45th President Of The United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 14)
Discussion
Randy Winkman said:
wong said:
What would TS be without Trump? No matter what happens, he's going to be dead in a few years. It's only value is to see what the Loser DJT is whining on about.
That's what I thought - with or without him, how is it a big money maker? TS at the moment is a minnow when compared to the other social media companies. Its revenue is a fraction of what it is burning through on a quarterly basis. The path to profitability at the current state is decades away. Could it turn into a massively popular platform? Unlikely. Take a look at it at the moment - its awful. They have massive issues with hate speech, problematic posts and as a result the advertisers on the platform are on the edges of legality (boner pills, prepper supplies, weight loss pills etc).
Twitter is pivoting to video (yeah, really) and the other social media companies are doubling down on their core markets. TS really has a shot at making this work? All of the numbers indicate that people joining TS is slowing down and certainly not the growth that they need.
I really struggle to see how TS could ever be profitable. Its just not going to work in its current form. Their only chance from what I see is that Musk pulls the plug on Twitter and shuts it down, forcing users to other platforms. That might work, but there are other alternatives anyway, its certanly not going to add 320m users in one go.
Mortarboard said:
Trump has already testified he knew. One of his attempts to dismiss was that it was "a personal matter"
One of the flaws in using a scatter gun, hail Mary, try everything to escape approach is that you just create more and more evidence undermining your own arguments when they raise contradictions.
M.
Thanks, I can't see that in the article or the "Statement of Facts" only that Cohen has testified?One of the flaws in using a scatter gun, hail Mary, try everything to escape approach is that you just create more and more evidence undermining your own arguments when they raise contradictions.
M.
Defendant’s direction:
[O]n or about the summer of 2016, in coordination with, and at the direction
of, a candidate for federal office, I and the CEO of a media company at the
request of the candidate worked together to keep an individual with information
that would be harmful to the candidate and to the campaign from publicly
disclosing this information. After a number of discussions, we eventually
accomplished the goal by the media company entering into a contract with the
individual under which she received compensation of $150,000. I participated in
this conduct, which on my part took place in Manhattan, for the principal purpose
of influencing the election.
(emphasis added).
44. Lawyer A also pleaded guilty to a felony in connection with his payoff of Woman
2 to secure her silence, again at the Defendant’s direction. Lawyer A admitted as part of his
guilty plea:
[O]n or about October of 2016, in coordination with, and at the direction of,
the same candidate, I arranged to make a payment to a second individual with
information that would be harmful to the candidate and to the campaign to keep
the individual from disclosing the information. To accomplish this, I used a
company that was under my control to make a payment in the sum of $130,000.
The monies I advanced through my company were later repaid to me by the
candidate. I participated in this conduct, which on my part took place in
Manhattan, for the principal purpose of influencing the election.
wong said:
What would TS be without Trump? No matter what happens, he's going to be dead in a few years. It's only value is to see what the Loser DJT is whining on about.
What's most interesting is that TS really exists because he was kicked off Twitter. Now Twitter (X) has essentially turned into TS regarding it's lack of moderation.. the purpose of TS really fails to exist.
Crook said:
Thanks, I can't see that in the article or the "Statement of Facts" only that Cohen has testified?
It was in one of Trumps motions to dismiss, iirc he claimed that the case should be dismissed "as it was a personal matter, not business, therefore could not have been business fraud"It helps if your lawyers don't create more evidence for the prosecution....
M.
CraigyMc said:
dukeboy749r said:
Unreal said:
You are incorrect in your first statement. The money can be accessed immediately with board approval. Who do you think controls the board?
What will happen to the share price is speculation.
Losses aren't unusual. Take a look at how long it took Amazon and Facebook to become profitable.
Trump is sitting on a potential goldmine .
I read that as Trump is sitting on a landmine - and thought, 'Yep, that would work'.What will happen to the share price is speculation.
Losses aren't unusual. Take a look at how long it took Amazon and Facebook to become profitable.
Trump is sitting on a potential goldmine .
reminded me of
minimoog said:
Byker28i said:
There's 4 charges, 3 of which they have trump bang to rights - business fraud again. The more difficult one is the election interference charge, that trump had intent - which he did, and Cohen will testify to, but they'll attack that testimony. They previously tried to ban it altogether.
Forgive me displaying my Dunning-Kruger syndrome again, but are you sure about that? I thought there's 4 parts to the crime, the payments, the invoices, the ledger entries, and the intent. The latter being where it'll determine whether the first 3 are illegal or not.https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/04/politics/takeaw...
trumps been found guilty of false business records and fraud twice already in NY in the last year.
