Donald I, emperor of the world.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

secretsqirrel

Well-Known Member
<------- Where can I moan about the 'Veteran' bit?

Well they’ve called me ‘Well-Known’, I supposed to be secret.
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member
T
Trump entertained and praised the Crown Prince Mohammed in the oval office (who ordered the murder of Khashoggi). Trump praised their human rights record (wtaf?). An ABC news reporter asked whether there was a conflict of interest with his family capitalising on exploits in Saudi Arabia. she mentioned the murder of the journalist and the family's of the victims of 9/11 who were furious over his visit. He simply attacked her and called ABC 'fake news'.
The fat Arab f*cker just sat there smiling.

Crown Prince Mohammed seized $800bn in assets to basically control the politics in Saudi Arabia.

Grifting grifting grifting. No shame, no scruples (and virtually no penis).

I doubt Trump saw the irony of him accusing a reporter of being rude to a guest in the White House after he had been even more rude to visitors when Zelensky and Cyril Ramaphosa were his guests.
 

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Perhaps the answer would be to build Trump a fake Oval Office and gold-encrusted ballroom and send in lots of people telling him what a tremendous job he's doing as President.

1763546681642.png
 

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
 

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
That's going to go down well with the judge.
If it wasn't so serious a matter, that would be laughable.

Just reading some more about this - seems as if it was such a rush job, because they were on the last day they could file it, because of the statute of limitations... the grand jury rejected the three-count indictment, and the new indictment was just shown to one jury member, and that's the one they presented to the court. I can't see there's any way that even a partisan judge could sidestep that as disabling. (Obviously I'm an expert in US legal matters, because I read stuff on Bluesky.)

1763576787720.png
 
  • Wow
Reactions: C R
OP
OP
C R

C R

Guru
Just reading some more about this - seems as if it was such a rush job, because they were on the last day they could file it, because of the statute of limitations... the grand jury rejected the three-count indictment, and the new indictment was just shown to one jury member, and that's the one they presented to the court. I can't see there's any way that even a partisan judge could sidestep that as disabling. (Obviously I'm an expert in US legal matters, because I read stuff on Bluesky.)

View attachment 11137

I started reading popehat many years ago following reporting of some copyright cases I was interested in. Ken is always a pleasure to read.
 
Top Bottom