Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 05:31 PM

Thanks Lighter.

One of the pitfalls I have noticed with non-compulsory voting is that a lot of people need to be motivated to go to the polls and make a choice but are dissuaded by either negative media coverage or social media campaigns, or by the difficulty of voting mid week for people who are not able to lose time at work (i.e. read between the lines, people who have lower incomes and less power in their workplaces). Our voting is on Saturdays and we have had postal pre-voting in place for decades.

In Oz, we always have one or the other of the two major parties in power, but the minor parties who have members elected tend to have a chance to keep the major parties a bit more honest and on track. That works especially well when the party in power is teetering on the brink, with a very small majority. They need the negotiating power of collaborating with minor parties then. (Although, having said that, we do have a couple of nutjob minor parties and most major parties would rather jump off a cliff than negotiate with them, IMHO.)

"..electoral college, its flaws are becoming ever more obvious. I doubt much will be done about it in the so-called "foreseeable" future.."

I'm guessing it's in the same "too-hard basket" as firearm reforms. :-D

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 04:31 PM

Helen, the two-party system wasn't legislated, it simply evolved. Third parties occasionally run candidates but usually lose. There were four parties/candidates running for president in 1860. Lincoln won, but almost two-thirds of voters voted against him. For many practical reasons, third party presidential candidates rarely generate much interest, though they can certainly influence the outcome of an election by drawing off voters from one (or both) of the others, sometimes predictably - which makes them dangerous if cynically financed by mega-donors to one of the other parties.

It would be nice if the federal government gave each candidate an equal sum of money to run on, while forbidding any other funds to be used. But Congress would never approve such a plan, because each party thinks it will gain a decisive edge by raising more money.

The 2010 Supreme Court decision "Citizens United v. FEC" now allows corporations and "political action committees" to donate unlimited funds to the candidates of their choice. Their reasoning was that campaign contributions are a form of free speech. The result, of course, is that mega-donors now influence the parties and candidates as never before, often giving huge amounts to both sides, so that no matter who wins, they'll still have plenty of influence. Nor must the parties reveal the specific sources of many such contributions.

Power in the U.S. isn't invested in one person (yet), though it's easy to think so, since the president gets credit and blame for everything that happens.

As for the electoral college, its flaws are becoming ever more obvious. I doubt much will be done about it in the so-called "foreseeable" future, however.

Compulsory voting doesn't appeal to me. It makes every fool who doesn't care and who would prefer to stay home is made cast a vote almost at random. There are enough fools voting already.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 01:31 PM

I'll say this diplomatically, but I prefer our compulsory voting with one vote for one person system here in Oz, and that we have more than two political parties, and that we do not invest power in one person as president, and that election of that one person doesn't depend on how much campaign money that person has to spend. Every federal electorate votes for the person who appears to be able to do the best for that area and who has to reside in that area to be eligible to run for office.

There, I've said it, sorry, but I promise I won't go on about it. :-)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 01:23 PM

You could have just said Lara is stupidly in charge.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 12:31 PM

That's it in a nutshell.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 02 Mar 24 - 02:56 AM

SRS, the reason I am confused is that "Trump plans [or seeks] to install at the RNC" certain people who are loyal to him, so planning to or seeking to do it implies it is not done yet, but the implication seems to be that it will happen, or that it has already happened,i.e. it is already a fait accompli.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 08:31 PM

Helen that second article describes the status of the party leadership right now, an meeting in Houston, TX early this month is where it will be hammered out.

Tonight on Washington Week with the Atlantic they speculated on how Trump will go back and forth from the courtroom to the campaign trail. He'll be very busy.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 07:48 PM

Speaking of Aussie PMs, Malcolm Turnbull was on US TV yesterdsay observing that Trump's deference to Putin is "creepy" and like some kind of weird hero worship. Trump is "in awe" of Vlad.

Turnbull also reported that all the leaders of allied nations he's met are highly concerned that America will soon be a "third great autocracy" after Russia and China.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 06:01 PM

Thanks for the info, SRS. I'm a bit confused. Is Trump still just proposing Lara Trump for the RNC or is she already there?

Another interesting thing on the Oz TV show was a brief, tantalising comment which implied that Trump could try to sell some of his NY assets to pay his legal obligations but then he's kind of caught between a rock and a hard place, presumably because the sale prices probably won't match the inflated prices he has been found guilty of creating. Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, I suspect.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 05:32 PM

He's already done it - he's proposing putting his daughter-in-law in the co-chair position. She knows nothing about fundraising or political strategy, and the committee is supposed to support all Republican candidate races that meet a certain threshold. That will go by the wayside.

