Do you think what Trump said required special knowledge by 2000?
1997 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orawG7vt68o
1998 https://youtu.be/zDq9tMu1Jm0?t=688
1999 https://press.un.org/en/1999/19991015.sc6739.doc.html
1999 http://www.cnn.com/US/9906/16/bin.laden.plot/
U.S. officials fear that suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden "may be in the final stages" of planning an attack against the United States.
Bin Laden, son of a Saudi Arabian billionaire, is accused of masterminding the almost simultaneous bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania last August that left 224 people dead.
U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity Wednesday, told CNN that current targets would most likely be somewhere in the Middle East or Africa.
However, they refused to rule out the possibility of an attack on U.S. soil -- including Washington, D.C.
Bin Laden was absolutely NOT a known CIA asset in the 1980's.
The first time the US government mentioned Bin Laden was in 1993 and they called him Usama. This is why he is still referred to as UBL in us documents.
President Trump has had a few wins, as well as a few setbacks, but other than NY, these big cases aren't even close to the trials.
Apparently the jury notices for DC just started to go out. There's going to be prescreening process, so they probably are starting early
NY Case
The moron judge in NY has already decided he was guilty before the trial (no jury) so that's how it will probably end.... and then it will likely get overturned.
The trial is about deciding other issues. The main issue is the amount of "disgorgement of profits" Trump will pay and a ban on future NY business including >A five-year ban on Trump or the Trump Organization applying for loans from any financial institutions chartered by or registered in New York. The AG is asking for a disgorgement of $250 million.
The finding of liability for fraud and the turning the Trump LLCs over to receivership to be dissolved was decided. Waiting on appeal.
Trump has had some good defense witnesses and some bad ones. I could see the awarding less than the AG is asking for. One witness pointed that high net wealth private banking is not just about that client but other clients that person could lead to you. Another mentioned even if the loan said Trump needed to maintain $2.5 billion in net wealth, going below that would not be a material default, it might just lead to more collateral being put up or a new rate negotiated. I thought they did good and undercut a specific witness called by the state. It seemed like he was not using realistic interest rates.
The past couple of witnesses I didn't think were too strong. They were discussing Mar a Lago. One was a guy who sold real estate in Palm Beach. Each witnesse has to testify to his or her expertise. He never graduated high school. When asking if he ever sold any social clubs in Palm Beach he said no. When asking if he used a formula to calculate Mar a Lago's value he said no. So his testimony was limited to his opinion of the value of Mar a Lago "if it was valued as a private house." Previous testimony talked about the limitations on Mar a Lago and it can't be used as a private house. So it didn't seem useful.
In the "deed of development rights" that Trump signed in 2002, the deed says
WHEREAS the Club and Trump intend to forever extinguish their right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use;
Another witness testified about development right at mar a lago, but from the 1990's before this document was signed.
Eric was supposed to testify today and they pulled him. No reason given. Trump is set to testify Monday. We will see if that goes through.
GA case Fallout from this case is starting to happen in other states. After Kenneth Chesebro plead guilty, he apparently starting hearing from other states.
He told the judge he needed to modify his bail conditions to allow him to travel to other states. he talked to NV and today 6 electors were indicted https://thehill.com/homenews/4345851-nevada-grand-jury-indicts-six-pro-trump-electors/
He supposedly is about to speak to Arizona next.
FL case There was a big drop from Jack Smith in this case. There a laws regarding federal evidence. Specifically around if the prosecutor is going to use evidence not charged in the indictment particularly character evidence in this filing, the prosecution has to give notice. In most cases this is not allowed, but there's a section of the law where you can use it.
Example, if you robbed a bank 10 years ago, it doesn't mean you robbed this bank in your new case. Prejudicial evidence would be kept out.
But if the prosecutor's can use other evidence to show for example that you are very familiar with the laws against conspiracy to rob a bank and show your actions showed consciousness of this. Not a lawyer, this is a rough example
Here's the law https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_404
(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.
(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.
GOVERNMENT’S NOTICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 404(b) establish his motive, intent, preparation, knowledge, absence of mistake, and common plan https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2023/12/2463dc6e-1f98-4759-9a49-c15c27edfab3.pdf
This gives a sense of the case they will use against Trump.
Robert Gouvela discusses this filing here https://x.com/RobGouveiaEsq/status/1732510732347232322?s=20
Garden of the Gods is great. Lovely country out there.
That's not 10,000 fake ballots.
