The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[waitingtoconnect]

MAGA is not going to be able to offset Trump's unpopularity outside his base with those kinds of tricks. Especially with all the headwinds blowing against him. That may be their strategy, but it's a losing one. That's why some Republicans are in a panic about Trump being the clear frontrunner - they know he's going to get destroyed.

This is probably *way* off the mark. We have to keep in mind Trump didn't lose by the 7 million headline votes. Trump lost by 12K votes in Georgia, 12K votes in AZ, 34K votes in NV, and 20K votes in Wisconsin, Generally inside a percent in each and the margin of error in the polls. He came very close to winning a 2nd term.

And there's no evidence that a No Label or Green Party would torpedo Biden's chances.

Probably true but it'd inject a whole lot of uncertainty. The odds are that uncertainty probably helps Biden but we wouldn't know until the dust settles.

Sure, anything's technically possible, but you'd be an absolute fool to put money on Trump winning this election (if it was held today).

We have reasonably good data saying otherwise. You might hold in your heart of hearts that the 14% who were "undecided" will break more for Biden than Trump but that doesn't make statistical sense. Also note that at least one of those states above has made serious efforts to close the gap by purging rolls, changing voting rules, etc. In any case, all signs point that an election held now or next year would be a similar *coin flip*. It's just the math in the end.

I agree that this election should be a Democratic rout, if they can forgo their tradition of shooting their own feet off.

I don't get this. On what basis is there a chance of a rout? That idea flies in the face of the last several elections and all available data. The electorate is extremely polarized. That doesn't mean shift can't and won't happen but they are very dampened. We aren't seeing the sort of electoral coalition swings we saw in the 80s or 90s. The change is in the margins. That said, this is the one area I wish I was wrong on. I'm probably not but it'd be nice if people rejected MAGA. We unfortunately have plenty of evidence suggesting that won't happen.

Biden has a strong record on domestic legislation and foreign policy (despite some notable exceptions).

Unfortunately what you think is strong hasn't translated to the general public. Biden is simply very unpopular.

He can't overcome being old and appearing frail, but TFG is almost as old. The public doesn't want either of them, so that's a wash. I like the Dems' chances of holding the presidency and re-taking the House, although keeping the Senate is unlikely.

The handicap unfortunately more looks like this: the Presidency is coin flip, House is likely close to a coin flip, and the Senate is probably 80+% odds of flipping to the GOP. Maybe all the indictments and a possible conviction change that but we won't know that for some time yet.

The issue is the electoral college hasn’t been updated based on changing state populations. democrats could well win the election but not the college and it’s getting worse over time. It could well be Biden wins the popular vote by 7 to 10 million votes and still loses.

In 2000 and in 2016 democrats won the popular vote. Biden only narrowly won in 2020 as you have shown here very clearly.

Indeed a Democrat who leads 55-45 right now only has a three in four chance of winning the election. If it’s 52-48 difference it’s only a 2 in 3.

tragically the electorate is also split on racial grounds. If only white people voted Trump would win by a canter. Even in California and New England Trump would be competitive. This is why maga republicans want non white voters off the rolls.

[Kraken]

This from author James Fell made me chuckle:

“We Didn’t Start the Fire,” Indictment Version:

Tangerine Palpatine, unprecedented, obscene
Danger Yam, runs a scam, how far will he go?
Jaundiced Jesus doesn’t please us, Donald Grievous wants to seize us
Eric’s Dad, Orange Man Bad, sentient dildo

Cult belief, endless grief, Oompa Loompa in Chief
Proud boys, shrieking noise, Pence in effigy
Babbitt falls, Taserballs, shit smeared on the Capitol halls
Ultra rich, Putin’s bitch, lawyers need money

Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He incited riot and now he’s indicted
Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He’s not Jesus risen, gonna go to prison

[waitingtoconnect]

Everyone on this forum is going to the Trump Gulag once this is over haha.

[YellowKing]

Some guy in the neighborhood FB group finally called out the folks flying Trump banner in their garages and, as you might expect, a shit storm ensued. It was really depressing seeing these cultists defending the banners and claiming Trump was still President. I mean JFC I'm afraid to be driving on the same roads as these nutjobs.

[Unagi]

Look at the bright side. Those roads are not yet made of radioactive material.

[waitingtoconnect]

And when they are the local community will save massively on street lights.

[LordMortis]

Is there a highly-regarded Biden replacement who could crack even 45% approval nationally, especially after the right-wing media machine had a few months to go at them? I think we're just in an era where partisanship and political fatigue have combined to put all the possibles underwater.

