amounts to an unguided and unlawful fishing expedition.”

In August, Judge Marrero dismissed the president’s new arguments. The judge noted that Mr. Trump’s lengthy legal battle could end up allowing the statute of limitations to expire on any possible crimes, and effectively grant him the immunity to which the Supreme Court ruled he was not entitled.

“At its core, it amounts to absolute immunity through a back door,” Judge Marrero wrote. He added, “Justice requires an end to this controversy.”

Mr. Trump is now appealing that decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In recent court filings, his lawyers described Judge Marrero’s opinion as “flawed from start to finish,” and they accused him of “stacking the deck” against the president.

“The president is not trying to resurrect a categorical-immunity claim,” the lawyers wrote. “He is challenging this specific subpoena on distinct grounds.”

The appeals court scheduled oral arguments on the matter for Friday. However the court rules, either party could take the case back to the Supreme Court, making it unlikely the dispute will be decided before the presidential election on Nov. 3.

Even if Mr. Vance’s prosecutors ultimately obtain Mr. Trump’s tax records, grand jury secrecy rules make it unlikely the materials will become public anytime soon. They might only surface if Mr. Vance’s office brings charges and the tax returns are introduced as evidence in court.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Meanwhile, in the real world, as opposed to the one of endless conspiracy theories designed to portray the President in good light, the number of Covid 19 deaths in the USA will pass 200,000 today (it already has if some sites are to be believed). Go back and see what Trump was saying through most of the first half of this year and then take in that figure - it gives you all the reason you need to hope that the American electorate do not repeat their mistake of 2016 in a few weeks time.

[Dorcus]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Meanwhile, in the real world, as opposed to the one of endless conspiracy theories designed to portray the President in good light, the number of Covid 19 deaths in the USA will pass 200,000 today (it already has if some sites are to be believed). Go back and see what Trump was saying through most of the first half of this year and then take in that figure - it gives you all the reason you need to hope that the American electorate do not repeat their mistake of 2016 in a few weeks time.

I'm hoping Donny the Blonde Bombshell gets his arse served up on a plate on November 3rd. However, the fact that he is able and is likely to increase the conservative cohort on the Supreme Court is an affront to US democracy.

It could have serious implications even if Trump is defeated. There is also the question as to whether this move is a sinister attempt to help him stay in office even if he loses in a tight election.

[lardy]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

I'm hoping Donny the Blonde Bombshell gets his arse served up on a plate on November 3rd. However, the fact that he is able and is likely to increase the conservative cohort on the Supreme Court is an affront to US democracy.

It could have serious implications even if Trump is defeated. There is also the question as to whether this move is a sinister attempt to help him stay in office even if he loses in a tight election.

See my post above; he's said that this is the plan. If he's ahead on the night, he'll call victory and the supreme court are there to push him through.

[Wales-Bales]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

See my post above; he's said that this is the plan. If he's ahead on the night, he'll call victory and the supreme court are there to push him through.

It might have something to do with the zillions of blank mail-in ballots floating around America!

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

It might have something to do with the zillions of blank mail-in ballots floating around America!

You said voting by post is no less respectable than voting in person, so I just pointed out that there are two types of postal voting, verified and unverified, so all things are not equally respectable!

Remind us what the difference between verified and unverified postal voting is again?

[Wales-Bales]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Remind us what the difference between verified and unverified postal voting is again?

Already cleared that up ages ago. One is requested by a named person, as opposed to ballots being sent out randomly to all and sundry, based on inaccurate data. I fully expect you to support cheating though, as it seems to be typical of your character.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Led by Donkeys' latest offering;-

https://twitter.com/i/status/1308355009164304384

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Already cleared that up ages ago. One is requested by a named person, as opposed to ballots being sent out randomly to all and sundry, based on inaccurate data. I fully expect you to support cheating though, as it seems to be typical of your character.

Here this might help your ignorance. Well on this subject at least.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/absentee-ballot-vs-mail-in-ballot/

In each case the verification process at the point of acceptance is the same, checking the individual and their signature against the electoral roll. Can you explain how you think widespread fraud will take place and why if the process is so open to cheating only non-Trump voters will use it?

[Heisenberg]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Here this might help your ignorance. Well on this subject at least.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/absentee-ballot-vs-mail-in-ballot/

In each case the verification process at the point of acceptance is the same, checking the individual and their signature against the electoral roll. Can you explain how you think widespread fraud will take place and why if the process is so open to cheating only non-Trump voters will use it?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/29/trump-supporter-charged-in-voter-fraud-case

It's an old story but it shows that the process works.

Yes, the Trump supporter committed election fraud and yes she was caught in the act... which shows that the process works (as it has done for how many years?)

[lardy]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

Here this might help your ignorance. Well on this subject at least.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/absentee-ballot-vs-mail-in-ballot/

In each case the verification process at the point of acceptance is the same, checking the individual and their signature against the electoral roll. Can you explain how you think widespread fraud will take place and why if the process is so open to cheating only non-Trump voters will use it?

I think I can help clear up what's happened here.

He doesn't know what 'verified' means, and thinks it's similar to 'requested'.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: The Donald Trump thread

I think I can help clear up what's happened here.

He doesn't know what 'verified' means, and thinks it's similar to 'requested'.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion.
I asked a DJ in a night club once if he did verifications. No wonder he looked at me as if I was a bit simple.