On CNN, Trump was as delusional and deceitful as he ever has been...maybe even more so.

[xocetaceans]

It has, yet once again, been made quite clear that he belongs in a jail cell for life and nowhere near the Oval Office.

Perhaps, CNN gave the world the gift of a reminder (not that many actually needed such a reminder) that Trump is an absolute threat to the US and needs to be stopped cold legally or at the ballot box if that orange moron happens to make it that far.

I hope that CNN has seen enough and no longer platforms that insurrectionist traitor or any of his surrogates and that the DOJ gets off its collective ass and does something significant for a change. It's not as if Trump's crimes are so breathtakingly subtle or complex that he cannot be charged. For one, Trump openly fomented an insurrection, after all.

(It's hard to believe that Santos actually has been charged before Trump. I'll bet Santos thought he had at least until the middle of 2025 to skate.)

And again Trump did the very same thing in that town hall interview as he did the entire year before the 2020 election: he kept pushing the idea that if he does not win an election, the election has been rigged. That's right: he is preparing Insurrection 2.0, in case all of you at the DOJ missed it.

Also, for those of you in law enforcement who care about the country and each other, Trump painted a large target (one clearly visible to all our precious stochastic terrorists on the right wing) on that officer who defended the Capitol by shooting and killing Ashli Babbitt: she is neither a patriot nor a victim. She chose to invade the Capitol and found out the hard way that certain actions are not allowed. Fuck any delusional morons who hold her up as a hero of any sort.

So, yes, Trump is a threat to the US. Hopefully, everyone is again well aware of that fact.

(Lastly, E. Jean Carroll should sue Trump again for his further defamation of her during the town hall. Trump seems to have been too stupid to learn his lesson the first time.)

[Aussie105]

1. Trump lives in his own little world.

And there is no hope for him ever connecting with reality.

He will always blame others for his shortcomings, and he will always rain derision on his critics.

Why he gets the airtime he does currently is beyond me.

Not like his presidency was marked with successes and glory. Far from it.

I guess Santos and Trump could share the same cell and spend endless hours telling each other all their imagined life successes.

The story Trump tells of watching the Twin Towers come down and Santos reliving the story of how his mother died there should while away a few hours.

Then there is the time both were astronauts flying to Mars or fighting in the Revolutionary War against the British . . . endless stories to tell!

EDIT: Most of us around the world probably have older relatives who have a certain illogical slant on reality.

But we don't make them Presidents or political representatives.

What is wrong with you, America?

[bdamomma]

5. Your last question

is what the world would like to know. Too many guns, hatred and division throw in greed and corruption.

The threat is from within, domestic terrorists.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

7. He is a Malignant Narcissist

They live in their own world where they are the top of the food chain and center of the Universe....with zero concern for anyone else's interests or needs. In fact they are unable to understand that what they want might be detrimental to others needs.... they cannot even comprehend that others do have needs much less figure out what those are

[Kablooie]

2. And once again Republicans will all follow him over the cliff.

They have already been attacking his conviction and still act as if he is got almighty on earth.

It is histories biggest mystery as to why they so willingly fall for his childish, transparent tantrums.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. "It's hard to believe that Santos actually has been charged before Trump"

???



(45 was charged with almost 3 times as many "financial" crimes as Santos - 34 vs 13)

Santos was not (as far as we know) involved in January 6 crimes nor mishandling of classified documents, if that (as federal vs state) is the only criteria for "charges" to be considered "valid". If that is the case, then whatever AG Fani Willis is doing in GA for state charges related to January 6/election tampering, would be "invalid", and could not to be counted as "charges".

[xocetaceans]

8. State charges vs. federal charges.... "Valid(ity)" is your term. My point had to do with what the..

...DOJ seems to be able to do. They have been distinctly non-glacial with respect to Santos, whereas it's still an ice age with respect to Trump (1/6 is a long time ago relative to Santos' alleged wrong-doing). Perhaps that explains my point: it does explain the comparison.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. And there is no "glacial pace" by DOJ.

There are at least 3 different grand juries going (fake electors, election/other fundraising, classified documents), all of them with witnesses and/or defendants, literally going to federal court to block the requests after each attempt to get evidence and testimony, and appealing, in many cases, right up to the SCOTUS.

I don't understand why people forget that most people DON'T have the time or resources to battle in the courts like we are seeing 45 and his criminal henchman have been doing.

