Biden campaign has a user account on Trump's platform. — creativesoul
I am loving the state of Georgia right now. They aren't fooling around. — GRWelsh
The most newsworthy quote probably came prior to the rally, when a reporter asked Trump if his recent perplexing claim that Sidney Powell was never his attorney (although he’s previously said she was) meant that his interactions with her wouldn’t be covered by attorney-client privilege.
Trump, who has been indicted four times, responded by making the completely false statement that he was “never indicted.”
“We did nothing wrong,” Trump said. “This is all Biden’s stuff … I was never indicted. You practically never heard the word.”
...
“You don’t have to vote, don’t worry about voting. The voting, we got plenty of votes,” he said.
...
Trump also remarked that “U.S.” and “us” are spelled the same and noted that he’d “just picked that up.”
“Has anyone ever thought of that before?” he asked the crowd. “Couple of days, I’m reading, and it said ‘us.’ and I said, you know, when you think about it, us equals U.S. Now if we say something genius, they will never say it.”
...
Trump also promised to keep immigrants who “don’t like our religion” from entering the United States. Of course, the First Amendment establishes that there is no state religion in America.
...
He also justified challenging the 2020 election results by saying he doesn’t mind “being Nelson Mandela because I’m doing it for a reason.”
Trump is losing his mind. — Michael
Ellis has implicated former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in her plea deal by admitting that she aided and abetted the former mayor’s “false statements” to Georgia lawmakers at a December 2020 hearing, where they both peddled baseless voter fraud claims.
She acknowledged that she was “assisting with the execution of” that legislative hearing with Giuliani and another co-defendant, Trump campaign attorney Ray Smith.
Former President Donald Trump's final chief of staff in the White House, Mark Meadows, has spoken with special counsel Jack Smith's team at least three times this year, including once before a federal grand jury, which came only after Smith granted Meadows immunity to testify under oath, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The sources said Meadows informed Smith's team that he repeatedly told Trump in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election that the allegations of significant voting fraud coming to them were baseless, a striking break from Trump's prolific rhetoric regarding the election.
According to the sources, Meadows also told the federal investigators Trump was being "dishonest" with the public when he first claimed to have won the election only hours after polls closed on Nov. 3, 2020, before final results were in.
Opening remarks in the trial began Monday, where a lawyer for the plaintiffs – Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and six Colorado voters – argued that Trump “incited a violent mob” to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6 “to stop the peaceful transfer of power under our Constitution.” Those actions, the lawyer said, deem Trump “ineligible” to be president again.
“It was Trump’s dereliction of duty – in violation of his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution – that caused the constitutional process to stop,” attorney Eric Olson said.
But the former president’s legal team argued that the “anti-democratic” lawsuit is tantamount to “election interference” in the 2024 presidential race...
Olson, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, argued that the Colorado case has four basic components: Trump took an oath as an officer of the U.S. The Capitol attack was an insurrection. Trump engaged in that insurrection. And Colorado’s secretary of state can be ordered by the court to keep him off the state’s ballot because of it.
But Trump’s counsel claimed that the plaintiff’s case is based solely on the report produced by the House committee that investigated the riot, which they described as “poison.”
Historical precedent also confirms that a criminal conviction is not required for an individual to be disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. No one who has been formally disqualified under Section 3 was charged under the criminal “rebellion or insurrection” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or its predecessors. This fact is consistent with Section 3’s text, legislative history, and precedent, all of which make clear that a criminal conviction for any offense is not required for disqualification. Section 3 is not a criminal penalty, but rather is a qualification for holding public office in the United States that can be and has been enforced through civil lawsuits in state courts, among other means.
He seems on the edge — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.