Re: Charges
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 7:34 am
Page 77 of 109
Re: Charges
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 1:19 pm
"and don’t even get me started on the overwhelming bulge in his pants. God willing I’ll be able to sketch that treasure someday.”
Re: Charges
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 4:11 pm
SickOverlander wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 1:19 pm "and don’t even get me started on the overwhelming bulge in his pants. God willing I’ll be able to sketch that treasure someday.”
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 11:46 am
It would appear that things are going as we might expect when a "stable genius" takes the witness stand:
Trump's refusing to answer the questions he's asked, and instead, according to one reporter, "giving what amounts to a Zillow tour of his properties around the world, in an attempt to justify their allegedly, 'inflated worth", which is not the question at hand.
Judge Engoron in Trumps trial asked Trumps attorney if they could control their client. This is not a political rally.
Judge Engoron is considering imposing sanctions seriously for the 1st time.
Judge Engoron “I will excuse him and draw every negative inference I can. Do you understand that? ”
Trump declared “This is a very, very unfair trial. Very. “
Trump's refusing to answer the questions he's asked, and instead, according to one reporter, "giving what amounts to a Zillow tour of his properties around the world, in an attempt to justify their allegedly, 'inflated worth", which is not the question at hand.
Judge Engoron in Trumps trial asked Trumps attorney if they could control their client. This is not a political rally.
Judge Engoron is considering imposing sanctions seriously for the 1st time.
Judge Engoron “I will excuse him and draw every negative inference I can. Do you understand that? ”
Trump declared “This is a very, very unfair trial. Very. “
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:44 pm
Quite a circus going on. One of the questions was about the value of the Mara-A-Lago estate.
I remember an English professor I had once said he was fighting the local government over the valuation (for property tax purposes)of his vast book library. I think he told them he couldn’t put a value on it because it was priceless.
Putting a value on some property is pretty much arbitrary, whatever a buyer decides to pay in agreement with a seller.
I remember an English professor I had once said he was fighting the local government over the valuation (for property tax purposes)of his vast book library. I think he told them he couldn’t put a value on it because it was priceless.
Putting a value on some property is pretty much arbitrary, whatever a buyer decides to pay in agreement with a seller.
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:52 pm
To an extent, yes.dolomite wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:44 pm Quite a circus going on. One of the questions was about the value of the Mara-A-Lago estate.
I remember an English professor I had once said he was fighting the local government over the valuation (for property tax purposes)of his vast book library. I think he told them he couldn’t put a value on it because it was priceless.
Putting a value on some property is pretty much arbitrary, whatever a buyer decides to pay in agreement with a seller.
But only to an extent; I read that one of Trump's "defenses" this morning was that Mar-A-Lago would be worth much more than its assessed value if it were condos rather than a social club.
Maybe that is true.
However, Mar-A-Lago is deeded (by Trump, for tax purposes!) so as to legally prohibit that. You don't get to have all of this stuff both ways.
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 1:03 pm
$1.5 Billion valuation for Mar-A-Lago, as Trump apparently claimed, sounds a bit rich*.dolomite wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:44 pm Quite a circus going on. One of the questions was about the value of the Mara-A-Lago estate.
I remember an English professor I had once said he was fighting the local government over the valuation (for property tax purposes)of his vast book library. I think he told them he couldn’t put a value on it because it was priceless.
Putting a value on some property is pretty much arbitrary, whatever a buyer decides to pay in agreement with a seller.
*Not that MBS, one of the Russian oligarchs, or Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, owner of the yacht Steve Bannon was arrested on, might not be willing to do a friend a solid, and pay that much for it...
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 1:07 pm
Obviously the dream scenario here is for Trump to, under oath, give the prosecution(s) that particular string to tug on.Shirley wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 1:03 pm$1.5 Billion valuation for Mar-A-Lago, as Trump apparently claimed, sounds a bit rich*.dolomite wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:44 pm Quite a circus going on. One of the questions was about the value of the Mara-A-Lago estate.
I remember an English professor I had once said he was fighting the local government over the valuation (for property tax purposes)of his vast book library. I think he told them he couldn’t put a value on it because it was priceless.
Putting a value on some property is pretty much arbitrary, whatever a buyer decides to pay in agreement with a seller.
