The Trump Indictment Thread

[Huntn]

Are you willing to give any of your savings away, move into a smaller house and give up a lot of the comfort you worked all your life for?

You were a commercial airline pilot and I am sure you made a nice living and didn't steal or cheat to get it. You got it because you worked for it. I have a friend who just became a Spirit pilot and another friend's son is just starting his CRJ training. It is not easy. You worked/studied your ass off to become a pilot and then had the daily stress of having the lives of hundreds of souls in your hands.

Don't think for one minute you didn't earn and deserve every single dollar you have accumulated.

Yes, there are good jobs, that pay well, that require skill. I’m not rich, but I’m comfortable. I have less than a million in the bank, but am very fortunate to have a pension that pays well. I was one of the last pilots to get a full pension, before big business decided that employees don’t deserve pensions. The 401ks that replace them are not nearly as good. Capitalism at it‘s best.

I was fortunate to be white, born into a middle class family who could afford to send me to college, which got me into my flying slot, although that was an iffy proposition, and it worked out because I was determined to make it work. So I put out effort, and was in a position to take advantage of the opportunities,

My comment about Capitalism, the accumulation of capital still stands. If we had a bunch of people who believed in highly regulated Capitalism, and spreading the wealth, and an over all healthier society, there would be no stopping us. But look at small enterprise business plans. Without exception they're built on slave wages, with the owners living the good life, while the employess scrape by.

I realize I’m dreaming about a better humanity, but at our core we are selfish. This is why I’ve stated that in an advanced society, the annual income/wealth accumulation of a human being should be capped at $1M. I don’t care how smart you are, what great idea you have, if you can’t live a decent life on that kind of income, there is something fundamentally wrong with you. And the rest of society could benefit would be more stable by having more options to live good lives.

There’s a sucker born every minute
We could talk about MAGA, but I won’t get into a big debate about it. These people are what would have been populists, liberals, working class looking for a better life, but it can be argued the liberals could not save them, and Capitalism ensured the liberals would fail, millions of exported good paying jobs for example, hence based on dissapointment, and perceived good deals for “others” less worthy citizens (minorities, women, LGBT), MAGA broke bad, and they now look to a criminal as their savior to tear down the system, and somehow delusionally, think he cares about them and they will end up with better lives at the expense of others, with the fascists eliminating those “others”, maybe send them off to work camps after the civil war.

The irony is they don’t ever think of themselves as others, but privileged (white privaledged) and as the big wheel turns this could easily change and surprise them. But they have either not thought about this realistically or like living their fantasies believing that a malignant, incompetent, corrupt, lawless, frequently more incoherent stand up comedian, will improve their lives. Putin is a riot! Maybe living in Russia West is not so bad.

 

[cbum]

Leaving the moral aspect of hyper-concentration of wealth to the side, any economist will tell you that for the economy, it is extremely inefficient.
Guardrails do limit your freedom, like the freedom to drive your car off a cliff...

 

[Herdfan]

I realize I’m dreaming about a better humanity, but at our core we are selfish. This is why I’ve stated that in an advanced society, the annual income/wealth accumulation of a human being should be capped at $1M. I don’t care how smart you are, what great idea you have, if you can’t live a decent life on that kind of income, there is something fundamentally wrong with you. And the rest of society could benefit would be more stable by having more options to live good lives.

I have a few thoughts about this.

When I was growing up, my dream was to play Major League Baseball. Never made, but got closer than many. Anyway, in the late 70's Nolan Ryan became the first player to earn $1M a year. My dad thought this was insane and that no one was worth that. I told him I was glad he wasn't in charge because I planned to make that much or more. . Also, if they aren't paying it to players, the owners are just keeping it.

Second, when I was in business school, we were doing a case study on GE. I think everyone did a case study on GE at the time. But there was this one girl who thought it was ridiculous that Jack Welch made what he made and that the employees should simply be paid more. The internet was just becoming a thing so financial data on companies was fairly easy to get. So I got it and while I don't remember the exact numbers, it was something like if Welch got paid zero, each employee would get like $50. And if you included the entire executive suite, it was something like $90. She still may be stunned. .

