Trump - Criminal Prosecution

[Chips]

on top of that, she should also sue CNN. Because they did nothing to intervene at the time.

Wait, what? What is the basis she'd sue them for?

I don't want to watch the townhall, it's US anyway so why bother, but I've a feeling I should

[matthewfarmery]

on top of that, she should also sue CNN. Because they did nothing to intervene at the time.

Wait, what? What is the basis she'd sue them for?

I don't want to watch the townhall, it's US anyway so why bother, but I've a feeling I should

I well, they didn't intervene, also the audience laughed at Trumps remarks and ultimately her. I think that just adds insult to injury. Especailly as the audience was hand picked and was only told to applaud. and of course, CNN invited him on. So they are very much responsible. Especailly as it was only a day after the verdict. CNN should have had some kind of prep, or plan if he started to attack her. But CNN didn't do anyway.

I mean, CNN could have muted him, or cut the transmission. But again, they didn't do anything. They turned another cheek, in my book, they are equally as responsible.

And of course, it makes her name more visible to network TV, and perhaps even open her to abuse from his magat supporters.

I think for that reason, CNN should have been more careful about this, and had a plan if Trump went down this road.

[Chips]

I need to watch it, but I've heard she was rebutting his claims, just that Trump is Trump and there's such arrogance it doesn't matter what the host says; did you get to see it and was it clear she was rebutting his claims over fixed votes and so on?

But pulling an entire transmission because you don't like what someone says is... I mean, I think Elon Musk (for all the negatives) said it best to a BBC interviewer - "who decides?". If you've invited them onto a platform, you let them speak. If you don't wish to hear what they say, don't listen/watch/read about it and get outraged. As long as the host wasn't (imo!) cheering them along and supporting their viewpoint (at which point it turns into a party political broadcast), but is challenging them - then it's okay. After all, who gets to decide what is too far? where the line is? That's usually proven in the courts (as the plaintiff in the accusation of sexual abuse achieved), an avenue that's available to once again go down. Unselected, unverifiable/examinable sources making those decisions based upon feelings and personal viewpoints/opinions isn't a good idea for "balance". A real slippery censorship pathway is being taken if you believe you should pull transmissions when it strays slightly into a territory you're not happy with. That's kind of what Russia is doing with it's broadcast media after all... so, seriously?

To me it sounded like Trump was given rope and he climbed up a tree, tied it around the branch and his neck, and then gleefully jumped. His supporters will have been supporters regardless, but as said - I need to watch it - it sounded like anyone who's not completely goggle eyed over Trump will have been revulsed by his obvious detachment from reality. Any and every interviewer he may have from now on knows what the responses are like and can, from that, plan and formulate their interview/style to achieve their desired goals. May have been hard to watch, but realistically, gold mine for everyone else to work from.

[matthewfarmery]

But that's the thing though, Trump was find guilty of sexually assault, and defamation, and he just carried on doing that on CNN, calling her a wack job, if he wanted to prove his innocence, he should have done that in front of a jury, not in front of a live audience. and especailly doing the same remarks that led E Carroll to win her defamation case against him.

So yes, The lady should certainly do another defamation case against him, but I still say, especailly after the verdict, CNN should have been more careful, if this had happened say last year, it probably wouldn't be quite as bad but still bad. Also, this also looks bad for people who have been sexually assaulted. Because it just makes fun of them. and might look that people may not care. or hard for those that have been sexually assaulted to come forward, especailly in the eyes of a network, its nothing but a laughing matter. especailly a major news network. So there is a lot of factors here.

[Chips]

Well, unless there's a broadcast charter they've neglected to stick to, at which point they're at fault for failing in their broadcast obligations, then Trump can say what he likes - it's not *their* responsibility. Imagine any of the news networks when he was President going "sorry, we're cutting this transmission as you're saying something we don't think you should".

Can he say what he said? Yes. Of course he can. Can she take him to court and claim defamation? Of course she can. Will she win? who knows, their defamation is seriously different from UK.

[matthewfarmery]

deleted,

[felter]

Trump never said that and there are a few mistakes in it also, for starter it happened 30 years ago not 20, he said she was in her 60s that would make her in her 90s now and besides trump does not talk like that it's way too articulate for him.

[matthewfarmery]

I was googling to find what he said, guess that was a mistake. so I deleted it.

[matthewfarmery]

At least on judge is stating to get serious against Trump,

Merchan on Thursday ordered Trump to appear remotely at a May 23 hearing regarding an order, issued on Monday, that bans him from using evidence to attack witnesses in his criminal trial. The former president pleaded not guilty after being charged last month with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

So if Trump still doesn't obey after that, Trump could be seeing more serious contempt charges. But we all know Trump being Trump, will just act like he always does. A few months in a cell might finally make him behave, here's hoping.