*Not that MBS, one of the Russian oligarchs, or Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, owner of the yacht Steve Bannon was arrested on, might not be willing to do a friend a solid, and pay that much for it...
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:17 pm
One of Trump's lawyers in another trial, the Manhattan hush money/Stormy Daniels trial, was sitting in the gallery and laughed out loud at something that was said in today's trial while Trump was on the stand.
According to a couple of former federal prosecutors, laughing out loud at a trial is not considered good form, especially by an officer of the court.
And, if I understood correctly, in an attempt to justify the size of his Trump Tower apt. being 30,000 sq ft instead of ~ 10,000 sq ft., Trump argued to add the square footage of the roof, which is accessible from his penthouse.
According to a couple of former federal prosecutors, laughing out loud at a trial is not considered good form, especially by an officer of the court.
And, if I understood correctly, in an attempt to justify the size of his Trump Tower apt. being 30,000 sq ft instead of ~ 10,000 sq ft., Trump argued to add the square footage of the roof, which is accessible from his penthouse.
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:37 pm
Trump reasons like an elementary school bully - because that's fundamentally what he is.Shirley wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:17 pm One of Trump's lawyers in another trial, the Manhattan hush money/Stormy Daniels trial, was sitting in the gallery and laughed out loud at something that was said in today's trial while Trump was on the stand.
According to a couple of former federal prosecutors, laughing out loud at a trial is not considered good form, especially by an officer of the court.
And, if I understood correctly, in an attempt to justify the size of his Trump Tower apt. being 30,000 sq ft instead of ~ 10,000 sq ft., Trump argued to add the square footage of the roof, which is accessible from his penthouse.
But please, tell me more about Biden's stutter.
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2023 4:07 pm
jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:37 pmTrump reasons like an elementary school bully - because that's fundamentally what he is.Shirley wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:17 pm One of Trump's lawyers in another trial, the Manhattan hush money/Stormy Daniels trial, was sitting in the gallery and laughed out loud at something that was said in today's trial while Trump was on the stand.
According to a couple of former federal prosecutors, laughing out loud at a trial is not considered good form, especially by an officer of the court.
And, if I understood correctly, in an attempt to justify the size of his Trump Tower apt. being 30,000 sq ft instead of ~ 10,000 sq ft., Trump argued to add the square footage of the roof, which is accessible from his penthouse.
But please, tell me more about Biden's stutter.
@MaryLTrump
Donald just testified he was president in 2021.
When a prosecutor asked him if he prepared the 2021 financial statement himself, Donald responded:
“I was so busy in the White House, focusing on Russia and China and keeping our country safe.”
The lawyer responded,“You weren’t president [when they were drafted].”
Imagine the coverage this would be getting if Donald were 80.
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:36 am
Trump's time on the witness stand must have gone terribly as FoxNews has zero mention of it anywhere.
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:49 am
It did.
While Eric and Don Jr. did everything they could to put as much distance between themselves and the property valuations as possible, and for the most part stayed disciplined and on script, after the judge gave up trying to get Trump to stop holding a campaign rally while on the witness stand, even saying "I beseech you" to his lawyers to get him under control, the judge let him wax philosophic, (and the prosecution didn't object). And, although no one could have predicted it, eventually Trump, after previously testifying that he too had nothing to do with the valuations, made an admission that he did. And, in the opinion of former fed prosecutor Joyce Vance, blew that line of defense totally out of the water, not that it was all that strong an argument before.
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:59 am
(He was also making arguments against liability, when that phase of the proceedings is over. And (1) his arguments already failed in that phase of the proceedings, and (2) his quixotic ramblings here probably cost himself tens or hundreds of millions of dollars - he should have been in mitigation mode, not martyr mode.)Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:49 amIt did.
While Eric and Don Jr. did everything they could to put as much distance between themselves and the property valuations as possible, and for the most part stayed disciplined and on script, after the judge gave up trying to get Trump to stop holding a campaign rally while on the witness stand, even saying "I beseech you" to his lawyers to get him under control, the judge let him wax philosophic, (and the prosecution didn't object). And, although no one could have predicted it, eventually Trump, after previously testifying that he too had nothing to do with the valuations, made an admission that he did. And, in the opinion of former fed prosecutor Joyce Vance, blew that line of defense totally out of the water, not that it was all that strong an argument before.