Third, so someone makes $20M. They decide to build a $10M house. Extravagant sure, but in building that $10M house, there are workers that get paid, suppliers that get paid who then pay their employees, and so on. He is not just putting money in a hole and then a house pops out. People make a lot of money off rich people and use it too support their families. That's not to say some don't take advantage of it. They do, but that not because of the system. All systems have this, just that capitalism allows regular people to work their way into wealth.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Third, so someone makes $20M. They decide to build a $10M house. Extravagant sure, but in building that $10M house, there are workers that get paid, suppliers that get paid who then pay their employees, and so on. He is not just putting money in a hole and then a house pops out. People make a lot of money off rich people and use it too support their families. That's not to say some don't take advantage of it. They do, but that not because of the system. All systems have this, just that capitalism allows regular people to work their way into wealth.

I agree with this basic premise, but there’s a small percentage of people at the top sitting on trillions of dollars that isn’t doing shit for anybody. There was an article a year or 2 ago talking about their recent favorite pastime of finding the perfect spot on earth to build bunker resorts for themselves so they can ride out the rest of us killing each other over the damage their wealth hoarding and screwing people over has caused. This includes a lively debate on slave labor and what to do to keep them in check.

I know you have at least one kid and I think you will quickly learn, if you haven't already, that they are going to get a lot less for their hard work than you did. I have faith that you raised them to be a hard worker.

 

[Herdfan]

I agree with this basic premise, but there’s a small percentage of people at the top sitting on trillions of dollars that isn’t doing shit for anybody

Two of the richest men in America, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett also plan to give their wealth away.

I know you have at least one kid and I think you will quickly learn, if you haven't already, that they are going to get a lot less for their hard work than you did. I have faith that you raised them to be a hard worker.

Actually she makes way more 2 years out of college than I did. Even adjusted for inflation. . And she works for a half billionaire.

She is a hard worker unlike many of her peers. So thanks!

The rich can build all the bunkers they want. I don't want to live in a post apocalyptic world no matter what.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Actually she makes way more 2 years out of college than I did. Even adjusted for inflation. . And she works for a half billionaire.

That's unfortunate for the narrative I aimed for there.

 

[Herdfan]

That's unfortunate for the narrative I aimed for there.

Well, she worked a lot harder in college than I did.........

 

[Nycturne]

I agree with this basic premise, but there’s a small percentage of people at the top sitting on trillions of dollars that isn’t doing shit for anybody.

And that small percentage is holding onto a larger share of the wealth over time, while the percentage held by the lower 90% shrinks. Wages since the 80s have gone from where the top gets ~30x the average worker, to over 300x. And tax cuts meant to enable "trickle down" policies like the 2017 tax cuts (the idea that cutting the corporate rates would increase wages) did eff all to help wages and instead either went into the company coffers or executive wallets. This inequality is key to why we have such a "strong" economy that isn't actually being felt by the public at large.

The wealth being generated today isn't making it to those whose hard work helped generate it, because it's increasingly being concentrated at the top. At levels not seen since the Great Depression. That concentration reduces economic activity.

That said, while spending 10mil on a house is economic activity, that spending also will benefit other wealthy persons more than anyone else due to the above issues, in aggregate. If you can address wealth inequality, you get more people who are comfortable enough to save and spend, and more economic activity overall which can support more jobs.

Two of the richest men in America, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett also plan to give their wealth away.

Into trusts. And those trusts are directed to spend it a specific way, on specific projects/efforts. When they die.

As someone who complains that we keep spending money on others before ourselves, shouldn't the idea that these two are basically going to pour this money into the global south when they die bother you a bit? That the wealth they accumulated through US policies will not return to those communities that helped them build it?

 

[Yoused]

The wealth being generated today isn't making it to those whose hard work helped generate it, because it's increasingly being concentrated at the top. At levels not seen since the Great Depression. That concentration reduces economic activity.

Reminds me of when Frankie was faced with a huge budget deficit because he had a bunch of programs to help the country work its way out of it economic caastrophe. He erased the deficit by imposing a 0.5% tax on financial instrument trades.

Taxing trading has a couple of advantages. You basically have to tax the gross value of the trade, so the guy who loses money on the trade cannot evade the tax. But, more importantly, it throttles the market, reducing the kind of massive fad-driven capital surges that drive instability. And, given that there are companies running computers that make big trades hundreds of times a second to reap profits on the statisical noise of instrument prices, a trading tax would pay off in fairly short order.

