265

Trump Trial Document May Prove He Knew He Lost Election (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Rapidcreek@reddthat.com to c/politics@lemmy.world

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip 81 points 1 year ago

I think it's funny people actually consider that any of these prosecutors would go after Trump if they weren't coming correct.

They have the fucking goods on him for whatever they actually indict on. They probably have decent but not 100% solid cases on at least twice as much, probably 10x as much.

Setting aside for a moment the bastardized definition of "conservative" that has come to exist these days, prosecutors are CONSERVATIVE. They rarely bring cases they might not win. If it's not certain, they try to intimidate the accused into a plea bargain.

Ok, we can pick up the bullshit modern American politics definition of conservative again. Thanks for listening to my TED talk.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Ok, we can pick up the bullshit modern American politics definition of conservative again. Thanks for listening to my TED talk.

You know how there's a difference between the words "democratic" and "Democratic", or "republican" and "Republican"? I say it's past time we differentiate "conservative" from "Conservative". Republicans are Conservatives, but they're definitely not conservative.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

There is a conservative party in the US, but it's the Democrats, whose position on most issues can be summed up as "preserve and maintain institutions, treaty relations, and infrastructure; support slow and gradual social progress without radical upheavals." This is textbook Burkean conservatism, only applied in a liberal-democratic country rather than an aristocratic one.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I've literally made this exact point but Christ on a stick people look at me like ice got a second head.

The Democrats are a big tent conservative neoliberal party. They are getting better, but that's because to build a winning coalition they've got to be the big tent. Progressives have drug them kicking and screaming to the few good policy positions they have. Otherwise they are 1990s or 2000s Republicans without the southern twang.

Americans in general are politically illiterate. As in they don't know what the damn words mean.

[-] MelodiousFunk@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

As in they don’t know what the damn words mean.

Most Americans have only heard the words used in the contexts that are being bitched about. And that's intentional on behalf of the ruling class. It's a framing of the conversation on a societal scale. More accurate information is out there, but to find it, one would need to either be intellectually curious (a dangerous trait to exhibit in the "wrong" setting) or stumble across it at random AND have the inclination to hear out something that goes against what they've been told their whole lives instead of rejecting it out of hand.

And now we are neck deep in yet another round of anti-intellectualism to further compound the issue. I'm not trying to make excuses, just provide context that tends to get lost amongst the "Americans are stupid" narrative.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In a liberal-democratic society, "conservatism" in the Burkean sense should normally mean maintaining liberal-democracy; and occasionally expanding its scope e.g. women voters, racial equality, etc. Replacing an existing liberal-democracy with anarcho-capitalism or theocratic fascism is not conservative.

In any society, "conservatism" should maintain public goods; knocking down the schools, libraries, and treaty alliances because a radical libertarian doesn't know what they're for is a Chesterton's Fence violation!

Liberal conservatism is opposed to both communist revolution and fascist corruption. It allows for social-democratic experiments within the frame of liberal-democracy. It cannot endorse gerrymandering, institutional overthrow, or the abandonment of public goods which is the mainstay of the GOP.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah I don't have a word for whatever the hell the Republicans have become. Even fascists see the utility of institutions.

[-] teamevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

But there's so .. so many stupid people that are like abuse victims with Stockholm Syndrome and the need abuse Daddy for some deeply disappointing reason.

[-] spider@lemmy.nz 6 points 1 year ago

Ok, we can pick up the bullshit modern American politics definition of conservative again.

adjective

off the rails

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Doesn’t matter. He succeeded convincing 85% repubes that the election was stolen. These assholes will never let free and fair elections happen in this country for a foreseeable future. Long after the orange man is gone, the threat to democracy will persist as long as Republican Party remains.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

This article is making a big deal out of nothing, at least right now. The fact that Trump resumed doing non-presidential things doesn't mean he believed that he lost the election, but only that he thought it was unlikely he'd be able to keep the White House.

Of course there could be specific legal positions that he can no longer reasonably advance because of his business decisions, but at the moment we don't have any of those on hand.

Certainly this document doesn't prove that he knew he lost anything. It simply shows what pragmatic steps he was taking.

[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This document could be hugely important to Jack Smith and Fani Willis: it would show that Trump knew, at least as of 1/15/21, that he had not won the election and was returning to his private life & business,"

Gotta say I disagree. It shows he knew he would be out of the presidency, shows he wouldn't be fighting to stay extra judicially, but we all know he left the presidency on the 20th. This just shifts the timeline by 5 days.

The implication here is that he knew that he lost a free and fair election...and he DID do that, we all know that, but this doc doesn't prove he believed that. He could have easily believed there was fraud but be resigned to that fact, this is all after Jan 6th so there was no hope of Pence overturning the election anymore.

Luckily, you don't need to prove he knew he lost, you have to prove a reasonable person should have known. His own lawyers can testify that they told him he lost. That is the actual evidence that they need.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

No shit he knew he lost. There was zero evidence to call the results into question. Every one of Trump's legal challenges was thrown out except one; in which the judge changed a COVID distancing rule for election monitora from 10 ft to 6 ft. Obviously that had nothing to do with the outcome.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A document presented during Donald Trump's business fraud trial in New York Wednesday may prove to be "hugely important" in the former president's election interference cases, according to former prosecutor Andrew Weissmann.

On Wednesday, Donald Trump Jr., who's listed as a defendant in the civil case, took the witness stand to testify about his role in the family business.

Alex Woodward, senior reporter for the Independent, said the document in question stated that full control of Trump's trust would be returned to the former president on January 20, 2021, the day that he left the White House.

According to Weissmann, the document could be a valuable piece of evidence for Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the Justice Department's investigation into whether Trump attempted to remain in the White House after knowing he lost the 2020 presidential election.

The former president is also facing charges in Georgia following an investigation from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who accused Trump and 18 others of attempting to overturn the 2020 election results in the state.

"Of course, Trump may argue that he genuinely believed that he won up until January 6, 2021, and that he only restored himself as trustee after Mike Pence certified the electoral votes," Rahmani continued.

The original article contains 575 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 64%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] rthmchgs@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 1 year ago

So he's comparing the election to a fruit cake?

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com -3 points 1 year ago

no, this is nonsense. there are so many ways out of explaining this document this article is a complete waste of time.

we all know if it isnt an image of him with his hand in the jar, its not going to stick

this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023

265 points (94.9% liked)

politics

19103 readers

2010 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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