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 10:50 am
Hard to imagine that japhy didn't have a hand in this:
Poor Donald, it was only a matter of time until your favorite turned against you. Ivanka has now hoarded enough money, using your name, that she and Jared no longer need you anymore. If you think she’ll visit you in prison, think again.
Is it just me, or are republicans really mean to republicans?
Poor Donald, it was only a matter of time until your favorite turned against you. Ivanka has now hoarded enough money, using your name, that she and Jared no longer need you anymore. If you think she’ll visit you in prison, think again.
Is it just me, or are republicans really mean to republicans?
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:56 am
His options are either to lie and perjure himself or tell the truth and hang himself. It won't be tolerated for him to just never provide an answer to the question, even if the judge reluctantly has to allow him to blather on like an idiot just so any refusal to allow it to continue isn't used in appeal as "he didn't let me provide a defense". This has always been the risk of having him on a witness stand.Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:49 amIt did.
While Eric and Don Jr. did everything they could to put as much distance between themselves and the property valuations as possible, and for the most part stayed disciplined and on script, after the judge gave up trying to get Trump to stop holding a campaign rally while on the witness stand, even saying "I beseech you" to his lawyers to get him under control, the judge let him wax philosophic, (and the prosecution didn't object). And, although no one could have predicted it, eventually Trump, after previously testifying that he too had nothing to do with the valuations, made an admission that he did. And, in the opinion of former fed prosecutor Joyce Vance, blew that line of defense totally out of the water, not that it was all that strong an argument before.
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:59 am
Yes. And this particular proceeding cuts at what's left of his psyche in a way that trivialities like endangering our national defense simply do not.twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:56 amHis options are either to lie and perjure himself or tell the truth and hang himself. It won't be tolerated for him to just never provide an answer to the question, even if the judge reluctantly has to allow him to blather on like an idiot just so any refusal to allow it to continue isn't used in appeal as "he didn't let me provide a defense". This has always been the risk of having him on a witness stand.Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:49 amIt did.
While Eric and Don Jr. did everything they could to put as much distance between themselves and the property valuations as possible, and for the most part stayed disciplined and on script, after the judge gave up trying to get Trump to stop holding a campaign rally while on the witness stand, even saying "I beseech you" to his lawyers to get him under control, the judge let him wax philosophic, (and the prosecution didn't object). And, although no one could have predicted it, eventually Trump, after previously testifying that he too had nothing to do with the valuations, made an admission that he did. And, in the opinion of former fed prosecutor Joyce Vance, blew that line of defense totally out of the water, not that it was all that strong an argument before.
Re: Charges
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:51 pm
Re: Charges
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:54 pm
Tic...tic...tic...
Today In - It appears the likelihood that the former insurrectionist president will be convicted of trying to overthrow our government seems to be increasing:
Jan 5, 2021 Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he would preside over the U.S. Senate debate surrounding disputes of the 2020 election results if Vice President Mike Pence does not show up.
He suggested Pence was not expected to attend but Grassley’s staff later said that was a “misinterpretation” and that Pence was expected to be there.
On Wednesday, Congress will meet to formally count the Electoral College votes after they were certified by states last month. At least 12 GOP senators and dozens of House Republicans say they intend to object to the Electoral College results as those votes are read, state by state, in a joint session that begins at noon CT Wednesday.
During an exchange with reporters on Tuesday, Grassley was asked how he plans to vote.
“Well, first of all, I will be — if the Vice President isn’t there and we don’t expect him to be there, I will be presiding over the Senate,” according to a transcript of his remarks sent by a spokesperson.
Grassley serves as the president pro tempore of the Senate and will preside over any portion of the debate that Pence does not attend. But Grassley expects Pence to be present on Wednesday, according to his spokesperson...
Pence told Jan. 6 special counsel harrowing details about 2020 aftermath, warnings to Trump: Sources
Speaking with special counsel Jack Smith's team earlier this year, former Vice President Mike Pence offered harrowing details about how, in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, then-President Donald Trump surrounded himself with "crank" attorneys, espoused "un-American" legal theories, and almost pushed the country toward a "constitutional crisis," according to sources familiar with what Pence told investigators.
The sources said Pence also told investigators he's "sure" that -- in the days before Jan. 6, 2021, when a violent mob tried to stop Congress from certifying the election -- he informed Trump he still hadn't seen evidence of significant election fraud, but Trump was unmoved, continuing to claim the election was "stolen" and acting "recklessly" on that "tragic day."