 

[AG_PhamD]

I find it difficult to follow this conversation. We just had an entire legal trial involving hundreds of people and legal experts, where this issue was dissected and discussed into the smallest detail. The trial ended with a criminal conviction by an impartial, independently selected jury on every single charge. Are you claiming that the judge, the prosecution, and the jury did not understand the basic legal issue?

I would argue the “basic legal issue” was pretty convoluted and the prosecution had to stretch the law to have a case. There were and are quite a number of leading experts and academics who did not agree with the basis of the case.

I loathe this idea that a verdict cannot be fairly challenged and that not accepting the verdict is basically immoral or unreasonable. There is a reason appellate courts exist and it’s part of having a just legal system. Imagine all the audacity of wrongly convicted people to challenge their guilty verdict!

There’s plenty of potential avenues to appeal this case including but not limited to;

- The fundamental legal theory used to prosecute​

- The unnecessary inclusion of Daniel’s salacious/prejudicial commentary (this is how Harvey Weinstein got his own NY case overturned literally weeks ago). I’m not sure I’ve heard any legal expert who didn’t think this was an issue.​

- The court’s effective blocking of expert witness testimony favorable to Trump​

- The instruction that jurors need not agree on the crime/“unlawful means”- how does uphold the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”?​

- The judges impartiality (ie illegal donations, whatever the argument is about daughter’s job)​

- Whether Manhattan was an appropriate venue given 87% voted for Biden​

(I’m not saying all of these have merit or one alone is enough to overturn the verdict- but there’s a lot here)​

Trump has every right to appeal this case as he should, as should anyone who is convicted.

Did you buy the gold shoes?

YES, I ACTUALLY BOUGHT ALL OF THEM!

I’ve made repeated comments about how I feel about Trump. Just because I think this “hush money” case is incredibly flimsy and perhaps more importantly, very poorly executed, doesn’t mean I think he’s not guilty of other crimes or I’m going to vote for him.

Seriously, people wonder why this country is so partisan. It’s this pathological dichotomous, black and white thinking. There’s this manifestation of borderline personality disorder on a both an individual and political-societal level. People are either worshiped idols or are arch enemies. If the former, they can do no wrong, if the latter, everything they do is wrong. Do you realize how unhealthy this is?

When you and others make disingenuous interpretations in regards to my beliefs, contradictory and ignorant to my statements am I to conclude
1) A reading comprehension issue
2) A personal political ideology so rigid and extreme that any nuance is regarded as opposition
3) You’re so bored of everyone having virtually the same opinion in a “political discussion” that you have a create the opposition you want to engage despite not existing.

Or should I assume you subscribe to the conspiracy theory/delusion that I’m actually a pro-Trump operative pretending to be opposed to Trump, seeking to manipulate the minds of 10 primarily left leaning people on an obscure web forum. Makes total sense.

I have been told I must Pro-Trump through because I am not critical enough of him… my opposition to voting for him, my belief he is likely guilty of certain crimes, my concern he is a dangerous person/leader… evidently is insufficient.

Do you realize how insane this type of thinking is? That’s like saying you’ve only made a few posts promoting LGBT rights/equality- you must be a homophobe!

I was under the impression this was a “political discussion” thread, not one to virtual signaling how much we dislike Trump. Perpetual agreement isn’t an interesting discussion nor is at all useful.

 

[AG_PhamD]

Collectively I think these cases are about he destroyed the mental health of the nation whether you are a supporter or hater.

As someone in the psychiatric field, I feel compelled to comment on the notion that anyone is responsible for “destroying” one’s mental health, let alone the nation. And I’m discussing this in a purely clinical sense (I don’t disagree Trump is an extremely divisive figure and the nation’s collective mental health is suffering severely).

Individuals can certainly be detrimental to one’s mental health- in severe cases of abuse indeed can be horrifically destructive, but that’s a totally different situation. But ultimately it is the individual (the “victim” in cases of actual abuse and trauma) who must take responsibility for their mental health.

I don’t think I can emphasize this concept enough. You may not be responsible for what’s happened to you, but you’re responsible for how you choose to deal with it- For those who actually want to recover.