I can think of two that *I* find charismatic: Pete Buttigieg, whose flaw is having a husband, and Elizabeth Warren, whose flaw is having a vagina. Neither of them would poll better than Biden.

Warren has come to show she has more flaws than having a vagina. Still I'd vote for her, perhaps over Biden, at this point. Not sure. Biden, for me, has been more of a surprise on the positive than the negative. After seeing Buttigeg working for the Biden department, I'd not bat an eyelash at voting for him.

[Zaxxon]

Count me in for PB, as well.

[The Meal]

This from author James Fell made me chuckle:

“We Didn’t Start the Fire,” Indictment Version:

Tangerine Palpatine, unprecedented, obscene
Danger Yam, runs a scam, how far will he go?
Jaundiced Jesus doesn’t please us, Donald Grievous wants to seize us
Eric’s Dad, Orange Man Bad, sentient dildo

Cult belief, endless grief, Oompa Loompa in Chief
Proud boys, shrieking noise, Pence in effigy
Babbitt falls, Taserballs, shit smeared on the Capitol halls
Ultra rich, Putin’s bitch, lawyers need money

Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He incited riot and now he’s indicted
Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He’s not Jesus risen, gonna go to prison

I'm laughing two words in. Well done, Mr. Fell.

[Carpet_pissr]

Is there a highly-regarded Biden replacement who could crack even 45% approval nationally, especially after the right-wing media machine had a few months to go at them? I think we're just in an era where partisanship and political fatigue have combined to put all the possibles underwater.

I can think of two that *I* find charismatic: Pete Buttigieg, whose flaw is having a husband, and Elizabeth Warren, whose flaw is having a vagina. Neither of them would poll better than Biden.

You’re missing a biggie that’s common to both (and to Hillary, and Obama)…they are, and speak with, obvious intelligence. I’m really starting to believe that we the people don’t like that.

Sure, they can get elected, and have, but a large swath of the population will go to their graves with a psychological scar of having lived in an America with a black AND highly intelligent president. Being black was surely the bigger negative factor (in terms of reasons to not vote for him), but I feel certain his professorial tone and manner of speaking was a very close second.

If you can talk/grunt like a caveman in public, while actually being intelligent behind the scenes, I think that’s probably The Way.

[Carpet_pissr]

This from author James Fell made me chuckle:

“We Didn’t Start the Fire,” Indictment Version:

Tangerine Palpatine, unprecedented, obscene
Danger Yam, runs a scam, how far will he go?
Jaundiced Jesus doesn’t please us, Donald Grievous wants to seize us
Eric’s Dad, Orange Man Bad, sentient dildo

Cult belief, endless grief, Oompa Loompa in Chief
Proud boys, shrieking noise, Pence in effigy
Babbitt falls, Taserballs, shit smeared on the Capitol halls
Ultra rich, Putin’s bitch, lawyers need money

Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He incited riot and now he’s indicted
Trump can’t accept he’s fired
He’s not Jesus risen, gonna go to prison

That’s fantastic. Randy Rainbow should musicalize that.

[YellowKing]

I was reading an article about a poll yesterday that up to 50% of Republicans say they wouldn't vote for Trump if he was convicted of a felony. I'll believe it when I see it. After all, the only thing worse than a convicted felon is a Democrat.

[malchior]

I was reading an article about a poll yesterday that up to 50% of Republicans say they wouldn't vote for Trump if he was convicted of a felony. I'll believe it when I see it. After all, the only thing worse than a convicted felon is a Democrat.

That poll was straight up cognitive dissonance. The same poll said 75% thought the charges were politically motivated, 66% the charges were "not believable"...but if he was convicted they'd believe it then?! They are smooth brains.

[Isgrimnur]

[waitingtoconnect]

I was reading an article about a poll yesterday that up to 50% of Republicans say they wouldn't vote for Trump if he was convicted of a felony. I'll believe it when I see it. After all, the only thing worse than a convicted felon is a Democrat.

That poll was straight up cognitive dissonance. The same poll said 75% thought the charges were politically motivated, 66% the charges were "not believable"...but if he was convicted they'd believe it then?! They are smooth brains.

Can you imagine if Joe Lunatic committed a whole pile of crimes and then said you can’t prosecute me I’m running for president?

[Blackhawk]

You’re missing a biggie that’s common to both (and to Hillary, and Obama)…they are, and speak with, obvious intelligence. I’m really starting to believe that we the people don’t like that.

Sure, they can get elected, and have, but a large swath of the population will go to their graves with a psychological scar of having lived in an America with a black AND highly intelligent president. Being black was surely the bigger negative factor (in terms of reasons too not vote for him), but I feel certain his professorial tone and manner of speaking was a very close second.