[felter]

So Timothy Parlatore, a Trump lawyer or should I say Trump ex-lawyer as he has now quit Trump's legal team, meaning another lawyer has gone, and it sounds like it may be because of the CNN fiasco last week as Trump said something's which contradicted what Timothy Parlatore was saying about the handling of those classified documents, making him a liar which comes as no surprise, but the big question is not if he knowingly told lies for Trump, but he testified to the Grand Jury, so did he knowingly tell lies to the grand Jury. So now it looks like Trump has screwed him over and potentially lost another Lawyer his law licence.

Not just that, the National Archives have sent Trump a letter telling him that they are going to hand over 16 of his presidential documents to Jack Smith that shows he knew exactly how the declassification system and handling of documents worked, which also bites him on the rear because of some things he said in that CNN town hall fiasco. Like it or hate it, that thing did not help Trump in the least, if anything it did him more harm than good, and we have CNN to thank for that.

[Chips]

Making who a liar, Trump or the Lawyer? Is the Lawyer a liar if he's stating what the client has instructed him to say... in the event the client then contradicts their own statement?

Trump must be a nightmare to deal with, both as a representative of his companies or legal teams. Guy literally makes things up on the spot and casually throws people under the bus on a whim. Mental.
Looking forward, but also fearing, how all this pans out. Can only hope the orange is squeezed and chucked into the composting bin, but...

*edit*

and it sounds like it may be because of the CNN fiasco last week as Trump said something's which contradicted what Timothy Parlatore was saying about the handling of those classified documents, making him a liar which comes as no surprise, but the big question is not if he knowingly told lies for Trump, but he testified to the Grand Jury, so did he knowingly tell lies to the grand Jury. So now it looks like Trump has screwed him over and potentially lost another Lawyer his law licence.

Actually, you have a source on that bit? CNN shows nothing of that flavour, nor CBS or NBC - but I'm not familiar with what news sources in the US are considered acceptable Just zero sign on BBC. They all just state what he's said on leaving and what his role was.

[matthewfarmery]

Trump throwing another lawyer under the bus? who can be surprised about that? But then again, the lawyer is also going to be held to account, so Timothy Parlatore should have realised sooner, he will only get himself in water at some point.

So how many lawyers have quit Trump now? I lost count, I wonder if Timothy Parlatore was paid up front or if Trump has shafted him by not paying his legal fees?

But your right felter, CNN did do us a favour, at least Jack Smith and others who are going after Trump. Lets hope they drop the hammer soon. As Trump's lawyers will be hand pressed to defend him period.

[Chips]

But your right felter, CNN did do us a favour

...whaaaaatt? I thought you said CNN should never have let it happen; taken the transmission off air as soon as he said something wrong; should be sued into oblivion for allowing him a platform; that you hope CNN "falls" as a result of having it.


Or are you talking about something else in the above?

[matthewfarmery]

Well, its a double edged sword, He did snitch on himself, and for that, he did openly admit taking classified documents. So in that regard, having him on tape saying that will help a lot. And CNN is indeed to thank for that.

But where I draw the line is the E Carroll remakes, and that CNN should have had some kind of prep or better handled if he did mention this woman.

But for the classified documents stuff, then that will bring down Trump's downfall, also, from what I read, it will be harder for Trump to request the trial will be held in Florida for example, (where lose cannon might get him off the hook once more, or poke her nose into something that she has no business looking into)

So, yes, CNN did do us a favour there. But again, regarding that one instance, no, it should have been better done.

But still, this will probably hurt CNN in the long run, so maybe they will learn some lessons or maybe not. But still, the way that they rigged the audience, the way that they rigged the questions. Something that they should have done differently or not at all.

If Trump's remarks help to bring him down faster, then great, if it doesn't, then CNN will still remain as a joke, and the whole thing was a bad idea.

[Chips]

CNN allowed presidential candidate runner to have their time... my chief concern is how the F is he even in contention

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/25/11716609 ... cted-crime

Scary.

But in the UK apparently there's a "movement" for Bodger Johnson in the Conservatives, despite all that he's done. So US isn't alone in the "wtf" stakes.

[matthewfarmery]

The problem is, those that still follow Trump are more of a cult then anything. And we can say that Fox are to blame there. especailly then people still think that the election was stolen from them. But I think the problem is, Trump is still ultimately talking to he base, saying stuff that they want to hear, like his Mothers day message. And so on. But this is an America problem, both with the news, and the way people are over there. Plus their out of date laws and outdated stuff that should have been binned and replaced.