 

[AG_PhamD]

Yes, there are good jobs, that pay well, that require skill. I’m not rich, but I’m comfortable. I have less than a million in the bank, but am very fortunate to have a pension that pays well. I was one of the last pilots to get a full pension, before big business decided that employees don’t deserve pensions. The 401ks that replace them are not nearly as good. Capitalism at it‘s best.

I was fortunate to be white, born into a middle class family who could afford to send me to college, which got me into my flying slot, although that was an iffy proposition, and it worked out because I was determined to make it work. So I put out effort, and was in a position to take advantage of the opportunities,

My comment about Capitalism, the accumulation of capital still stands. If we had a bunch of people who believed in highly regulated Capitalism, and spreading the wealth, and an over all healthier society, there would be no stopping us. But look at small enterprise business plans. Without exception they're built on slave wages, with the owners living the good life, while the employess scrape by.

I realize I’m dreaming about a better humanity, but at our core we are selfish. This is why I’ve stated that in an advanced society, the annual income/wealth accumulation of a human being should be capped at $1M. I don’t care how smart you are, what great idea you have, if you can’t live a decent life on that kind of income, there is something fundamentally wrong with you. And the rest of society could benefit would be more stable by having more options to live good lives.

There’s a sucker born every minute
We could talk about MAGA, but I won’t get into a big debate about it. These people are what would have been populists, liberals, working class looking for a better life, but it can be argued the liberals could not save them, and Capitalism ensured the liberals would fail, millions of exported good paying jobs for example, hence based on dissapointment, and perceived good deals for “others” less worthy citizens (minorities, women, LGBT), MAGA broke bad, and they now look to a criminal as their savior to tear down the system, and somehow delusionally, think he cares about them and they will end up with better lives at the expense of others, with the fascists eliminating those “others”, maybe send them off to work camps after the civil war.

The irony is they don’t ever think of themselves as others, but privileged (white privaledged) and as the big wheel turns this could easily change and surprise them. But they have either not thought about this realistically or like living their fantasies believing that a malignant, incompetent, corrupt, lawless, frequently more incoherent stand up comedian, will improve their lives. Putin is a riot! Maybe living in Russia West is not so bad.

I don’t think this would work. If there’s a $1m cap, the ultra wealthy would either move their business abroad (and surely other countries would welcome such moves) or they would structure their wealth by other means. Besides, it’s capital gains that’s far more relevant in building wealth than income like one’s salary.

There’s undoubtedly an issue with the increasingly wealth concentration in our country, but the cost of living inflation I see as the most relevant- housing market being the most significant.

I guess my question is, let’s say I own a company, offer value to my customers, pay all my employees a well above average and living wage, and can afford to pay myself $5m/year but only pay myself $1m…. It’s not like that $4m will necessarily benefit others in society. Depending on what I do with it it may not be taxed at all or taxed less than had I paid myself.

This is not a right or left issue. So long as politicians are beholden to wealthy donors and large corporations (and usually politicians tend to be far wealthier than their salary would predict), the loopholes and incentives that benefit the ultra wealthy and large corporations will continue.

 

[MEJHarrison]

I would argue the “basic legal issue” was pretty convoluted and the prosecution had to stretch the law to have a case. There were and are quite a number of leading experts and academics who did not agree with the basis of the case.

Soooo.... Should we go with innocent until proven guilty a second time? Innocent until the Supreme Court rules against him? Or just cut to the chase and go with innocent period and everyone else is wrong regardless till the end of time? Do we go around declaring murderers and rapists innocent just because they're not had the opportunity to play out the appeal game? No, we do not do that. We don't even do that when their innocence is obvious to everyone.

The fact is he lost. He's a convicted felon at this point. By definition. He's even met with a parole officer. Those are the facts. Now the burden is on him to prove he received an unfair trial. If there were irregularities in his case, then he's free to appeal. And it's a certainty he will. But let's be clear here that it's not an innocent man appealing, but a convicted felon. Innocent people don't appeal because they've already been found not guilty. It's possible he might get that title removed in the appeal process, but that doesn't change the facts of the situation at this moment in time.

