[Politics] Donald Trump, US President Elect 2025

[Triggaaar]

She's a massive c*nt.

A woman who was prepared to marry Trump is a massive c*nt?

I'm shocked I tell you

 

[The Clamp]

Those who are going to vote for Trump will do so blindly and in the face of anything, no matter what, forever.


Those who aren’t going to vote for him, never will.

The rest is just bad theatre.

 

[sparkie]

Trump has now reached God-level immunity.

There is absolutely no crime that he could commit which will stop people voting for him.

It's as if there is a mass psychosis happening.

 

[Crawley Dingo]

Have you actually read it? Read some of the actions he and his campaign took. It's all documented in texts / emails / phonecalls / witness statements (from republicans) - not hearsay at all.

I did read the 13 comments. Claiming the election was rigged isn't a crime, after all Democrats were saying that in 2016.

If this really is a gotcha moment then why didn't Smith lead with it rather than a desperate last stand?

 

[US Seagull]

It is getting to the point that even any krompromat Putin has on him won't be bad enough.

Maybe at that point he can cast Putin aside and no longer do everything possible to keep the goblin sweet.

It does seem unlikely, with everything else he's done, that the revelation that he had a Russian hooker piss on him would be the final straw.

 

[Bodian]

I did read the 13 comments. Claiming the election was rigged isn't a crime, after all Democrats were saying that in 2016.

If this really is a gotcha moment then why didn't Smith lead with it rather than a desperate last stand?

No - read the full motion. Read how they treated each state's officials, then read how they tried to persuade Pence despite themselves admitting it would be illegal. It's nothing about 'saying it was rigged' it's about how they tried to deceive everyone without a shred of evidence that it was.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.252.0.pdf

Smith has led with it - it's what the Grand Jury was about. It's only now they have been able to make some of it public.

 

[Crawley Dingo]

No - read the full motion. Read how they treated each state's officials, then read how they tried to persuade Pence despite themselves admitting it would be illegal. It's nothing about 'saying it was rigged' it's about how they tried to deceive everyone without a shred of evidence that it was.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.252.0.pdf

Smith has led with it - it's what the Grand Jury was about. It's only now they have been able to make some of it public.

It is an accusation, not fact. Will the Democrat Judges keep the Cameras out of this trial like the others(Involving Trump) so nobody can see the details of what's going on?

 

[nicko31]

That is because you are consuming BS, I get it.

Thank you Crawley, you carry on

 

[nicko31]

Has she gone off the reservation?



There were some mutterings of "pro-life" people being a bit pissed off with Trump, especially when he seemed undecided on how he'd vote for the abortion issue (issue 4) on the Florida ballot this year. He said he thought six weeks (the current ban) was too harsh. He later said he'd vote NO on issue 4, which is to say against restoring abortion rights in Florida. I doubt they're going to be too happy with his wife being seemingly uncompromisingly pro-choice.

So is her position good or bad for Trump. Or will it make no difference?

 

[US Seagull]

So is her position good or bad for Trump. Or will it make no difference?

It'll probably not make a huge difference.

There are two schools of thought. One is that this would soften Don's perceived position on abortion and that might help him appeal to some undecided moderates. The other is that this will piss off the pro-lifers and some of them might stay home to "punish" Trump for not being sufficiently extreme. Will either of those groups be significant? Who knows.

Either way, Donald gives exactly zero shits about this issue. He only cares about which position will get him more votes.

 

[Bodian]

It is an accusation, not fact. Will the Democrat Judges keep the Cameras out of this trial like the others(Involving Trump) so nobody can see the details of what's going on?

If you can't be bothered to read it all - just read the evidence in relation to what he tried to do in Georgia. Pages 21-31. This is hardly an accusation - being backed up with tweets, transcripts and so on.

Even if you think he may have immunity because he was president, I really can't see how anyone who behaved in that fashion could seriously be considered to be a fit person to be president again. Even if you took away half of it, it still shows that he is underhand, manipulative, lying and scheming to bully people to do what they commendably refused to do (because it was wrong).

Why does this make him the best presidential candidate?

As to nobody seeing the details, it is Trump who has tried to keep this from being published.....

 

[Zeberdi]

I did read the 13 comments. Claiming the election was rigged isn't a crime, after all Democrats were saying that in 2016.

If this really is a gotcha moment then why didn't Smith lead with it rather than a desperate last stand?

Maybe rather than reading X, you could actually try reading straight from the actual Court filings (the latest which I posted in a link above) or if that’s too onerous, then reserve judgment.

In a nutshell:

• 6th February 2024 - An appeals court ruled that Mr Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution for acts committed while he was president and must stand trial for the charges brought in relation to the Jan 6 riots and election interference.

• Trump appealed the decision and the start of the trial was put on hold while Trump was given leave to appeal to SCOTUS

• July 1 2024 - SCOTUS held that ’under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts but there is no immunity for unofficial acts. (Pp. 5–43.)

• SCOTUS returned the judgment to Judge Chutkan after ruling there was no immunity for unofficial acts and Trump therefore had to stand trial for any criminal acts committed in acting outside of his executive powers as President.

• September 2024 - Jack Smith, after the SCOTUS ruling on immunity, proceeded with trial after months of delay - Smith filed his evidentiary argument that Trump committed crimes in attempting to cling to power when acting in an unofficial capacity not as President but as a Candidate attempting to win the Presidency.

• October 2024 - The evidentiary filing is unsealed and made public.

 

[lasvegan]

Jack Smith’s October Surprise

The special counsel had information he wanted to make public. But he bent important rules to do so.

nymag.com

Jack Smith is a POS hit man for the DOJ and should be disbarred, as should the judge.

 

[Triggaaar]

Trump has now reached God-level immunity.

There is absolutely no crime that he could commit which will stop people voting for him.

It's as if there is a mass psychosis happening.

And yet we'll have people posting here arguing that there's a legitimate reason to vote for him, and that the 2020 election was stolen etc

 

[lasvegan]

Yet there is still not one person on here with a legitimate reason for voting for Harris...a vacuous dullard.

 

[Zeberdi]

Yet there is still not one person on here with a legitimate reason for voting for Harris...a vacuous dullard.

To keep Trump out would be ‘legitimate’ enough for me because he is a Clear and Present danger.

Tactical voting has long been recognised as a legitimate way of exercising one’s franchise

 

[lasvegan]

To keep Trump out would be ‘legitimate’ enough for me because he is a Clear and Present danger.

Tactical voting has long been recognised as a legitimate way of exercising one’s franchise

What do you like about Kamala Harris?

 

[BadFish]

Yet there is still not one person on here with a legitimate reason for voting for Harris...a vacuous dullard.

The same number of people with a legitimate reason for voting for Trump.

Best go to goal difference and consider reasons not to vote for each of them.

 

[BadFish]

What do you like about Kamala Harris?

I like:
She is not a convicted felon
Not a sex offender
Has better mental faculties than her oppositon
Doesn't lie endlessly
Not a narcassist
Doesn't incite her followers to use violence to disrupt the democratic process.
Doesn't advocate for destroying the constitution.
Doesn't have a cult like, kool aid drinking following who have guns and limited brain cells.
She isn't Trump.

 

[BadFish]

And yet we'll have people posting here arguing that there's a legitimate reason to vote for him, and that the 2020 election was stolen etc

It's been interesting* watching one of them fall down the rabbit hole on NSC.

Went from 'Trump is a better option than Bide. But I don't really like him' to fill on kool aide drinking nutter spewing the 'facts' and diversions he is being fed, all in the space of a few months.

*interesting isn't really the word for it