If you can talk/grunt like a caveman in public, while actually being intelligent behind the scenes, I think that’s probably The Way.

It's almost like were in the midst of a wave of anti-intellectualism. But if that were true, we'd also be seeing massive attacks on education and science. Oh, wait.

I've made the point before that part of the reason why we're getting nowhere is that we're using reason to try to understand and argue with people who have willfully decided to reject reason. We're throwing water at ducks.

We see it in everything from Florida's book bans to the attacks on colleges to the rejection of medical science regarding COVID and vaccines. If it sounds smart, a large swathe of people are against it. It sounds absurd, but it's the truth. And it's a hard problem to solve, since the normal remedy for irrationality is rationality, and right now that's exactly the wrong approach. If we want to move forward, we have to figure out something else. So far, that particular group has responded only to emotion.

We're treating it like a fight to win 'hearts and minds', but we're only focusing on the minds.

[YellowKing]

Heck, it's even hard to appeal to emotion. Your kid get shot to death at school? Your grandma die of COVID? Well that's OK because they've gone to be in the happy loving arms of Jesus. It's a win win all around!

[Carpet_pissr]

If I learned one thing from the OG Star Trek show, it was that while Spock was generally a badass, the times he failed were usually due to his trying to apply logic to every single problem, instead of considering the human being factor. Interesting how that can be applied to so many (typically) tech startups today where they are so focused on analytics, data and algorithms, to the exclusion of actually talking to clients, that they dig massive holes for themselves, sometimes leading to their ruin.

Last example and I will STFU. Nothing frustrates me more than when my brother, sister and I are talking about my hoarder Mom and her related issues, and my brother makes the same damn comments year after year. Usually to the effect of "I just don't understand!! Why can't she X? How can she be like that?! I don't understand?!" And then proceeds to suggest that he will talk to her, or offer some reasonable solution that would absolutely work for someone with a non-hoarder psyche/problem. Yeah, man, let's do the SAME thing we've done a million times before, with no effect, and related to someone who absolutely does not think rationally. Her issues make NO logical sense, yet there they are, causing problems for her and others every day.

After years (decades) he still just can't fathom, or chooses not to accept that we cannot use logic or reason with her, and gets super upset when his calls to reason are either rejected by my Mom, or ignored, or even backfire.

[Isgrimnur]

It's almost like were in the midst of a wave of anti-intellectualism.

Isaac Asimov, A Cult of Ignorance (1980)

[Blackhawk]

Heck, it's even hard to appeal to emotion. Your kid get shot to death at school? Your grandma die of COVID? Well that's OK because they've gone to be in the happy loving arms of Jesus. It's a win win all around!

That's because 'they' are way, way ahead of 'us.' It's our emotional appeal against their well-programmed emotional stance.

The kid getting shot in school is the price we pay for the freedom to own guns, and nothing is can be worse than the government coming for your guns! (anger and fear)

Grandma died because she was old and frail, while the vaccine would have killed her faster, all because we can't trust the doctors. Oh, and grandma wore the mask she knitted when she went to play Bunko in the community center every week, which proves that the scientists were lying. (suspicion and avoidance of guilt)

[Kurth]

Count me in for PB, as well.

All in for PB. Not a fan of Senator Warren.

[Kurth]

Is there a highly-regarded Biden replacement who could crack even 45% approval nationally, especially after the right-wing media machine had a few months to go at them? I think we're just in an era where partisanship and political fatigue have combined to put all the possibles underwater.

I can think of two that *I* find charismatic: Pete Buttigieg, whose flaw is having a husband, and Elizabeth Warren, whose flaw is having a vagina. Neither of them would poll better than Biden.

You’re missing a biggie that’s common to both (and to Hillary, and Obama)…they are, and speak with, obvious intelligence. I’m really starting to believe that we the people don’t like that.

Sure, they can get elected, and have, but a large swath of the population will go to their graves with a psychological scar of having lived in an America with a black AND highly intelligent president. Being black was surely the bigger negative factor (in terms of reasons to not vote for him), but I feel certain his professorial tone and manner of speaking was a very close second.

If you can talk/grunt like a caveman in public, while actually being intelligent behind the scenes, I think that’s probably The Way.

To the populist masses, intelligent = elite, and elite's are really the bad guys. Just listen to David Brooks:

Donald Trump seems to get indicted on a weekly basis. Yet he is utterly dominating his Republican rivals in the polls, and he is tied with Joe Biden in the general election surveys. Trump’s poll numbers are stronger against Biden now than at any time in 2020.