You seem to be placing a lot of faith in academics and experts who already failed badly with their predictions. If you want to keep listening to them knock yourself out. I guess as long as people are buying what they're selling, they'll keep finding "experts" to tell them what they want to hear. And I'm quite sure they'll continue to do so all the way to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, here in the real world, he's not only guilty but guilty on ALL 34 counts.

It's possible it all gets overturned down the road. But at this point in time, that's an unknown. If you choose to believe in that future, more power to you. I'm going with what the jury decided. And the judge. And the prosecution, the grand jury and all the little people who turned some rumors into a winning case. Neither of us knows how this will turn out. But I do know what we have today. Which by all appearances is a lying, cheating business man that the law finally caught up to.

 

[Huntn]

I don’t think this would work. If there’s a $1m cap, the ultra wealthy would either move their business abroad (and surely other countries would welcome such moves) or they would structure their wealth by other means. Besides, it’s capital gains that’s far more relevant in building wealth than income like one’s salary.

There’s undoubtedly an issue with the increasingly wealth concentration in our country, but the cost of living inflation I see as the most relevant- housing market being the most significant.

I guess my question is, let’s say I own a company, offer value to my customers, pay all my employees a well above average and living wage, and can afford to pay myself $5m/year but only pay myself $1m…. It’s not like that $4m will necessarily benefit others in society. Depending on what I do with it it may not be taxed at all or taxed less than had I paid myself.

This is not a right or left issue. So long as politicians are beholden to wealthy donors and large corporations (and usually politicians tend to be far wealthier than their salary would predict), the loopholes and incentives that benefit the ultra wealthy and large corporations will continue.

This is a philosophical, not a practical discussion. There has to be a path from A to B and the only way a path might form is with a general breakdown to destroy current wealth strongholds. High taxes, wealth recouped, individual wealth capped. Corruption can’t be allowed. Those with large amounts of wealth won’t voluntarily give it up. It’s up to the rest to take control, ideally via Democratic means. I’m a pessimist about this working out. .

We’ve got a climate crisis in the works for 40 years, yet we are locked into our economies. We could fix it, but don’t have the conviction because of our economies. In essence “ that’s too hard”. it will take a serious breakdown, and mass deaths, and then the survivors will fight among themselves, and just maybe a consensus will be found among the 10,000 humans left, but maybe that’s too many.

 

[cbum]

I would argue the “basic legal issue” was pretty convoluted and the prosecution had to stretch the law to have a case.

Name one thing in T's world that isn't mind-bogglingly convoluted and backwards.

And don't forget what Capone was ultimately convicted for...

 

[Roller]

I would argue the “basic legal issue” was pretty convoluted and the prosecution had to stretch the law to have a case. There were and are quite a number of leading experts and academics who did not agree with the basis of the case.

I loathe this idea that a verdict cannot be fairly challenged and that not accepting the verdict is basically immoral or unreasonable. There is a reason appellate courts exist and it’s part of having a just legal system. Imagine all the audacity of wrongly convicted people to challenge their guilty verdict!

There’s plenty of potential avenues to appeal this case including but not limited to;

- The fundamental legal theory used to prosecute​

- The unnecessary inclusion of Daniel’s salacious/prejudicial commentary (this is how Harvey Weinstein got his own NY case overturned literally weeks ago). I’m not sure I’ve heard any legal expert who didn’t think this was an issue.​

- The court’s effective blocking of expert witness testimony favorable to Trump​

- The instruction that jurors need not agree on the crime/“unlawful means”- how does uphold the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”?​

- The judges impartiality (ie illegal donations, whatever the argument is about daughter’s job)​

- Whether Manhattan was an appropriate venue given 87% voted for Biden​

(I’m not saying all of these have merit or one alone is enough to overturn the verdict- but there’s a lot here)​

Trump has every right to appeal this case as he should, as should anyone who is convicted.

YES, I ACTUALLY BOUGHT ALL OF THEM!

I’ve made repeated comments about how I feel about Trump. Just because I think this “hush money” case is incredibly flimsy and perhaps more importantly, very poorly executed, doesn’t mean I think he’s not guilty of other crimes or I’m going to vote for him.

Seriously, people wonder why this country is so partisan. It’s this pathological dichotomous, black and white thinking. There’s this manifestation of borderline personality disorder on a both an individual and political-societal level. People are either worshiped idols or are arch enemies. If the former, they can do no wrong, if the latter, everything they do is wrong. Do you realize how unhealthy this is?

