1052
He was declaring the 2016 election as rigged too, right up until the point he "won" it.
Oh, no… he still claimed it was rigged even after he won because he lost the popular election/ didn’t win in a landslide.
Well, he claimed he won in a landslide in 2016 up until Biden won by that exact electoral margin against him in 2020.
Funny how his perspective changed just like that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And he called the 2016 GOP primaries rigged also when he lost one. Everything Trump loses is rigged. If he wins, but doesn't win by as much as he wanted to, then it's rigged also.
At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if he thought merely having a non-Trump name on the ballot counted as "rigging." Trump's ideal ballot would be "do you want (a) Trump for President or (b) to be imprisoned for life?"
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wow he really did say it.
If he isn't found guilty I'll lose any faith I have remaining in our justice system.
I mean. There's always been a very different justice system for the rich v poor. I'm not expecting much. Slap on the wrist, a little community service that he can pawn off or do in some cushy way. Maybe I'm setting my hopes low, so as to avoid the fall of it does actually turn out that way.
Exactly what I'm afraid of. Something like that will not deter anyone else that's smarter than him to try again. I really hate to say it, but he needs to be made an example of. He's admitting the crime he's accused of doing. And he's a former president.
It's a scary time for the U.S.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Usually rich people get out of stuff by hiring smart lawyers and listening to what they say, though.
I would caution you against having any expectations.
load more comments
(15 replies)
He is the most popular Republican candidate for a reason. They love this shit.
You can't be a republican without being some combination of stupid or evil.
And I don't just mean stupid colloquially as "people I don't like" but more specifically as "incapable of looking at facts and drawing reasonable conclusions from them."
It's weirder than that. I know people who are generally very good at reasoning based on facts except with Donnie they don't. When caught out in a lie, he explains it with an even more unbelievable lie and they just repeat it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Didn't he also talk about how "all those J6 people were treated very badly" and he would "look into" pardoning Enrique Tarrio and others?
Tarrio was convicted of seditious conspiracy.
18 U.S.C. § 2384 states:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
Suggesting the possibility of a pardon for someone convicted of seditious conspiracy is "giving aid or comfort to the enemies [of the US Constitution]."
Trump is ineligible to hold office, per the 14th Amendment, Section Three.
load more comments
(16 replies)
Oh, so he confessed. Can we skip to the "lock him up" phase now?
We still need the trial, but I think he should have his bond revoked and await trial in jail.
This is America. So no. Republicans get to do what they want.
"And furthermore, I did shoot that man on Fifth Avenue."
And furthermore, Susan, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to learn that all four of them habitually smoke marijuana cigarettes...
REEFERS
load more comments
(1 replies)
Haven't we been hearing for weeks that he was planning an "advice of counsel" defense in his criminal trials?
Fani Willis and Jack Smith will welcome this admission - and doubtless make use of it in court.
The screams you hear are emanating from his current group of lawyers, tearing their hair out and rending their garments as they are forced once more to scramble to try to do damage control in coming up with a legal strategy - and fearing for the future of their own law licenses.
I might be giving him too much credibility because it's not like Trump is a fine strategist or anything, but at this point I think he knows he's fucked in court anyway. He already lost this battle so to speak, so I doubt he'll make any sort of effort to help his own case. He'll do what he does best and stir up shit as fast as possible, making the biggest circus imaginable with whatever he can, and insulting the judges and admitting to his crimes is definitely a signature wtf play of his. Another angle is that the case is lost, he knows, and Trump never admit defeat, he'll just double down and pretend it's not a crime because he did it on purpose.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Don't you guys know anything? Words have zero meaning anymore. From "literally" to "pov", no one really understands how to use the english language anymore. Trump is a practitioner of the "that's not what I meant" school of communication. GWB had clearer thoughts.
In all things I yearn for the past. Modern fashions seem to keep on growing more and more debased. I find that even among the splendid pieces of furniture built by our master cabinetmakers, those in the old forms are the most pleasing. And as for writing letters, surviving scraps from the past reveal how superb the phrasing used to be. The ordinary spoken language has also steadily coarsened. People used to say "raise the carriage shafts" "raise it" or "trim it."When they should say, "Let the men of the palace staff stand forth!" they say, "Torches! Let's have some light!" Instead of calling the place where the lectures on the Sutra of the Golden Light are delivered before the emperor "the Hall of the Imperial Lecture," they shorten it to "the Lecture Hal", a deplorable corruption, an old gentleman complained.
? Words have zero meaning anymore.
yeah if you're a fucking moron. the rest of us use these things to communicate for fuck's sake, don't let this idiot ruin language next.
load more comments
(12 replies)
This is going to help everyone around Trump walk, because they can point to him taking full accountability, Meadows Eastman, Giuliani can get out of it. And Trump himself will never see any consequences either.
RICO case in Georgia is much more difficult, which is why the GOP down there have created a committee to remove any prosecutors they want. So, that's how that will get killed off.
I know
Putin told you too. Traitor
This is why he should have get a gag order from a judge. He already is preparing his base that he will lose in court: "yes, I did it, but anyone would do the same, because all is rigged against me"
He’s doing this to try and prove he didn’t know he lost the election.
I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think that will work.
I think he's said on tape that he knows he lost the election, so I'd love to see that legal defense
That makes sense knowing the way he went on about it.
Did anyone watch the clip, or just reacting to the headline? Immediately after he said that, they return to the commentator who says there isn't much in that statement that can be used by prosecutors
I'll leave that decision up to the prosecutors.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. The exchange is:
"Were you calling the shots?"
"As to whether or not I thought the election was rigged, yeah it was my decision."
Trump is being charged with conspiracy to prevent the election results from being certified. He's not being charged with lying about election rigging. He can flat out say "yeah I knew I lost I just wanted to lie to people". He's not obligated to tell the truth and it's not why he's in legal trouble.
He would need to have said something about creating a plan to delay or prevent the certification and that lying about the election being rigged was part of that. Prosecutors claim they have this evidence anyways.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“It was my decision, but I listened to some people,” Trump told NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview that aired Sunday.
“I was listening to different people, and when I added it all up, the election was rigged,” Trump told Kristen Welker in the interview, again pushing the false claim as he seeks the 2024 Republican nomination for president.
He pressured Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and another official to “recalculate” the numbers and “find” enough votes to let him win.
The House select committee that investigated Trump’s actions in the lead-up to the January 6, 2021, insurrection argued that the evidence shows he actively worked to “transmit false Electoral College ballots to Congress and the National Archives” despite concerns among his lawyers that doing so could be unlawful.
Trump is facing four charges in Smith’s case, including obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States.
Trump was also charged in a sweeping Georgia indictment accusing him of being the head of a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the 2020 election.
The original article contains 471 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
1052 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19090 readers
3985 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS