"The butt of global jokes": who might this be? (Talk Trump)

[L'Emmerdeur]

Is it just me, but don't complaints about a supposed 'perjury trap' make a mockery of rule 603 of the Federal Rules of Evidence? Aren't complainants basically implying that a citizen has a right to lie in court where they decide that questions are not germane to the proceedings at hand? Seems to me it's a variation on the blaggard's plea: I didn't do anything wrong, I just did something that was technically illegal.

Perjury trap doctrine is about protecting people from government over-reach; a perjury trap is a form of entrapment in that the testimony is elicited or compelled for no other purpose than attempting to obtain a perjured statement. The perjury trap defense is hardly ever successful because it's extremely rare that a prosecutor will bring somebody before a grand jury who is genuinely unable to provide any testimony that's relevant to the inquiry, especially when that person is or has been under investigation.

Again, there's no question that Dershowitz is perfectly well aware of these facts. It's hard to say at what point he made the decision to ignore ethical considerations in his advocacy for Trump but as far as I'm concerned, when it comes to Trump, nothing that Dershowitz says should be accepted as legitimate on its face.

[Joe]

It was the rush, to get the judge approved before Trump is impeached!

Republicans would normally be at least a bit choosy on who they pick to ban abortion forever.

Naw, there aren't enough votes in the Senate to convict him. He could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and be acquitted by this gang.

Well, unless he shot a Koch brother....

[Tero]

Trump not running?

I'm now beginning to understand what my friend was imagining when he said Trump wouldn't run again. And I think he may be right. Here's why.
He's running out of stooges
In a Hail Mary attempt to keep the Robert Mueller investigation at bay, he's appointed Matthew Whitaker to head up the Justice Department. But that is, even by Trump's own admission, temporary. No one person can keep the investigation from running its course. Democrats will see to that, and then some.
He trusts no one
He's reportedly preparing to fire Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Chief of Staff John Kelly, and first lady Melania Trump issued her own unusual call for deputy national security adviser Mira Ricardel to be fired. As Washington Post White House bureau chief Philip Rucker suggested on Wednesday, "There are not particularly the sort of close loyal friends that he feels he can confide in with any regularity at a deep emotional level."

The castle is crumbling from the inside, and Trump is feeling like a ruler under siege.

His base is shrinking
The midterm elections proved one thing: Trump's base is not as big as it once was. He's lost a considerable contingent in the suburbs, and he will not likely have the turnout he did in 2016 by 2020. Nor will he have as singularly horrible an opponent.
The 2020 elections are light years away by political standards. We know Trump's biggest brand is never running away from a fight, and in the end that might trump everything. Anything can happen — but little of that is likely to favor the president.

The next few months will be bloody and exhausting for all of us, but for the president they might just be too much to take.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... -2020.html

he can be charged and investigated and even impeached
the only case he will pullout is if it means financial ruin from dirt that comes out
kind of House of Cards stuff

[Animavore]

Still plenty of racist, scared-shitless, KKK, Nazi sympathisers out there. He will run again for office. The American people need to stop being complacent.

[Tero]

When I read that, I couldn’t help but to do a little fist pump in my pajamas. I’m sure you did the same. What about that foul sea of Trumpkins around the country? How do you think they felt when they found out that their Presidential Grand Dragon has actually been lying to them? Say whatever you want about how great and honest Trump is, but why would he repeatedly lie to congress about this Russian building? Why lie?

While Trump was pursuing a massive building contract in Russia he was lying about it to America PLUS he was pressuring legislation to go easy on Russia!!!!!!!! Treason is punishable by death!

This article only reiterates my article from yesterday, how Trump killed the republican party. Once Trump is carted off to prison, after humiliating every person who voted for him, come next election, they won’t be so eager to get into that voting booth.

https://medium.com/politicalhaze/trump- ... qD6DxVrLPY

Yeahbut her emails! Nasty woman!

[Animavore]

Trump supporters already look stupid. But the cowards will never admit it. They'd rather sacrifice their intellect by cleaving to conspiracy theory than admit wrong-doing. Ideas like self-awareness and personal responsibility are alien to them.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Once Trump is carted off to prison ...

[Tero]

Trump supporters already look stupid. But the cowards will never admit it. They'd rather sacrifice their intellect by cleaving to conspiracy theory than admit wrong-doing. Ideas like self-awareness and personal responsibility are alien to them.

"Yeah but black mothers on welfare! We're proud Americans working for $9 an hour!"

[Brian Peacock]

Trump supporters already look stupid. But the cowards will never admit it. They'd rather sacrifice their intellect by cleaving to conspiracy theory than admit wrong-doing. Ideas like self-awareness and personal responsibility are alien to them.