Inside the GOP Fight Over Trump’s Mounting Legal Costs

Drafted by Henry Barbour, an RNC member from Mississippi, the measure comes as Trump marches closer to solidifying the Republican presidential nomination and seeks to install new loyalists to lead the organization. That includes his daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, who has previously said she was willing to funnel some of the group’s funds toward Trump’s multi-million-dollar stack of legal fees.

But after Barbour released his resolution over the weekend, both Lara Trump and the Trump campaign adamantly denied any such plans. The Republican National Committee, they say, will remain narrowly focused on Trump’s election and helping GOP candidates win up and down the ballot.

But the only "down-ballot" folks to see anything from the RNC will be the ones Trump approves.

Nikki Haley calls for RNC vote on resolution barring payment of Trump's legal fees
The former U.N. ambassador has been focusing in on Trump, his legal trouble and the potential general election consequences.

Trump co-campaign manager Chris LaCivita — whom Trump plans to install at the RNC along with other loyalists, including his daughter-in-law, following the resignation of longtime chair Ronna McDaniel — previously told reporters that the RNC would not be paying for Trump's legal fees, but Haley campaign officials have not trusted the statement.

Haley went on to question if the RNC would end up shifting support from down-ballot Republicans to a “legal slush fund.” . . . . RNC members will meet in Houston in early March to select a new chair and potentially vote on resolutions including two put forward by a Mississippi committee member, Henry Barbour. One focuses on slowing the RNC from coordinating with a presidential candidate until the candidate meets the delegate threshold to win the nomination. The other one would prohibit the committee from paying any candidate's legal fees.

RNC at 'high risk' of breaking the law by paying Trump's legal bills: expert

With the imminent departure of chair Ronna McDaniel and plans by the former president to load the leadership up with MAGA loyalists like his daughter-in-law Lara Trump, concerns have been raised by Republicans that the RNC would become another cash cow for the embattled ex-president while ignoring GOP officeholders going into the November election.

According to a report from Politico's Erica Orden, election finance experts are serving notice to the RNC to tread carefully when it comes to paying Trump's bills.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 05:11 PM

Is the RNC likely to let him walk all over them? And Brand Trump was also explained in that episode.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 04:59 PM

That's why he's trying to take over the RNC - so their dollars can pay his legal bills. They can't pay the penalty, but anything he can fob off on someone else is a win as far as the Donald is concerned. Brand Trump.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 03:24 PM

I watched an episode on Oz ABC TV last night called If You're Listening : Is Donald Trump Running Out Of Money?

That link is for the audio podcast but the If You're Listening - video page version could get uploaded soon. It's only a 15 minute show.

A couple of interesting points for me were that a graph shows that Biden's campaign funds are on the up and Trump's are way way down, and also that on top of his legally imposed penalties amounting to about half a billion dollars Trump's legal fees were approx $US50 million in 2023.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 01:44 PM

The State of Georgia hearing on the leadership of Fulton County DA Fani Willis is on right now - and the Trump folks stood there and repeated the same lies as if none of it (all of it!) had been debunked. That's what they've been talking about in relation to how Hitler came into power - tell a Big Lie and make it so bold and say it so often that people will start to believe it. It has also come up this week in interviews with Barbara McQuade in advance of the release of her book Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America

Trump's folks are trying to change the rules that the state set - what has to be proved to remove a prosecutor, instead suggesting that a hint of impropriety, without evidence, is enough to remove her. Trump will use this move every step of every trial if he gets away with it here.

From MSNBC: The Fani Willis courtroom drama was a distraction from the real crime
Defense attorneys failed to prove their claims of prosecutorial misconduct as they sought to help their clients avoid accountability.

Don’t be fooled. The drama televised from a Georgia courtroom into the homes of millions of Americans over the past few weeks is not a serious attempt to clear Donald Trump’s name. Instead, you should see it for what it is: another act of deflection by Trump and his enablers. . . . Under Georgia law, there are two ways a prosecuting attorney can be disqualified from a case: 1) a conflict of interest, or 2) forensic misconduct. The latter has not been alleged and Team Trump has done a terrible job of proving the former even exists. So why are we even here? Because Trump, his former chief of staff, a number of his attorneys and local officials attempted to undo his 2020 election loss in Georgia.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 10:49 AM

Illinois courts have also ruled that he was engaged in insurrection, pending appeal. Just 47 more stares to go

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 10:32 AM

Showing up on AP today (their links don't usually load more than a few days):

Texts show prosecutor’s ex-law partner gave info for effort to remove Fani Willis from election case

ATLANTA (AP) — Attorneys for Donald Trump and other defendants in the Georgia election interference case hoped that lawyer Terrence Bradley would provide key testimony in support of their effort to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis — and they had good reason for their optimism.