It's fake voter registrations.
Gigantic difference. Usually this type of thing is a company is hired to get voters to register. They hire a bunch of employees who are told go here and get signatures. if that person, then say, doesn't do the work, just stays home and plays video games, and fakes a bunch of signatures that doesn't result in any votes whatsoever.
The Detroit News says this was caught in October 2020. https://archive.ph/NAAzO
You should show your evidence.
Tell you what let's wait 72 hours and see if this guy is dead.
RENO, Nev. (AP) — A Nevada grand jury on Wednesday indicted six Republicans who submitted certificates to Congress falsely declaring Donald Trump the winner of the 2020 presidential election in their state, making Nevada the third to seek charges against so-called “fake electors.”
“We cannot allow attacks on democracy to go unchallenged,” Nevada’s Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford said in a statement Wednesday. “Today’s indictments are the product of a long and thorough investigation, and as we pursue this prosecution, I am confident that our judicial system will see justice done.”
The fake electors — involved in the state GOP or Clark County GOP — have been charged with offering a false instrument for filing and uttering a forged instrument. Those two categories of felonies have penalties that range from one year up to either four or five years in prison.
I don't think it's realistic.
It's clearly illegal for the military to start arresting people. I don't think the parallels with Nazi Germany go in the same directions. The round up and detain people would MUCH MORE likely happen against an unpopular minority.....see the Japanese in WWII.
Show your evidence before calling people names.
Head of security where? show what you found.
What's the deal with this?
Wisconsin was one of six battleground states that witnessed President Trump’s enormous lead reverse in the middle of the night after a mysterious and still unexplained ballot dump for Joe Biden
There's no mystery. Milwaukee reported their mail in ballots. All of them. They counted all they had that night and reported the numbers.
Milwaukee county is the largest county by far in Wisconsin and famously Democratic. 1 out of every 6 people in the state live there. https://www.wisconsin-demographics.com/counties_by_population
Here's the Settlement document including this statement from the electors.
https://wisconsinexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/False-Elector-Settlement.pdf
The Elector Defendants will provide a public statement, set forth below, regarding the Dispute and will provide a copy of such statement to the President of the United States Senate, the Wisconsin Secretary of State, the Archivist of the United States, and the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. The public statement shall read as follows:
On December 14, 2020, in compliance with requests received from the Trump campaign and the Republican Party of Wisconsin, we met at the Wisconsin State Capitol and executed a document titled “Certificate of the Votes of the 2020 Electors from Wisconsin.” That document stated, in part, that we were “the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Wisconsin.” The Elector Defendants took the foregoing action because they were told that it was necessary to preserve their electoral votes in the event a court challenge may later change the outcome of the election in Wisconsin. That document was then used as part of an attempt to improperly overturn the 2020 presidential election results. The duly elected presidential electors for the State of Wisconsin for the 2020 presidential election were: Meg Andrietsch, Shelia Stubbs, Ronald Martin, Mandela Barnes, Khary Penebaker, Mary Arnold, Patty Schachtner, Shannon Holsey, Tony Evers, and Benjamin Wikler.
We hereby reaffirm that Joseph R. Biden, Jr. won the 2020 presidential election and that we were not the duly elected presidential electors for the State of Wisconsin for the 2020 presidential election.
We oppose any attempt to undermine the public’s faith in the ultimate results of the 2020 presidential election.
We hereby withdraw the documents we executed on December 14, 2020, and request that they be disregarded by the public and all entities to which they were submitted
I am not sure what other option they have.
Um, what?
Gee, another relevant example.
Again in your example, the cops, the courts, etc go along with the lizard people eating humans. And the Constitution somehow covers some other species. That's a little far fetched to me.
My larger point is having a military faithful to their oath is a barrier against tyranny.
I’d love to have a discussion. I keep hearing “The military can’t do anything on American soil
You're basically asking about a coup. What would it take for the American military to participate in a coup? Which would end American democracy. The question is what would it take for the US soldiers to violate their oath to support and defend the Constitution, participate in a coup and end our constitutional republic?
What does an oath mean to you?
In your scenario, you're arguing that US could become some form of Nazi Germany. In your scenario, you're advocating a power that the government and the cops don't have. And that the courts go along with it. And the police go along with it. And essentially the people wait for military. That all checks on power are abandoned
There's tons of things different between the US and Nazi Germany, for one thing, your scenario would cause a giant upheaval, which would mean, they would have to enact this scenario including all legal battles within a couple of years, because in reality a massively unpopular thing, would mean people would get voted out of office and the laws would change.
