The Trials Of Donald Trump

[Bubba]

We'll see what we actually get. Trump's unpredictable sometimes impulsive decision making will no doubt cause some kitchen fires. There will be infighting with the press and the entrenched liberal established opposition. Trump is no angel of social morality nor capitalistic virtue. He sits on gold plated chairs. But in many ways he is the medicine for entrenched politicians and what that breeds when length of someone's political career drives the agenda more than the business of the people.

Is a candidates morality or, respect for others humanity, play a role in your voting? If so, how much does it influence your decision making when it comes to the vote? Is it different for voting than it is in other areas of your life?

Sincerely interested. Not trying to troll you

Moose - here's a brief clip from the late great David McCullough. In it, he references Dwight D. Eisenhower's 4 key qualities to measure a leader:

Character
Ability
Responsibility
Experience

Interesting Eisenhower listed Character first.

When I think of President's during my lifetime (Reagan, Bush, Clinton, GWB and Obama), prior to Trump, I don't think any of them failed all 4 qualities ... much less the first, character.

What say you?

Bill Clinton certainly would be considered borderline (personal) character at best.

[deadheadskier]

People seem to overlook Character and Responsibility and say his experience and ability make up for it.

What ability? He runs practically every business he starts into the ground. Wasn't Truth Social supposed to dominate with millions of people leaving Twitter or Facebook to join TS instead?

Hmmm.......

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/busin ... 235645818/

Such experience and ability!!

[easyrider16]

There is one and only one thing Trump has been great at - selling himself and his image. It's how he's made money and it's how he became President in 2016.

Now many of us will look at his selling techniques and realize almost immediately that he's largely full of sh!t, but in 2016 a solid majority of the country wasn't able to see that. More people have realized that he's full of it, but he's still successfully selling himself to a solid plurality of the GOP.

When it comes to actually delivering on what he's selling, though, he's got a pretty solid track record of failure.

[skidogg]

well p t said 1"s born every -----

[TheLurker]

There is one and only one thing Trump has been great at - selling himself and his image. It's how he's made money and it's how he became President in 2016.

Now many of us will look at his selling techniques and realize almost immediately that he's largely full of sh!t, but in 2016 a solid majority of the country wasn't able to see that. More people have realized that he's full of it, but he's still successfully selling himself to a solid plurality of the GOP.

When it comes to actually delivering on what he's selling, though, he's got a pretty solid track record of failure.

Trump: 62,984,828
Clinton: 65,853,514
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Unit ... l_election

Seems a majority saw it.

[Bubba]

He only hires the best people...

E. Jean Carroll judge bench-slaps Trump's attorney 14 times over basic lawyering in a single day of testimony

https://www.businessinsider.com/e-jean- ... bba-2024-1

[easyrider16]

Took a quick look at Habba's resume. This is not the typical lawyer hired by a billionaire (or even multi-millionaire). She graduated from a tier 4 law school, she's never worked at a white shoe law firm, or even a big law firm, and has just over ten years of experience as a lawyer. In short, she's not exactly among the most distinguished attorneys in the state.

Some of those mistakes are cringeworthy. They are first-time trial type of mistakes. My guess is Trump is having trouble hiring good lawyers because good lawyers don't want to work for someone who doesn't listen to them and doesn't pay the bill. On the other hand, if you google her and see a picture, it makes you wonder about the basis on which Trump made the decision to hire her.

[G-smashed]

83.3 million! Why not $833.3 million? I won't be happy until he's penniless and starving in the gutter.

[G-smashed]

Trump loses immunity claim unanimously! That's right his claim was sh*t. Time to warm up Ol' Sparky.

[Heywood jablowmee]

83.3 million! Why not $833.3 million? I won't be happy until he's penniless and starving in the gutter.

Dude…. You’ll NEVER be happy. You suffer from Terminal Miserable Prickitis

[easyrider16]

Read up on the oral arguments regarding the Colorado decision to disqualify Trump. Interesting discussion. I think the outcome is going to be SCOTUS reverses the CO decision and it would not surprise me if some of the more liberal justices signed on or at least concurred with the majority. I think the Court is going to be extremely uncomfortable with the notion of a single state's highest court being able to essentially decide unilaterally that a particular candidate is disqualified from office.

I think this decision will leave open the possibility for subsequent litigation on the issue. One of the problems with the Colorado case is procedural - should a single state be allowed to do this in this way? Isn't this a Federal case that deserves an evidentiary hearing in Federal court, and final review by SCOUTS? I don't know. The authors of this amendment did a pretty sh!t job of writing this particular clause. The obvious thing they left out is who determines whether someone meets the qualifications set out under the Constitution and how that is determined.

I also think it's a poorly thought-out concept, and it should have been pretty foreseeable that it would lead to a Constitutional crisis. The voters should decide who is qualified and who isn't, especially when things get murky. There is only so much one can do to protect stupid voters from themselves.

[spanky]

But what about states’ rights?!?!? /s

[easyrider16]

Seems to be a pretty consistent theme that people who work for Trump end up in jail.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-BB1i2fWj

[XtremeJibber2001]

Seeing as Fani Willis is a lawyer and also the DA of Fulton County .... she sure provided more than enough fodder to Trump & Co. I don't see how she remains on the Trump case.

[easyrider16]

Regardless of the impropriety of her relationship with a subordinate, I don't see how this has any bearing on the Trump prosecution. How is she conflicted by sleeping with one of her own subordinates? Why should this disqualify her from prosecuting Trump? What am I missing here? It strikes me as just taking dirt from their personal lives and making it public for no other reason than besmirching the prosecution. I'm a little surprised the judge allowed questioning on it.