Over several months, Bradley had been in touch with Ashleigh Merchant, a lawyer for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman, according to hundreds of text messages produced by Merchant as evidence and obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday.

Through the texts, Bradley fed Merchant information and made suggestions to help her prove that Willis had dated Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor hired for the election case. As Wade’s former law partner and onetime divorce attorney, Bradley was well positioned to know things, and the texts seem to back that up.

But when he took the stand to testify under oath in mid-February, Bradley initially refused to answer most questions, asserting attorney-client privilege. On Tuesday, when the judge compelled him to testify after determining some of his communications with Wade weren’t privileged, he repeatedly said he didn’t know or couldn’t remember crucial details. CNN reported on the text messages Wednesday.

Merchant filed a motion Jan. 8 seeking to remove Willis and Wade and their offices from the election case and to toss out the indictment against Trump and 14 others. She alleged that the prosecutors had been romantically involved before Wade was hired in November 2021, and she said Willis paid Wade large sums, then improperly benefited from his earnings when he took her on vacations.

“I am nervous,” Merchant texted Bradley the day she filed her motion, adding, “This is huge.”

He responded with a string of encouraging messages: “You are huge,” “You will be fine,” “You are one of the best lawyers I know,” “Go be great.”

And later in the article:

The texts show Bradley confirming information for Merchant and suggesting records she should request or people she should subpoena. Though he sometimes seemed to want to make sure certain information couldn’t be traced to him, he said he was “ok with” being subpoenaed to testify.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 07:07 AM

I heard that story yesterday, moving the cash businesses to Florida. He is dealing with a Federal judge so that move may not stick. If Trump declares bankruptcy Florida protects more assets than most states, but probably not the businesses themselves. Trump Tower is at this point the red herring.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Mar 24 - 05:29 AM

While Trump gets the S.C. to take his B.S. claim that he is immune which is as absurd as declaring he is a banana, he has quietly moved his two main cash businesses out of N.Y. State and has hidden them in FL. to avoid payment to Jean Carroll and the fraud case. However, he couldn't move Trump Tower.

Moving and hiding his assets is against the judge's orders but I guess he thinks he is immune.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Feb 24 - 06:44 PM

The Supreme Court heard the Bush V Gore in a week.
They heard the Colorado ballot case in 30 days.
They have now taken 130 days to hear the Trump immunity case which should be enough to delay a trial or stop a trial before the election.

Trump wins no matter how the Court decides as late as the end of June.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Feb 24 - 05:55 PM

The Supreme Court is going to wade into this. They didn't accept the well-reasoned and well-written decision from the appellate court. The shit is getting deeper. This comes up on the same day that Trump's folks tried to get the court to accept about 15 cents on the dollar of his settlement costs. At least that judge told him "NO." Trump must come up with the full bond amount to cover the $454 million civil fraud trial judgment, appeals court judge rules

Associate Justice Anil Singh, however, lifted a ban on Trump’s ability to obtain loans from a New York bank, which could allow him to access the equity in his assets to back the full bond amount.

Singh denied Trump’s request to delay his obligation to post $454 million until a full appellate panel hears his motion to stay enforcement of that judgment until his appeals of the civil fraud ruling are over.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 28 Feb 24 - 02:43 PM

There have been numerous "October surprises" at the presidential level, but it only became a meme after 1980.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise

Now calculated "October surprises" are hardly a surprise.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Feb 24 - 01:44 PM

Helen's term sheepdogging can be applied to AI algorithm control of societal thinking.

I stumbled on this link https://sbstatesman.com/122912/opinions/can-ai-lead-to-the-spread-of-fascist-agendas/

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Feb 24 - 09:56 AM

I'M NOT INTERESTED IN WRITING AN EXPOSE'. However, the Republicans have engineered the Presidential election wins 3 times with crimes to my knowledge.

The Reagan campaign steered 40 million dollars to Iran to only release hostages to him. The October surprise.

Bush got the Supreme Court to elect him. The Florida surprise.

Trump tried a 3 pronged coup that failed. The January surprise the fake elector surprise and the Rasberger surprises. Trump tried to get the military to seize voting machines but failed.

