The Trump Cesspool Thread- a place to drop misc Trump turds

Trump’s rally yesterday… wow. I don’t know where the republicans get off on talking about Biden’s mind when Trump is stumbling over his words. He always interrupts himself as soon as he screws up a word..

“We have to keep our country gay… perper what it’s not, I mean, for some reason, it’s just not great anymore”

“We’re gonna keep men up” (while doing some weird raising the roof motion)

“Do you know what the n-word is? No, no, no, it’s the nuclear word…”

“I know a lot about tractors.” (❌)

“We have a ‘dahckamint’ (document) hoax.” (❌)

He then calls the NY AG by a petulant nickname - Letitia”Peek-A-Boo” James. (🙄)

“I’m not a terrorist (❌), but there’s great anger in this country” (✅

He seemed to make his supporters uncomfortable a lot of times. Imagine you have a good friend who’s a comedian, bombing on their first gig, with you in the front row.

 
Trump’s defense right now in his defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll is that he made his comments as an elected official. Problem for him is, he’s still yakking away not as president, not as an elected official or government employee, but plain old, loud-mouthed, entitled Donald Trump. He’s repeating the same things he’s facing a lawsuit for.

He has no strategy and no plan. The federal judges aren’t playing his games, as we see with what’s happening with John Eastman.
 
Pace is picking up. Trump just lost another attempt to hold back his tax returns.

https://www.Twitter or X not allowed/i/web/status/1585742280203603968/​
 
fooferdoggie said:
just share the things everyone and their dog has copies now. is kind of pointless now.
Click to expand...

No, it still means something when it's a court order as opposed to a leaked document. Means the courts have once again informed Donald Trump that he's not anywhere near as privileged or immune to rule of law as he has been thinking all this time.

The other hammer that dropped again this week is another stiff sentence for a 1/6 insurrectionist who injured a police officer. 7.5 years in the slam. So another Trump follower discovers there's still an actual rule of law out there in American reality.

www.nbcnews.com

Trump fan who assaulted Officer Fanone on Jan. 6 sentenced to more than 7 years in prison

Kyle Young, who took his son with him on Jan. 6, handed a stun gun to Danny Rodriguez, who electroshocked Officer Mike Fanone near the Capitol tunnel, prosecutors said.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
 
lizkat said:
No, it still means something when it's a court order as opposed to a leaked document. Means the courts have once again informed Donald Trump that he's not anywhere near as privileged or immune to rule of law as he has been thinking all this time.

The other hammer that dropped again this week is another stiff sentence for a 1/6 insurrectionist who injured a police officer. 7.5 years in the slam. So another Trump follower discovers there's still an actual rule of law out there in American reality.

www.nbcnews.com

Trump fan who assaulted Officer Fanone on Jan. 6 sentenced to more than 7 years in prison

Kyle Young, who took his son with him on Jan. 6, handed a stun gun to Danny Rodriguez, who electroshocked Officer Mike Fanone near the Capitol tunnel, prosecutors said.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...
but other agencies have them now Where trump lost the legal battle.
 
fooferdoggie said:
but other agencies have them now Where trump lost the legal battle.
Click to expand...

The House Ways and Means Committee specifically required six years of returns for Trump and some of his businesses, for oversight of IRS audits, which have routinely been applied to sitting presidents and vice presidents.

Trump had just been doing what he always does, kick up dust with legal objections and appeals and whatever else his rafts of lawyers could come up with.

Just goes to show us how long Trump can manage to string things out for no reason, like this objection didn't really have a leg to stand on ever since 2019, when the tax returns request was first made.

Now he's probably going to say it's moot because he's not a sitting president any more. Oops. Well... hmm... he's not likely to say that even now, is he... o_O :ROFLMAO:
 
fooferdoggie said:
I wonder how many misspelling's and claims he won the election were in it?
Click to expand...

Hah, he's not quite at stage of having to write his own arguments, probably....

He's hoping somehow to stall the turnover so that the incoming House, if majority Republican, can rescind the request. So first he asks for an emergency stay just to start the "buying time" ball rolling and after that it depends on which party rules the roost in the House in January.

If by November 9th he knows the House will be red, then he files a garbage claim to a lower court like "a lame duck congress shouldn't be able to just yada yada".

By time that gets tossed out of court, and then appealed, the new House will be sworn in and first order of business if under Republican control will have been to ditch all pesky things like outstanding Ways and Means oversight of a Trump IRS tax audit, and the 1/6 committee investigation.

And he'll still be complaining on social media about being persecuted. He's like water dripping on limestone really. Just grinding away at the very idea he's subject to any rule but his own impulses.
 
fooferdoggie said:
no but we saw one of them from that woman lawyer and it was full of election lies.
Click to expand...

Yeah well he has upgraded his legal representation lately since he's in deeper and deeper trouble.

Now I could be wrong here but when submitting an appeal to SCOTUS, even an emergency appeal, one's lawyer probably has the common sense to ensure that more than the usual amount of proofreading gets applied.

Best foot forward, as they say. Not something like this:

"To Whom It make unsure: gimme a break all i mighta did was​
like i coulda dropped a few zeros off my numbers here an their."​
 
lizkat said:
Now I could be wrong here but when submitting an appeal to SCOTUS, even an emergency appeal, one's lawyer probably has the common sense to ensure that more than the usual amount of proofreading gets applied.

Best foot forward, as they say. Not something like this:

​
Click to expand...
you forget who you are talking about. he is stuck with the low hanging fruit of lawyers because no smart lawyer will work for him.
 
Can anyone go straight to the Supreme Court to intervene in such matters, or does he get special privileges as a former president?
 
mac_in_tosh said:
Can anyone go straight to the Supreme Court to intervene in such matters, or does he get special privileges as a former president?
Click to expand...

Well a person who has been subject to an order in a lower court can apply to SCOTUS for a stay, which I believe is what Trump is doing.

The application (it is all paperwork, not oral argument) is usually reviewed by the SCOTUS justice for that lower court's circuit, and she may decide alone or refer it to the full court.

If she acts alone and denies the application, usually there is no attached opinion or explanation. The applicant could then ask another justice to review the application and keep going until having amassed a majority of denials, then has no further recourse on that precise question. To avoid this kind of gig, applications are often referred to the full court at the outset.

If the receiving justice refers to the full court, then It takes five justices to agree to grant a stay, but only four to decide to accept the case for review on its merits. If a stay is denied there is usually no attached opinion. If a stay is granted, there is usually boilerplate language attached stating how long the stay of the lower court's order shall persist, usually until the petition on the merits of the case are decided. If the stay was granted by the full court, there may be attached opinions including dissents.

Aside from getting a stay granted, there are other possible outcomes: the court can ask for a response by the opposition (meanwhile granting an interim stay), or if a stay has been granted by a single justice, the opposition can file a motion asking for the full court to vacate the stay (which outcome is unlikely). Usually a single justice will refer to the full court to begin with rather than end up with that outcome anyway,

I got this from some guidelines issued in pdf format to reporters, a doc that the SCOTUS hands out on request and has on their website someplace...

EDIT: provided the link to the pdf file referenced above.
 
Last edited:
mac_in_tosh said:
Can anyone go straight to the Supreme Court to intervene in such matters, or does he get special privileges as a former president?
Click to expand...

Chief Justice Roberts put a temporary hold on the House request... so all of SCOTUS can consider it.

https://www.Twitter or X not allowed/i/web/status/1587444672082870272/
 

Similar threads

Eric
Trump says if elected he will force federal workers to pass a political test and fire them if they fail
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
Yoused
Yoused
Back
Top