Pence is the highest-ranking current or former government official known to have spoken with the special counsel team investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election. What he allegedly told investigators, described exclusively to ABC News, sheds further light on the evidence Smith's team has amassed as it prosecutes Trump for allegedly trying to unlawfully "remain in power" and "erode public faith" in democratic institutions.
Pence could take the stand against Trump should Smith's election interference case go to trial, which is currently slated to occur in March.
As described to ABC News, much of what the former vice president told Smith's investigators mirrored -- and at times restated verbatim -- comments he has previously made publicly. Questions from Smith's team repeatedly focused on a book Pence published last year, with investigators apparently seeking to have Pence confirm -- under oath -- an array of post-election stories and opinions he included in the book.
But speaking with Smith's team behind closed doors, Pence also offered previously-undisclosed anecdotes and details showing how his longtime friendship with Trump unraveled in the final weeks of their time in the White House, including Pence's repeated warnings to Trump about the then-president's push to overturn the election results.
Sources said that in at least one interview with Pence, Smith's investigators pressed the former vice president on personal notes he took after meetings with Trump and others, which investigators obtained from the National Archives.
According to sources, one of Pence's notes obtained by Smith's team shows that, days before Pence was set to preside over Congress certifying the election results on Jan. 6, 2021, he momentarily decided that he would skip the proceedings altogether, writing in the note that there were "too many questions" and it would otherwise be "too hurtful to my friend." But he ultimately concluded he had a duty to show up.
Speaking with Smith's team, Pence insisted his loyalty to President Trump at the time never faltered -- "My only higher loyalty was to God and the Constitution," sources described Pence as telling them.
Sources said that investigators' questioning became so granular at times that they pressed Pence over the placement of a comma in his book: When recounting a phone call with Trump on Christmas Day 2020, Pence wrote in his book that he told Trump, "You know, I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome" of the election on Jan. 6.
But Pence allegedly told Smith's investigators that the comma should have never been placed there. According to sources, Pence told Smith's investigators that he actually meant to write in his book that he admonished Trump, "You know I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome," suggesting Trump was well aware of the limitations of Pence's authority days before Jan. 6 -- a line Smith includes in his indictment.
In April, ABC News reported that Pence had just testified before a federal grand jury in Washington. Two months later, in June, Pence launched a bid to challenge Trump as the Republican Party's next presidential candidate -- but Pence's campaign lasted only four months.
'Accept the results'
Sources said Pence acknowledged to Smith's team that even before Election Day on Nov. 3, 2020, he was aware that the Trump-Pence ticket was expected to take a big early lead in the polls that would then gradually fade as more mail-in ballots were counted.
In the first few days after the election, Pence never saw any "significant allegations of fraud," according to what he told Smith's team, sources said. But Trump still declared victory -- and claimed there was "a major fraud in our nation" -- within hours of polls closing, though Pence allegedly told investigators he believes Trump was speaking "in very general terms," not about specific instances of fraud.
At the same time, Trump privately instructed Pence to dig into any potential fraud or "irregularities" in the election, telling Pence their campaign "was going to fight," in court and elsewhere, Pence allegedly told Smith's team.
[...]
Today In - It appears the likelihood that the former insurrectionist president will be convicted of trying to overthrow our government seems to be increasing:
Jan 5, 2021 Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he would preside over the U.S. Senate debate surrounding disputes of the 2020 election results if Vice President Mike Pence does not show up.
He suggested Pence was not expected to attend but Grassley’s staff later said that was a “misinterpretation” and that Pence was expected to be there.
On Wednesday, Congress will meet to formally count the Electoral College votes after they were certified by states last month. At least 12 GOP senators and dozens of House Republicans say they intend to object to the Electoral College results as those votes are read, state by state, in a joint session that begins at noon CT Wednesday.
During an exchange with reporters on Tuesday, Grassley was asked how he plans to vote.
“Well, first of all, I will be — if the Vice President isn’t there and we don’t expect him to be there, I will be presiding over the Senate,” according to a transcript of his remarks sent by a spokesperson.
Grassley serves as the president pro tempore of the Senate and will preside over any portion of the debate that Pence does not attend. But Grassley expects Pence to be present on Wednesday, according to his spokesperson...