Taking the long view is eye-opening compared to looking only at current events.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Feb 24 - 09:05 PM

Tonight on MSNBC someone was discussing the possibility of Don, Jr, getting the nod if his father is prevented from taking office while the race is still underway. [barf emoji]

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Feb 24 - 06:48 PM

If for any number of reasons Trump can not get nominated or run for PREZ who will get the nod? Mitch McConnel is available but is older than Biden. I picture Mitch frozen at the mike while a mechanical voice like Hawking drones on. All other contenders seem as unlikely.
Trump may think he will seek and not accept election results but he may not have a liars choice.

Biden might not be able to continue, then what? The masked candidate?
Believe it or not but nearly half of Americans do not want Trump or Biden.


Lucky Aussies.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 27 Feb 24 - 06:22 PM

Former Aussie Prime Minister who showed himself as a poor imitation of Trump, in my opinion, is leaving Parliament and will take up two new jobs which are based in the USA but he will be working from Australia. His farewell parliamentary speech was yesterday. I didn't bother watching it.

Scary!!

Questions raised after Scott Morrison’s new defence job revealed

"Mr Morrison will clock in alongside key former Trump figures, former secretary of state Mike Pompeo and ex-security advisor Robert O’Brien.

"Scott Morrison has come under fire for taking on two jobs in the US private defence sector after the former prime minister announced his exit from politics.

"After revealing plans to resign in February, Mr Morrison said he would be joining consulting firm American Global Strategies as non-executive vice chairman.

"He will also assume a strategic advisor role with AUKUS investor DYNE Maritime, alongside former US Secretary of State and ex-CIA director Mike Pompeo.

"The venture capital company invests in technologies related to the joint security agreement that was orchestrated under Mr Morrison’s leadership.

"Greens [political party] defence spokesman David Shoebridge said Mr Morrison’s swift move into the private defence sector was an example of why the public was cynical about politicians.

“'Morrison is leaving politics only to grab his very unfair share of the billions of dollars of public money that he has shovelled into AUKUS,' Senator Shoebridge said.


The rest of the article has some interesting views, which I tend to agree with.

Morrison aka ScoMo was a slippery character while in the role of PM and he'll still be slippery in his new roles.

Subject: RE: Trump droppings number II
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Feb 24 - 02:11 PM

Trump is proving his youthful powers by trying things he's never tried before. This week it was a salad.

His court thinks money is speech, corporations are people and Liberty is the freedom to take away rights, especially from women.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Feb 24 - 05:31 AM

I'm not sure if the interest clock starts the moment Trump appeals so maybe interest has already started.


Boy, I was totally wrong about Musk. I now think he falls on the side of madness, not genius. I would like to know why he is all in for Russia and is anti American democracy.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Feb 24 - 01:33 PM

After March 31 the interest is $87,000 a day.

Finding a billionaire or a collective of billionaires willing to risk cash on a bad penny will be difficult along with someone Trump can trust with the receivership of his property assets.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 26 Feb 24 - 01:15 PM

There is a page that is a live tracker of Trump's Debt. I set a timer for 1 minute and it looks like he's paying (right now) about $82 a minute on that debt. It adds up in a hurry.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Feb 24 - 06:41 PM

Looks like Season 1 and episode 3. Do you suppose Stephen Fry could play Trump if Blackadder came to Washington? (Only because Robbie Coltrane is gone. It would need to be a big lump of a guy to play him.)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 25 Feb 24 - 06:20 PM

Can someone remind me, please? --- did the Black Russian turn up in the first or second series of Black Adder?

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 24 - 08:02 AM

It's only natural that Trump is deeply envious of Putin's dictatorship. Trump is envious of the fantastic wealth of its oligarchs, the election fix is deeply entrenched, and Russia is in keeping with Trump's ideals on racism. I bet the US drinks more black russains in a day than there are actual Black Russians in Russia.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 06:16 PM

And don't forget malnutrition. All those fried foods and burgers. That might be his ultimate downfall.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:52 PM

The punchline from Don's RNC article:

And what have the Romneys gotten for their convenient pro-Trump obsequiousness? Their legacy left in rubble, ostracized from a Republican Party they helped to build.

As the saying goes, “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”

The media could learn from that also - if you go for the ratings because Trump says stupid things you just promote his brand, as stupid as it is.

For those needing a scorecard (or a court calendar) here is the Just Security site with all of the stats and dates. All week next week Mar-a-Lago stuff is up; the MAL abbreviation suits Trump and this case perfectly; from Dictionary.com: "a combining form meaning “bad,” “wrongful,” “ill,” occurring originally in loanwords from French (malapert); on this model, used in the formation of other words (malfunction; malcontent)."