Santos didn't have 45's "Loose Cannon" to slow things down by demanding a "Special Master" and other bullshit that wasted months of time associated with the classified documents issue before higher courts finally shut that shit down.

Certainly Santos was aware of the investigations going on behind the scenes and that there was a grand jury that had been convened that resulted in these charges (NOT DOJ "personally" ).

Rep. George Santos has been criminally charged. Here's what prosecutors say he did.

If convicted, George Santos could face up to 20 years in prison.
By Nadine El-Bawab
May 10, 2023, 3:55 PM

A federal grand jury has indicted Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., on 13 counts centering around three alleged schemes, according to court documents. The congressman, who was sworn into office in January, was taken into custody Wednesday morning on Long Island.

(snip)

https://abcnews.go.com/US/rep-george-santos-criminally-charged-prosecutors/story?id=99227350

Santos isn't a mob boss like 45, with literally dozens and dozens of tentacles extending far and wide for longer than Santos has been alive. In fact, 3 years after Santos was born, 45 had declared bankruptcy less than a year after buying the Taj Mahal Hotel in Atlantic City -

Chapter 11 For Taj Mahal

By Reuters

July 18, 1991


Donald J. Trump's Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in a prearranged deal with creditors to reduce its $675 million "junk bond" debt.

Under the debt reorganization plan, filed Tuesday in Camden, N.J., Mr. Trump will give up half his ownership in the casino in exchange for lower interest rates on its junk bonds.

The plan also calls for a reduction in the interest rate on the casino's first-mortgage bonds from 14 percent to 11.35 percent, with some interest paid in additional bonds instead of cash.

The $1 billion Taj Mahal, which opened last year, is the largest of Mr. Trump's three casinos in Atlantic City. It was his first Chapter 11 filing.

(snip)

https://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/18/business/chapter-11-for-taj-mahal.html

So he has been at this for a long long time and I blame the state of NY for looking the other way for over 50 years.

Santos has been charged with similar to what Michael Cohen was federally charged for - financial/business type crimes, which are easier to nail down thanks to what is humorously dubbed as "having 'the receipts'".

If anything, there is a huge difference to note where state charges can't be "pardoned" federally.

[xocetaceans]

11. Results count, not endless preparations for results.

The longer Trump exists in the public space and is still able to be seen as a legitimate politician instead of merely as an inmate in some federal prison, the more normalized his past actions become.

If the US collectively wishes not to normalize the Trumpean idea that every lost election has been rigged and thus justifies an insurrection by the loser, it would be best to take down Trump as soon as possible - not several years after the fact.

I don't disagree with a lot of your points. I just believe that there is a huge political cost to allowing this to drag on as it has. Trump's 1/6 insurrection should have been the end of him politically and should have swiftly been the end of any claim which he had to freedom. (If Trump has truly outmatched or is close to outmatching the DOJ, that is an argument against allowing billionaires/multi-millionaires to exist, for they should not exist above the law.)

As it is now, with the DOJ failing, as of yet, to charge him, to put him on trial and to imprison him for his insurrection, his base will continue believing that this is all merely a "political witch hunt" etc. The closer the 2024 election approaches, the more fervently his base will believe exactly that the whole process is just "fake news" etc.

It's not wise to pretend that an insurrection 2.0 could not succeed. Clearly, nearly all the GOP politicians have now decided that it is fine tacitly to endorse Trump's first attempt at insurrection. How hard do you think it will be to get them to accept insurrection 2.0, especially if it is more successful when Trump tries it again? Don't kid yourself that the GOP will suddenly stand up and patriotically support the US Constitution. That river was already crossed on 1/6/21.

[BumRushDaShow]

13. I absolutely don't disagree

that he belongs in prison and should have been there a long long time ago.

There should never be an assumption that those of us who point out and even link to things like court proceedings that are bogging stuff down, means somehow we don't want the asshole charged NOW!

The problem basically comes down to carrying out due process AND satisfy a defendant's demand for "habeas corpus" - notably for those who formed his human shield. But once they are dispensed with, he's next. And to get those folks, it has required an epic set of court battles.

No one wants DOJ to go through all this and fuck up like Bill Barr-appointed Special Counsel John Durham, who ended up with 2 acquittals in 2 trials looking for non-existent bullshit regarding the Russia election meddling probe. We knew what he was tasked to do was bullshit and thankfully he failed not only due to incompetence but because there was "no there there".