When you and others make disingenuous interpretations in regards to my beliefs, contradictory and ignorant to my statements am I to conclude
1) A reading comprehension issue
2) A personal political ideology so rigid and extreme that any nuance is regarded as opposition
3) You’re so bored of everyone having virtually the same opinion in a “political discussion” that you have a create the opposition you want to engage despite not existing.

Or should I assume you subscribe to the conspiracy theory/delusion that I’m actually a pro-Trump operative pretending to be opposed to Trump, seeking to manipulate the minds of 10 primarily left leaning people on an obscure web forum. Makes total sense.

I have been told I must Pro-Trump through because I am not critical enough of him… my opposition to voting for him, my belief he is likely guilty of certain crimes, my concern he is a dangerous person/leader… evidently is insufficient.

Do you realize how insane this type of thinking is? That’s like saying you’ve only made a few posts promoting LGBT rights/equality- you must be a homophobe!

I was under the impression this was a “political discussion” thread, not one to virtual signaling how much we dislike Trump. Perpetual agreement isn’t an interesting discussion nor is at all useful.

Not to worry: Trump will have his appeal.

As for your stance on Trump, I can only speak for myself. But, yeah, I do think you're not critical enough of him, though I don't think you'd cast a vote his way. To turn around a common idiom, you praise him with faint damning. In past times, I'd have said your efforts to appear balanced were laudable and appropriate. But that's not where the country is now. We have a bona fide fascist who wants to be President, and Trump's myriad other glaring faults make him even more unsuitable compared to Biden. I won't recite them here, but how can anyone not condemn as manifestly unfit a person who has often denigrated the military he seeks to command?

The country is so polarized because Trump sets the tone and calls the shots on the Republican side, and his base supporters are fed a constant stream of lies. I applaud GOP members or former members who are willing to call out Trump and his enablers even if I don't agree with their policies, but their numbers are few. Consider what Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham said about Trump, only to return to positions of fealty.

 

[Edd]

To turn around a common idiom, you praise him with faint damning.

Boom. There’s a voter bloc not taking him seriously enough. He’s thoroughly incompetent, a sort of keystone fascist, but he’s malevolent so should be awarded no more power than he has already.

 

[Herdfan]

Boom. There’s a voter bloc not taking him seriously enough. He’s thoroughly incompetent, a sort of keystone fascist, but he’s malevolent so should be awarded no more power than he has already.

There is also a voting bloc who has no idea why he came to power. Nor do they seem to care.

I guess it is easier to just say "Trump voters are stupid" instead of trying to figure out what the other side did to make him appealing.

 

[Eric]

There is also a voting bloc who has no idea why he came to power. Nor do they seem to care.

I guess it is easier to just say "Trump voters are stupid" instead of trying to figure out what the other side did to make him appealing.

Wouldn't call them stupid, willfully ignorant hypocrites seems to be a better fit. Pro law enforcement, unless it's cops busting down doors to the Capital building on Jan 6. Pro law and order, unless Trump gets indicted, charged and convicted, so on.

The party of Reagan went tits up and was replaced by a far more radical party who seems more keen on placating a madman and kissing the ring than actually representing the people of this country.

But I digress, if the country wants 4 years of Trump taking revenge against his enemies while undergoing never ending trials then who am I to question them, I mean it's what's best for the country, right?

 

[Roller]

There is also a voting bloc who has no idea why he came to power. Nor do they seem to care.

I guess it is easier to just say "Trump voters are stupid" instead of trying to figure out what the other side did to make him appealing.

I knew many Trump voters in 2016, friends, co-workers, others. Although I thought Trump was unfit for a number of reasons, I understood why they chose him: he was a “populist businessman” who promised to upend Washington and get things done for people. And Clinton turned some folks off, though that didn’t prevent her from winning the popular vote.

By 2020, the warning signs were even stronger, and Biden won. But since then, it’s been a constant drumbeat that the election was stolen, that the insurrectionists were good people, and now, that anything but a Trump victory in 2024 will be illegitimate.

So what is it that we’re missing? What still makes Trump so appealing despite what he’s promised to do as an authoritarian?