Ar least you're doing your bit to give them something to play for and to bolster their confidence in themselves and the righteousness of their cause.

[L'Emmerdeur]

In the clip, people can be heard laughing at Trump. I question whether this was the somewhat strange 'wandering off' thing that he does sometimes. In this case he might have been purposely snubbing the Argentine president, and looking the complete arse doing it. Or he could have ignored his handlers when they told him what was going on, or simply misunderstood. 'The world respects us again. Believe me.'

[Animavore]

Trump supporters already look stupid. But the cowards will never admit it. They'd rather sacrifice their intellect by cleaving to conspiracy theory than admit wrong-doing. Ideas like self-awareness and personal responsibility are alien to them.

Ar least you're doing your bit to give them something to play for and to bolster their confidence in themselves and the righteousness of their cause.

Ah yes! Trump supporters supporting Trump to "stick it" to people like me.

Shooting themselves in the foot.

[DRSB]

Have you guys looked at the President-Trump-Fans groups on FB? Wow, you may need mood-stabilizers or statins or serious Stoic meditation before you venture there!

[Tero]

Arresting Trump to testify to a grand jury
"Let's say that Donald Trump decides he doesn't want to give an interview with Mueller, but Mueller says 'Oh, but you will.' And he's subpoenaed to [be] interview[ed] [by] Robert Mueller. And Donald Trump simply says, 'I don't recognize that subpoena.' This is a president whose behavior is different as president of the United States. He doesn't follow convention. Who would force him to comply with the subpoena ordering him to do an interview with Robert Mueller?" Reid asked.

"It would be a federal court judge," former Watergate prosecutor Nick Akerman said.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... shals.html

[Tero]

Why do people keep saying Trump might not run for re-election ...
But it's equally hard to see someone like Trump simply stepping down without some kind of excuse. He seems to like being in charge too much, and giving up would be totally out of character, as has been written by CNN's Chris Cillizza in the past.
From Trump's repeated references to serving two terms and the official steps he's taken to move in that direction, it's hard to believe otherwise.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/23/politics ... index.html
Now these not running rumors are popping up again, pn TV, can't find any text

[Tero]

All Wikipedia articles have a TALK tab. In the TALK on Trump tower meeting we find this:

CNN's report on Cohen alleging Trump had prior knowledge
Is this topic worth including here?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/26/politics ... index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/28/politics ... index.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... er-meeting

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ae535adaad

It's important to note that one of CNN's anonymous sources - Cohen's lawyer Lanny Davis - outed himself as a source and walked back his assertions, saying "I should have done a much better job of speaking with more suspicion than certainty, and I regret my mistake" and now indicated that he simply sought to have journalists investigate the matter. However, it seems like CNN did exactly that, investigated the matter and found a second "primary source" to confirm the story before publishing.

To be clear, the second "primary source" did not confirm Trump's foreknowledge of the meeting, they only confirmed Cohen's willingness to testify about such foreknowledge (which was all the article alleged). Any number of reliable sources could back that up and it still be of questionable encyclopedic merit given that Cohen may not be a particularly reliable source himself. This all happened when Cohen was seeking a plea deal, so Cohen had an obvious incentive to have something to offer the FBI to try to secure a better deal. It sounds like Cohen was "leaking" his willingness to testify about this, presumably hoping for a plea deal that would include immunity for perjury due to his contradictory statements to congress. Then, as the Washington Post article notes, Davis had multiple weeks to backpedal after the article was published, but only did so after Cohen had pleaded guilty without any immunity, and the prospect of a better deal was therefore no longer on the table. At that point it stands to reason Cohen would have his lawyer backpedal to avoid adding lying to congress to his list of offenses. This all seems murky enough that I'm not entirely comfortable adding anything about it to the article. Thoughts?

HonorKnight (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the question and the sources. Good analysis. I agree it is too vague and too murky to say anything right now. What we have is that 1) an anonymous source claims that Cohen offered to say this, and 2) Cohen's attorney initially said this was something Cohen was willing to say (presumably as part of a proffer), but then backed down. Vague sourcing that Cohen has suggested he could say this. All too flimsy for an encyclopedia. When we reach the point that Cohen actually does say it, then we will have something worth reporting. --MelanieN (talk) 15:43, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, we kept it out of the CNN controversies article as I don’t think the claim that CNN didn’t perform due diligence has been shown. OTOH, I also don’t think it belongs here as so many folks in this soap opera keep shifting stories. O3000 (talk) 16:55, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Trump_Tower_meeting