Pence told Jan. 6 special counsel harrowing details about 2020 aftermath, warnings to Trump: Sources
Speaking with special counsel Jack Smith's team earlier this year, former Vice President Mike Pence offered harrowing details about how, in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, then-President Donald Trump surrounded himself with "crank" attorneys, espoused "un-American" legal theories, and almost pushed the country toward a "constitutional crisis," according to sources familiar with what Pence told investigators.
The sources said Pence also told investigators he's "sure" that -- in the days before Jan. 6, 2021, when a violent mob tried to stop Congress from certifying the election -- he informed Trump he still hadn't seen evidence of significant election fraud, but Trump was unmoved, continuing to claim the election was "stolen" and acting "recklessly" on that "tragic day."
Pence is the highest-ranking current or former government official known to have spoken with the special counsel team investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election. What he allegedly told investigators, described exclusively to ABC News, sheds further light on the evidence Smith's team has amassed as it prosecutes Trump for allegedly trying to unlawfully "remain in power" and "erode public faith" in democratic institutions.
Pence could take the stand against Trump should Smith's election interference case go to trial, which is currently slated to occur in March.
As described to ABC News, much of what the former vice president told Smith's investigators mirrored -- and at times restated verbatim -- comments he has previously made publicly. Questions from Smith's team repeatedly focused on a book Pence published last year, with investigators apparently seeking to have Pence confirm -- under oath -- an array of post-election stories and opinions he included in the book.
But speaking with Smith's team behind closed doors, Pence also offered previously-undisclosed anecdotes and details showing how his longtime friendship with Trump unraveled in the final weeks of their time in the White House, including Pence's repeated warnings to Trump about the then-president's push to overturn the election results.
Sources said that in at least one interview with Pence, Smith's investigators pressed the former vice president on personal notes he took after meetings with Trump and others, which investigators obtained from the National Archives.
According to sources, one of Pence's notes obtained by Smith's team shows that, days before Pence was set to preside over Congress certifying the election results on Jan. 6, 2021, he momentarily decided that he would skip the proceedings altogether, writing in the note that there were "too many questions" and it would otherwise be "too hurtful to my friend." But he ultimately concluded he had a duty to show up.
Speaking with Smith's team, Pence insisted his loyalty to President Trump at the time never faltered -- "My only higher loyalty was to God and the Constitution," sources described Pence as telling them.
Sources said that investigators' questioning became so granular at times that they pressed Pence over the placement of a comma in his book: When recounting a phone call with Trump on Christmas Day 2020, Pence wrote in his book that he told Trump, "You know, I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome" of the election on Jan. 6.
But Pence allegedly told Smith's investigators that the comma should have never been placed there. According to sources, Pence told Smith's investigators that he actually meant to write in his book that he admonished Trump, "You know I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome," suggesting Trump was well aware of the limitations of Pence's authority days before Jan. 6 -- a line Smith includes in his indictment.
In April, ABC News reported that Pence had just testified before a federal grand jury in Washington. Two months later, in June, Pence launched a bid to challenge Trump as the Republican Party's next presidential candidate -- but Pence's campaign lasted only four months.
'Accept the results'
Sources said Pence acknowledged to Smith's team that even before Election Day on Nov. 3, 2020, he was aware that the Trump-Pence ticket was expected to take a big early lead in the polls that would then gradually fade as more mail-in ballots were counted.
In the first few days after the election, Pence never saw any "significant allegations of fraud," according to what he told Smith's team, sources said. But Trump still declared victory -- and claimed there was "a major fraud in our nation" -- within hours of polls closing, though Pence allegedly told investigators he believes Trump was speaking "in very general terms," not about specific instances of fraud.
At the same time, Trump privately instructed Pence to dig into any potential fraud or "irregularities" in the election, telling Pence their campaign "was going to fight," in court and elsewhere, Pence allegedly told Smith's team.
[...]
Re: Charges
Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2023 11:17 am
BREAKING: trump's gag order preventing him from attacking Judge Engoron's clerk in his fraud trial has just been reinstated by a NY Appeals court.
Imagine having to be forced NOT to threaten someone, and then imagine being a former President having to be forced NOT to threaten someone.
He is a daily disgrace.
Imagine having to be forced NOT to threaten someone, and then imagine being a former President having to be forced NOT to threaten someone.
He is a daily disgrace.