What’s going on here? Why is this guy still politically viable, after all he’s done? We anti-Trumpers often tell a story to explain that. It was encapsulated in a quote the University of North Carolina political scientist Marc Hetherington gave to my colleague Thomas B. Edsall recently: “Republicans see a world changing around them uncomfortably fast, and they want it to slow down, maybe even take a step backward. But if you are a person of color, a woman who values gender equality or an L.G.B.T. person, would you want to go back to 1963? I doubt it.”

In this story, we anti-Trumpers are the good guys, the forces of progress and enlightenment. The Trumpers are reactionary bigots and authoritarians. Many Republicans support Trump no matter what, according to this story, because at the end of the day, he’s still the bigot in chief, the embodiment of their resentments and that’s what matters to them most.

I partly agree with this story, but it’s also a monument to elite self-satisfaction.

So let me try another story on you. I ask you to try on a vantage point in which we anti-Trumpers are not the eternal good guys. In fact, we’re the bad guys.

This story begins in the 1960s, when high school grads had to go off to fight in Vietnam but the children of the educated class got college deferments. It continues in the 1970s, when the authorities imposed busing on working-class areas in Boston but not on the upscale communities like Wellesley where they themselves lived.

The ideal that we’re all in this together was replaced with the reality that the educated class lives in a world up here and everybody else is forced into a world down there. Members of our class are always publicly speaking out for the marginalized, but somehow we always end up building systems that serve ourselves.

The most important of those systems is the modern meritocracy. We built an entire social order that sorts and excludes people on the basis of the quality that we possess most: academic achievement. Highly educated parents go to elite schools, marry each other, work at high-paying professional jobs and pour enormous resources into our children, who get into the same elite schools, marry each other and pass their exclusive class privileges down from generation to generation.

There are no shortage of holes to poke at, and there is a noticeable shortage of proposed solutions. It's also deeply ironic and somewhat jarring to hear David Brooks criticizing elite self-satisfaction. That said, the whole piece is worth a read.

[malchior]

There are no shortage of holes to poke at, and there is a notceable shortage of proposed solutions. It's also deeply ironic and somewhat jarring to hear David Brooks criticizing elite self-satisfaction. That said, the whole piece is worth a read.

The former part of your quote is why the last part confuses me. I read this earlier and then found like much that David Brooks says...it's riddled with issues. In the end, I didn't find it worth my time.

This is more evidence in favor of an idea that I've been espousing; that conservative intellectualism has *collapsed*. I'm lumping in David French. Yes people would argue he isn't a "conservative" but at best he is a 'radical centrist' in this thought. I don't know what happened but many Conservatives and radical centrists seem to indulge in selective cherry picking of data or extensive use of strawman arguments to shore up their world viewpoints. The problem is that their opinions aren't sustainable. They are fighting against reality. Fortunately for them week after week the NY Times will offer them some more toilet paper type to soak up their shitty ideas in exchange for money.

I mean how could anyone defend this sort of illogical leap? What an asshole.

The meritocracy isn’t only a system of exclusion; it’s an ethos. During his presidency, Barack Obama used the word “smart” in the context of his policies over 900 times. The implication was that anybody who disagreed with his policies (and perhaps didn’t go to Harvard Law) must be stupid.

Edit: I almost posted about this in the viral economy thread earlier today (and maybe I'll relocate this there) because he so. so, so, so nearly came close to getting what is happening. But because he is so, so, so, so mediocre he then veered off into the usual "left is the problem and out touch" meme. Safe territory for a conservative hack at the NY Times.

What I'm getting at is he talks about how "elites" crowded out the newsrooms and business leadership to the exclusion of the middle class jobs. And that expanded into the general economy and at higher education institutions. Very close to "liberals" caused all these problems. He however doesn't have the capability or the moral integrity to step out of his routine and ask the important question. WHY did the elites crowded out everyone else? What drove that? I have a good idea why he didn't; it would clash with his fundamental beliefs about our culture and economy.

However, IMO the reason the conditions arose that drove the behaviors he feebly outlines is oligarchic forces in our economy. They were able to tilt the whole field in their favor. They created groups and institutions to dramatically change our society for the worse.

They fought hard to have the ability to destroy unions. They squeezed companies for profit, they merged industries and hollowed out entire manufacturing sectors and sent them overseas to maximize profit. They laid off workforces and often selected for "elites" to be the survivors. They kept all the productivity gains for themselves. They sent everyone clawing for each others throats.

People saw the impacts over the last 40 years and this created much of the excessive demand for higher education that made higher education unaffordable. At the same time, they hollowed out the commons that prevented us for allocating money to education, to improving opportunity, and expanding equity in the economy. And lastly, they then consolidated the media into huge conglomerates (including the NY Times) to spin tales about cultural divide to keep us distracted from what we should be doing. Which is demanding a path like we saw at the end of the robber baron era and reducing their control and influence over the nation.