But in this case, we know there are lots of "theres there", but they have to prove them "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the criteria for criminal trials (not just "a preponderance of the evidence", which is the test for civil trials).

Again, the DOJ doesn't "charge", the Grand Juries do (and the current ones are still in session hearing evidence and testimony as the courts throw out challenges to testifying by that top rung - including their continuing to try to assert idiocy like "Executive Privilege" ).

[xocetaceans]

14. As noted, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Nor do I believe that you do not want Trump...

...removed from the political playing field, as it were. And, yes, my statement regarding the DOJ "charging" greatly oversimplifies that process: so, I appreciate the clarifying corrective statement - for the record.

Let's just say that I hope that the DOJ and its procedures (as they currently stand) are up to the challenge that Trump et al present. If they aren't and we do see Insurrection 2.0, it will be fundamentally bad for the world, to put it mildly.

Either way, it's good to have allies like you.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. I appreciate the frustration

and years ago before I retired from federal government, I have had to deal with our local DOJ (providing evidence) as our agency, like most, are not "enforcement" but are "regulatory", where we had to rely on DOJ to file the paperwork for seizures and injunctions, etc. They even had a "template" that we would fill out and run through our own office of legal counsel, to forward to them to be finalized, and used in filings.

I have been trying to find a "standalone" of this summary graphic that Ari Melber has used -

Link to tweet

The Beat with Ari Melber 📺
@TheBeatWithAri
·
Follow
Donald Trump’s legal heat explained.
6:42 PM · May 4, 2023

I decided to just go on and do a screen shot). This is what is going on simultaneously (I think within the Jan. 6 probe, there are sub-probes including the fake electors and more recently, a fundraising/fraud investigation not separated out but apparently in process) -

[xocetaceans]

17. Thanks for that additional information. n/t

[Walleye]

4. The new definition of insanity is watching Trump over and over

And expecting him to be any different. Are they still waiting for the pivot to presidential?

[BlackSkimmer]

12. Lol, there are so many to whom I'd like to ask that question.

[2naSalit]

6. Can she also...

Sue cnn? If so, I hope she does.

[jcgoldie]

10. oooo

Collins: "Did you ever show those classified documents to anyone?"

Trump: Not really. I would have the right to by the way they were declassified."

Collins: "What do you mean not really?"

Trump: "Not that I can think of."

[Kid Berwyn]

16. SWF interviewer vs a pro-NAZI crowd and a 300 lb. Shitnozzle.

Transcript for Jack Smith, Esq. plus details for history:

COLLINS: If you are re-elected, are there any new gun restrictions that you would sign into law?

TRUMP: I would do numerous things. For instance, schools, we would harden, very – very much harden – and I also, I’m a very believer – I believe in teachers; I love teachers. I think they’re incredible, and they love the children – not quite like the parents, but they love the children, in many cases, almost as much.

Many of these teachers are soldiers, ex-soldiers, ex-policemen. They’re people that really understand weapons. And you don’t need – 5 percent of the teachers would be more than you could ever have if you’re going to hire security guards. But in addition to that, have security guards. You have to harden your entrances. You have to make schools safe.

And you can make other places safe. But it is a big mental health problem in this country more than anything else. And remember, we have 700 million guns – 700 million. Many people, if they don’t have a gun, they’re not going to be very safe. I mean, if they don’t have a gun – it gives them security. Now, you need them for entertainment; you need them for hunting; you need them for a lot of different things. But there are people that, if they didn’t have the privilege of having a gun in some form, they – many of them would not be alive today. You know, there’s a certain country that had a very strict policy on guns, very, very strict.

COLLINS: Which country?

TRUMP: Brazil. OK, Brazil, very strict. And the former president of Brazil – and the killing was incredible. They were walking into people’s homes and killing people. They had no protection. He said, “Go out and buy guns.” People went out and bought guns, and it went way down. The numbers went way down because they had security.

If you look at Chicago, Chicago has the singles toughest gun policies in the nation. They are so tough, you can’t breathe; New York, too, and other places also. All of those places are the worst and most dangerous places. So that’s not the answer.

COLLINS: So no new restrictions that you would sign if re-elected, Mr. President.

I want you to meet Julie Miles, a registered nurse from Merrimack. She’s a Republican who voted for you in 2020.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/politics/transcript-cnn-town-hall-trump/index.html

Thanks, pnwmom!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17907058