One difference between the US and Nazi Germany and a problem with your scenario, while there were concentration camps in Germany, none of the death camps were. They built the death camps in Poland. They wanted to hide the reality from regular Germans. The death camps were the results of Hitler being a dictator for almost a decade. they weren't the starting point. The death camps started in 1941 in another country. Hitler as dictator began in 1933. Hitler's full control of the army began August 1, 1934.
So I would argue that the military violating their oath to the Constitution is more likely TO LEAD to death camps.
To implement the ‘ Final Solution ’, the Nazis established six purpose built extermination camps on Polish soil.
Chełmno, Bełżec Sobibór Treblinka Majdanek Auschwitz-Birkenau
So just as a comparison, he invested his billions in the stock market in April 2001, he would 5 times his money now.
He would have a 400% profit.
Seems like a whole lot let trouble too.
We can simplify this.
let's say somebody makes you this offer.
You buy a car for $32,000 and 6 months later you set it on fire for the chance of.
6 years later, an insurance company would give you $45,000. And you could start paying that money for a new car, but you wouldn't get your new car to use for ANOTHER 6 years. So don't have your $32 grand or it takes you 12 years to get another car, but you have $1,000 profit a year less years of legal fees.
Would you do it? I wouldn't.
OK. Let's Examine this. Did he "net" $4.5 billion.
In April 2001, he leased the property and the buildings were 97% rented. He had four buildings and retails space
Number One and Two World Trade Center (the Twin Towers), Four and Five World Trade Center (two nine-story office buildings) and approximately 400,000 square feet of retail space.
So he has successful income generating buildings.
Then 9/11 happens and suddenly he is not generating income. This is going to affect his profit. He won't have income generating buildings until 2013
He also needs to build a new building. This will affect his profit.
One World Trade aka the Freedom Tower opened in Nov 2014. It cost 3.9 billion dollars.
4 World Trade opens in Nov 2013. It cost 1.67 billion dollars
Then he makes an insurance claim (fraud) netting $4.5Bn.
In 2007 he got the final $2 billion of a total of $4.55 billion https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20070527/story/100022003/silverstein,-insurers-settle-wtc-claims
Nearly six years of legal wrangling over the World Trade Center insurance claim ended last week with seven insurers agreeing to pay $2 billion to WTC leaseholder Silverstein Properties Inc.
#Accounting
So did he actually profit at all? Did he net even a single dollar?
Let's do some accounting.* We need to consider the credits and debits
#Debits $3.2 billion from the original billion lease. He didn't "buy" the towers. He leased them. So these means after 9/11 he was paying about $100+ million in rent for a giant hold in the ground.
$? billion 12/13 years of loss of income if 9/11 never happened. If rent is over 100 million a year, and the building in profitable than income would be something like 110 million a year, so this would be like 1.2 billion dollars
$?? million legal fees. 6 year battle with insurance companies would probably be multiple tens of millions of dollars
$350 million leasing fees. Just building the buildings in not enough, you need to lure tenants. They spent a ton of money to do this, helping tenants build out their office and in the case of Conde Nast, the anchor tenant of the Freedom Tower, they bought out the last 5 years of the existing lease. this number is part of the 3.9 building below, so we can ignore it
Building 1 $3.9 billion Building 4 $1.7 billion.
#Credits
$4.5 billion
So has he made a profit? Where? How? It seems like he gained a bunch more expenses.
. . . *I'm sure this is super simplified.
Many profited from 9/11.Larry Silverstein is just one of many.
How did he profit it from it?
Yes.
and they have nothing to do with prosecutions either.
So if that rubbed you wrong, pay attention to that feeling.
This is not an off the cuff comment. This seems like a setup question by Bannon and it seems like Kash is reading his answer from a prepared script.
This guy was Obama's chef too.
He cooked for Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump.
Jack Smith will get to submit a “written summary” of what a document SUPPOSEDLY says (just like hiding behind redactions on a document that we’re just SUPPOSED to believe are being redacted for a VALID reason)
No.
The summary needs to get approved by the judge who gets to read the original document.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18a/compiledact-96-456/section-4
Yes. Trump asked for a 2026 trial date.
oh, this happened too.
CNN Exclusive: Georgia prosecutors have officially added former Vice President Mike Pence on their witness list in the 2020 election subversion case against Trump https://cnn.it/3T5IexA