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:15 PM

Nice one Helen! ;-)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:00 PM

BWM & DC, I'm guessing that if the cockwombles and henwombles are free range then they would be Wombling Free.

(The link is just in case the non-Brits and non-Aussies don't know what we're talking about. LOL)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 01:20 PM

Trump ousted RNC chairwoman because she was related to Mitt.
He replaced her with a Trump relation.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 01:20 PM

I think the big question re Nikki Haley is whether the Republicans would ever, ever, ever vote for a woman as president. I think she is assuming that they would consider her equal to a man and capable of anything a man could do and I would be very surprised if enough voters would turn out for her.


Very funny, DC!

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 12:24 PM

The South Carolina primary is today, and Haley says she's in it for the long run, even if Trump wins today. She can do the math and is hoping that she's the last woman standing when Trump is officially found guilty of a federal crime. Gotta give her credit for figuring that out, but she has been a Trump toady for too long to make her an acceptable candidate. Hell, at this point, Romney should run. He's a lot less crazy sounding now; in his campaign against Obama in 2012 he was rejected as a tool of the rich. At least he is a normal human being. And he'd fit as far as the age of the rest of them, he's a year younger than Trump. :)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 12:10 PM

LOL! Never thought of that, Doug! :-)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 09:36 AM

BWM, I don't actually know what a cockwomble is

Presumably, a cockwomble is a male womble, such as Uncle Bulgaria or Tobermory. Madame Cholet, by that reckoning, would be a henwomble.
;-)

DC

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 08:37 AM

Trump has already distanced himself from the IVF controversy.
Its a 20 year old concern for the religious right. They called the frozen cells snowflake babies and complained extra zygotes were being thrown out with the bathwater when clinics disposed of them.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 08:27 AM

My mistake: the Planet America show is broadcast on Wednesday nights here and the Planet America Fireside Chat show is Friday nights.

BWM, I don't actually know what a cockwomble is, but I can guess from the example you mentioned. LOL

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 08:16 AM

It’s a very strange phenomenon - Republican ‘Pro-lifers’ defending the rights of the unborn, even of the unfertilised egg, yet decidedly anti-life when it comes to defending the rights of actual, living, breathing children by controlling the guns than kill them in their classrooms.

What a bunch of cockwombles.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 07:42 AM

Donuel, I read your comment about the zygotes and embryos.

The only reason I knew why you were mentioning that is because on Wednesday on the Oz TV show called Planet America Fireside Chat there was a segment on the Alabama ruling.

One political comment on the show was that this ruling would alienate more voters, especially couples hoping to have successful outcomes with in vitro fertilisation (IVF) programmes. A consequence of preventing or limiting IVF would be to also limit the number of children being born, which would seem to be contrary to the intention of Republicans who want to limit abortions to encourage more children being born.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:34 AM

The next Trump coup will be done all by the House.

Step 1: Ensure a R majority in the House by not certifying certain DEM wins

Step 2: Challenge certain States in the Presidential election.

Step 3: MAKE SURE neither candidate has enough delegates to win and the Constitution says the House will decide the election.



The election deniers can simply not certify and achieve a Trump win.


THIS IS ONE OF THREE POSTS THAT WAS DELETED.

---

Stop straying off of the topic into esoteric stuff and they won't be deleted. ---mudelf

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:22 AM

The RNC says they have their own problems and don't want to pay Trump's legal debts. His Freedom PAC is saying they will. It looks like there will not be any transparency of that dark money.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 05:21 AM

He doesn't care about the legal opposition. It gives him publicity and a platform to play the victim. The big trouble is, and I expect to be told off for this, it seems to be working :-(

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 24 Feb 24 - 12:05 AM

This might be a bit confusing, but ...

I use a term "sheepdogging" in certain situations where someone is out of control (usually in work situations with a pushy person doing things s/he shouldn't be doing) and then another person begins to quietly, determinedly round her/him up, like smart, quietly clever sheepdogs rounding up a mob of sheep based on commands from a nearby human.

It may take a bit of running around by the dogs, but eventually the mob of sheep are doing what they are expected to do. The sheep may not even realise that they have been outwitted by dogs and humans. The dogs don't bark or make a fuss. They just get on with the job.

I've been thinking about that in relation to Trump and his legal adventures. Initially he might think he is in control of the situation, but little by little he is being herded into a place where he no longer has as much control as he expects and he will have to start doing what he is told.

Another way of looking at it is that the noose around Trump's neck - figuratively speaking - is softly tightening, little by little every day and he might think he'll get away with it all, but I think he underestimates his legal opponents.