Edited by Byker28i on Thursday 28th March 18:53
Marge trying to rewrite history, claiming trump's geogia phone call was trump asking where votes were that were lost in the post
https://twitter.com/i/status/1773415317802287302
Its the start of the attack against mail in voting, just like many predicted
https://twitter.com/i/status/1773415317802287302
Its the start of the attack against mail in voting, just like many predicted
Byker28i said:
Marge trying to rewrite history, claiming trump's geogia phone call was trump asking where votes were that were lost in the post
https://twitter.com/i/status/1773415317802287302
Its the start of the attack against mail in voting, just like many predicted
Then they can just tell the gop voters to turn up in person then, simples.https://twitter.com/i/status/1773415317802287302
Its the start of the attack against mail in voting, just like many predicted
A bit like MTG....
M.
Byker28i said:
It's a 34 count indictment, Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree, a class E felony, a separate charge for each falsified record.
Specifically it's 11 instances each with 3 indictable parts - payments, invoices, and ledger records, plus an extra ledger record. What I'm trying to say is I don't think any of those count as crimes unless the fourth aspect is also proven: the intent to influence his chances of being elected by making those payments. And that's where the prosecution could potentially fall down.Unless I've misread that analysis, what with me being a stupid non-lawyer and everything.
Correct.
4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 counts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 counts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
Edited by Mortarboard on Thursday 28th March 19:23
Mortarboard said:
Correct.
4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 courts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
I understand that. It's the 'was this string of payments intended to influence the election' that's arguable. The fact the payments were made and recorded is indisputable. 4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 courts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
I do note that the illustrious authors of that analysis feel the chances are the jury will be convinced they were made in pursuance of improving his election chances, and he will therefore be convicted. I still tend to the view that even if convicted a custodial sentence being handed down and him actually getting the orange overalls are remote, especially as there'll be a protracted appeals process to complete..
Mortarboard said:
Correct.
4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 counts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
All the best crimes. Perfect crimes, Trump crimes.4 things must be found to be true for it to be an offense.
Unfortunately for trump, the first three in each of the 11 counts exists in the paper trail, leaving solely the "knowledge, and knowledge it was illegal" to be determined by court.
And he's already admitted to knowing about it...
M.
minimoog said:
I understand that. It's the 'was this string of payments intended to influence the election' that's arguable. The fact the payments were made and recorded is indisputable.
I do note that the illustrious authors of that analysis feel the chances are the jury will be convinced they were made in pursuance of improving his election chances, and he will therefore be convicted. I still tend to the view that even if convicted a custodial sentence being handed down and him actually getting the orange overalls are remote, especially as there'll be a protracted appeals process to complete..
On the first paragraph, you'd have to be Matt Gaetz if you're trying to argue that "hiding hush money payments to adult film stars that you were cheating on your wife with" wasn't anything to do with public perception of trump during a presidential run I do note that the illustrious authors of that analysis feel the chances are the jury will be convinced they were made in pursuance of improving his election chances, and he will therefore be convicted. I still tend to the view that even if convicted a custodial sentence being handed down and him actually getting the orange overalls are remote, especially as there'll be a protracted appeals process to complete..
I think m the authors point is that the jury are going to take some convincing that it wasn't election-related. Especially with trump musing "should we delay payment until after the election because then it won't matter?" (Cohen testimony)
No idea on custodial likelihood, or when. But conviction is highly likely.
M.
Mortarboard said:
On the first paragraph, you'd have to be Matt Gaetz if you're trying to argue that "hiding hush money payments to adult film stars that you were cheating on your wife with" wasn't anything to do with public perception of trump during a presidential run
M.
To be clear, I'm not saying I think that's a good argument, just that's it's the only aspect the defence can try and make something of, however far-fetched M.
minimoog said:
Mortarboard said:
On the first paragraph, you'd have to be Matt Gaetz if you're trying to argue that "hiding hush money payments to adult film stars that you were cheating on your wife with" wasn't anything to do with public perception of trump during a presidential run
M.
To be clear, I'm not saying I think that's a good argument, just that's it's the only aspect the defence can try and make something of, however far-fetched M.
Oh, there's loads of arguments the defense can make (and no doubt will, ad nauseum).
None of them any more convincing, mind.
And if memory serves, trump is an "uninvited co-conspirator" in the same version of this offense that got jail time for Cohen. So it gets equally sticky for trump...
M.
It would have taken less time to read the article I linked than this back and forth. Shrug emoji.
https://www.justsecurity.org/93916/guide-manhattan...
https://www.justsecurity.org/93916/guide-manhattan...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff