this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
287 points (95.8% liked)

politics

23225 readers
3225 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 105 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Voluntarily passing up an opportunity to lie, bloviate, ax-grind, spleen-vent and obfuscate before a national audience? To play (paper-thin) 'tough guy' before his degenerate maga-head cult crowd?

Something's really off here...

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 62 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

He must be in really deep doo-doo if he actually starts listening to his lawyers.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 year ago

He may lose a lot of his hotels and maybe even Maralago over this, he's nervous and going to get even more crazy talking soon.

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My bet:

He'll come out and say that "they won't even let me take the stand at my own trial, rigged!"

[–] Dantpool@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If he loses the trial, he'll blame the lawyer that didn't want him to testify, and claim they were part of the deep state.

It's also extremely disheartening that I had to say, "If he loses" and that I have no faith in our justice system anymore.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He already lost. Summary judgement at the outset. At this point, it's just about how badly he lost. And Engoron does not appear to be a fan of his behavior.

[–] Vertelleus@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My bet is he and his lawyers will find ways to appeal all of his current trials until the day he dies so he will never actually feel any punishment.

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

I assume that’s actually the plan

[–] athos77@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

Nah, he can do that outside on the courtroom steps without even risking perjury charges.

[–] SPRUNT@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Testifying is under oath, so bloviating like he does can result in actual consequences.

That's my guess, anyway.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What, like he gets sent to prison and has to dictate "My Fight" to a fellow prisoner?

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

He’d constantly be on the phone to news max, Fox, and Oann. No need to bother with an incoherent book.

[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 79 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Guess someone convinced him that he will wind up being charged with perjury in nearly record time. He lies about easily verifiable things. He’d be screwed.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He already testified and lied, my guess is they convinced him to not make it worse.

[–] Something_Complex@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

How has he not been charged with perjury??

[–] Fraylor@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Because the courts don't work like that for people with influence.

[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Don’t over-complicate the current case. Once this one is settled and all appeals have been played out THEN he can face new perjury charges.

[–] PRUSSIA_x86@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He may yet still. These things take time.

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

They need to stop trying to screw him, and screw him.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago (2 children)

His team is obviously trying not to let him make more of an ass of himself. This is usually the turn in a trial where the defense starts sniffing out a deal, but I see zero chance of that being agreed upon by the protectors here. They know they're destroying the defense and will refuse to compromise. I also doubt Trump's narcissism would allow him to admit any kind of guilt.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No chance for a deal in a bench trial.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure there are. You can have a plea agreement at any time, but it is at the judges discretion in either case. The venue doesn't matter. I just don't the prosecution bothering to compromise because they've an airtight case.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Judge has already stipulated there was fraud. This bench trial is too establish the amount of the penalty. The prosecutor's ask is a minimum of $250 million, but the judge can move that number anywhere he wants. There is no deal available. His guilt is already stipulated

[–] athos77@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Eh, they've already established fraud, but there are like 6 other charges that haven't been decided yet. This trial is for the other charges plus the fines. Which will be appealed on every possible level.

[–] Steve@startrek.website -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Since the judge already stipulated that the fraud was committed, what will deal be about?

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't know what you're talking about. The judge made a finding. Stipulating to things means an agreement by the parties.

Trump can settle with the state of NY at any time, if NY wants to settle.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Stipulating to things means an agreement by the parties.

No. He stipulated to a fact of fraud.

Good news though. You are qualified to be Trumps lawyer. Sorry about the paycheck.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're not even using these words correctly

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago

Bwhahahahaha

[–] Steve@startrek.website -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im just saying deal or no deal has nothing to do with it being a bench trial

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Not sure why this is so downvoted. You're absolutely correct.

[–] Treczoks@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

His team is obviously trying not to let him make more of an ass of himself.

Sadly, that's probably the truth. Would have been nice to see him jumping into the "I blatantly lied under oath" pool at full speed.

This is really bad. Think af all the tanking popcorn futures...

[–] carl_dungeon@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

Awwww but there’s so much rope!

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

puts popcorn kernels back into cupboard

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Save yourself the extra seconds and keep 'em out, it'll be delayed like 5mins at most

[–] Treczoks@lemm.ee 32 points 1 year ago

He'll probably just hold a rally in front of the court and "recommend" his insurrection-loving fans to "visit" the court and "see for themselves how corrupt the court is" or something.

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just have some blog post about how much of a weakling, pussilanimous and pathetic loser he is for not testifying. I hear he likes that sort of stuff. All the tough guy stuff and he just folds over when it gets rough.

I like my presidents with some spine, thanks.

[–] mikegioia@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

pussilanimous

Wow what an incredible new word I learned today, ty. Honestly thought you just made up a funny word based on "pussy" but this is amazing.

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Funnily enough I learned it as a kid from the English version of Asterix, which was originally from France/ in french.

[–] EvilEyedPanda@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Aww come on, it would have been so funny to hear him bumble on while incriminating himself

~~incriminating himself~~ saying things that he won’t ever be held responsible for, because of our broken, corrupt legal system

FTFY

I was really looking forward to the limitless meme material that was sure to come from his testimony.

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Shit-for-brains' lawyers must have finally gotten it through his thick skull that the moron wouldn't be able to help but incriminate himself in a host of other crimes if he testified.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Shocked! How does such a powerful and successfull defendant powerfully + successfully defend their indefensibles and unsuccesses

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


In an eleventh-hour reversal, former President Donald Trump announced Sunday he will not go back on the witness stand in the $250 million civil fraud trial against him and his company.

Trump had been expected to tout his company’s success and push back on New York Attorney General Letitia James’ claims that he vastly overvalued his properties and his net worth in financial statements that he used to get favorable loans from banks that he otherwise would not have been entitled to.

Called as a witness by James’ team on Nov. 6, a combative Trump made similar claims while also launching attacks on the AG and the judge who will decide the case, Arthur Engoron.

“Eric has already testified, PERFECTLY,” Trump wrote, “so there is no reason to waste any more of this Crooked Court’s time on having him say the same thing, over and over again, as a witness for the defense.”

Trump’s attorney Alina Habba told reporters after the former president appeared as a spectator at the trial on Thursday that he was “looking forward to taking the stand.”

She said she had urged him not to testify again because of a gag order preventing him from criticizing the judge’s law clerk, who he had previously complained is biased against him.


The original article contains 794 words, the summary contains 213 words. Saved 73%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

As I understand it, he never had to take the stand in the first place.

[–] SatanClaws@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Shocked pikachu face

someone must have gotten it through his thick skull there would be no positive at best, and serious legal repercussions at worst. good on them, i hear thats damn near impossible.