IF Trump did get in, I suspect it will be very bad for everyone, and it will be scorched earth. Trump will have his revenge, and he will feel vindicated, and all his enemies will face his wrath. Plus putting America on a very dark path, democracy will certainly be dead by this stage.

But I don't think his cult cares about that one little bit. And this is the problem. They just hear the words from Trump, they he will restore America again. But he won't.

I fear what will happen if he gets back into the WH, who will Trump trust? what his cabinet be like? will the house look the other way? (more the likely)

Its frightening really, and frightening that the president election laws aren't tightened up. to allow this POS again for the running, just silly and frightening at the same time.

[Observe]

IF Trump did get in, I suspect it will be very bad for everyone, and it will be scorched earth. Trump will have his revenge, and he will feel vindicated, and all his enemies will face his wrath. Plus putting America on a very dark path, democracy will certainly be dead by this stage.

I'm not sure about the democracy will be dead part. If Trump wins the election (legitimately), wouldn't this be democracy in action? To me, the greatest threat to democracy is censorship and right now, it is the liberals who are most guilty of that. I don't want to see Trump reelected, but the Biden administration isn't exactly a champion of democracy either for that matter.

[matthewfarmery]

IF Trump did get in, I suspect it will be very bad for everyone, and it will be scorched earth. Trump will have his revenge, and he will feel vindicated, and all his enemies will face his wrath. Plus putting America on a very dark path, democracy will certainly be dead by this stage.

I'm not sure about the democracy will be dead part. If Trump wins the election (legitimately), wouldn't this be democracy in action? To me, the greatest threat to democracy is censorship and right now, it is the liberals who are most guilty of that. I don't want to see Trump reelected, but the Biden administration isn't exactly a champion of democracy either for that matter.

The problem is, what damage Trump will do once he is in, what changes will he make? he will very likely isolate America, pull them out oof everything. What rules will he impose? while allowing him in is democracy, its what happens after that concerns me greatly.

The way he talks about America, he has fascist views, so he will want to be a dictator like his good friend putin. Trump won't care for America, he wants the position of power but without the responsibility of the job. And then what kind of cabinet will he have? how many people will Trump trust? how many people left during his first presidency? All this and more will cause problems. And lets not forget, he will have access to nuclear codes. As well as classified documents once more.

So yes, I doubt America will stay a democracy for long. more of a banana republic, or worse. It won't happen overnight, but it will.

[fiksal]

To the question of democracy,

Trump, and his followers on his behalf repeatedly have tried to undo democracy. The last amateur attempt is well documented. But all the others that preceded are equally important, trying to break electoral process, denying voting, pressing evidence less cases into courts, pressing on courts to undo laws.

Somehow US institutions held.

Though the damage is done too, as a chunk of population now doesn't think democracy is a good idea anymore.

If say, Trump wins again, democratically, he might have better help this time to make sure that was the last democratic election, to the cheer and applause of his base, awkward grinning of Republicans, and silence of the rest of Conservatives.

News will say how America became great again, and will keep referring to democracy unknowingly ironically. Like Kremlin does.

To me, the greatest threat to democracy is censorship and right now, it is the liberals who are most guilty of that. I don't want to see Trump reelected, but the Biden administration isn't exactly a champion of democracy either for that matter.

I am not sure what examples do you mean?

Censoring information has been Conservative's staple for awhile. Be it religion based, education, anything concerning minority populations. And it's not just a talk, they periodically push it into schools, government, legislation.

Trump is a good example of someone who doesn't support free speech or free press. The "fake news" talk isn't just a talk either.


If US liberals don't support free speech, then who is left even.

[felter]

IF Trump did get in, I suspect it will be very bad for everyone, and it will be scorched earth. Trump will have his revenge, and he will feel vindicated, and all his enemies will face his wrath. Plus putting America on a very dark path, democracy will certainly be dead by this stage.

I'm not sure about the democracy will be dead part. If Trump wins the election (legitimately), wouldn't this be democracy in action? To me, the greatest threat to democracy is censorship and right now, it is the liberals who are most guilty of that. I don't want to see Trump reelected, but the Biden administration isn't exactly a champion of democracy either for that matter.

I want to know who these liberals are, mainly because Liberals are the least likely of all to censor you as censorship in itself is not a liberal thing, they are predominantly against that sort of thing as liberals are more tolerant. By the way, I know exactly what censorship is and how it truly works, the majority of people do not. An example, a hint, western social media cannot censor you. Once you tell us who you think is the biggest censor in lets say America, I will tell you exactly who the biggest censor in America is right now and how they are that massive censor, another hint, they are not a Liberal. Remember, there are rules to censorship and only certain parties can censor you. I will tell you, two of the biggest censors in the world right now are Russia a right wing fascist state and of course China a left wing (so called) Communist state. Liberals are right in the middle of the two.