[Alefroth]

[malchior]

A US Senator folks.

[Zaxxon]

Wonderful handle for a Senator, too.

[malchior]

Wonderful handle for a Senator, too.

He should have gone for @MikeLee88 (to commemorate when Bush got elected natch!)

[Isgrimnur]

Was @RedPilledMikeLee already taken?

[Smoove_B]

Nice to see this only took a few hours (from above):

There it is.

Special Counsel has just alerted the DC federal judge about Trump's social media post today

Jack Smith’s court motion says the Special Counsel wants to promptly begin sharing evidence with Trump & defense (they likely want to keep this case moving swiftly) But there’s concern Trump will publicly share confidential evidence/grand jury transcripts.

Prosecutor: "All the proposed order seeks to prevent is the improper dissemination or use of discovery materials, including to the public"

It took barely a few hours for that TRUTH SOCIAL post to make its way into the prosecutor's criminal case filings

Instantaneous

[Apollo]

...We're treating it like a fight to win 'hearts and minds', but we're only focusing on the minds.

Which is an excellent summary of the Democratic Party's flawed, anti-populist messaging strategy for at least the last 50 years. All we need is a Charismatic Candidate who isn't a Left Wing Radical and we could beat Trump easily. But we just won't do it. And right now, honestly, Biden is the man though I agree that it needs to be Pete B next time.

Look at the charisma of the candidates the Democrats ran for President in 80, 84, 88. I mean, we all know that Jimmy is a Saint, but by the same reasoning he's a terrible politician. Then we finally run a young, smart guy with some charisma and Blam! We win in 92 and 96. Then comes 2000. Once again, we're not looking at merit. That barely moves the needle with the public. We're looking at Charisma, which is what the public wants, and neither Gore nor Kerrey had any. Next comes a young guy with tremendous merit AND Charisma. Blam! He wins two terms.

We need more Charismatic Leaders in the Democratic Party. We can have the Elizabeth Warrens et al working on policy behind the scenes and helping the party gets its agenda passed but we need to focus on finding candidates with Charisma who, for whatever reason, can connect with the public and then give them a script. That, IMHO, would work much better than trying to push someone like Walter Mondale or Hillary Clinton on the general public and expecting everyone to appreciate all the work they've done for the Democratic Party over the decades.

[Carpet_pissr]

Well said. Agree.

[Kurth]

Well said. Agree.

Yep. That said, it’s not like those people grow on trees.

[Kraken]

Warren either rings your chimes or she doesn't. She's whip-smart, takes no shit, and has solid liberal bona fides. My kind of woman. I'm glad she's my senator and the GOP can't even field anyone to challenge her next year, but I know America can't handle her.

[Carpet_pissr]

Well said. Agree.

Yep. That said, it’s not like those people grow on trees.

Yep. Very few roll 18’s in WIS, INT AND CHA.

And re: Warren, she’s much like Hilary IMO…both smart as hell, policy wonks, and personally I would love having either one as President, but they both rolled CHA 2 or maybe 3.

Not just a liberal thing though: DeSantis, Ted Cruz, lots of examples.

[Kurth]

Well said. Agree.

Yep. That said, it’s not like those people grow on trees.

Yep. Very few roll 18’s in WIS, INT AND CH.

And re: Warren, she’s much like Hilary IMO…both smart as hell, policy wonks, and personally I would love having either one as President, but they both rolled CH 2 or maybe 3.

Not just a liberal thing though: DeSantis, Ted Cruz, lots of examples.

It’s the same old story, although it feels like it’s getting worse: No one worth anything really wants to be a political leader in this country. It’s a shitty, shitty job to a person with high stats in WIS, INT and CHA.

[Blackhawk]

Roll? It's point buy, and Charisma is the dump stat unless you're playing a Performer.

[Grifman]

[Grifman]

[Zaxxon]

Clearly false, as Trump has never read a major magazine article.

[Pyperkub]

Not the brightest bulb in the batch...

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/jo ... government

"Jan 6th conspirators have spent more than two years claiming either that nothing really happened at all in the weeks leading up to January 6th or that it was just a peaceful protest that got a bit out of hand or that they were just making a good faith effort to follow the legal process. Eastman cuts through all of this and makes clear they were trying to overthrow (“abolish”) the government; they were justified in doing so; and the warrant for their actions is none other than the Declaration of Independence itself."

Neither Constitutional, nor Law...

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk