93
Trump is facing multiple charges – but there is one that could seriously harm his reputation
(www.theguardian.com)
What reputation?
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
93 points (91.2% liked)
politics
19089 readers
4198 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Neat if it happens, but it won't change any opinions. Those already anti-Trump will point to it as another example of how corrupt Trump is and those already pro-Trump will point to it as an example of how the government is out to get him.
I mean... he's already a rapist, found to be 100% liable for his rape by a court, just this year.
And this article is claiming that a blow to his business reputation might change his story.
Rape is bad. People should really take notice of the raping thing.
The people who believe rape is bad have. The problem is the ridiculous number of people who don't really think it's bad.
It's just locker room rape.. /s
Do you think if people started referring to him as Donald Rapey McTrump, that he would be able to sue them for defamation considering he was found in a court to be a rapist?
Too bad our news outlets are huge pieces of shit.
"Why did she wait so long?" There are a million excuses for him.
If you ask an Obama or Carter voter to name some things they didn't like about their candidate they'll give you a long list. All Trumps people are ready to swear he was the greatest President ever.
Exactly. "He was a billionaire when he took the Oath in 2016. The Deep State went after him behind the scenes to strip him of his wealth. I'm signing all my social security benefits over to him today!!"
Oh there's a tiny hands/ penis charge?
We don’t criticize people for things they didn’t choose.
Correction. You don't. I'll laugh at this tiny dick napoleon forever.
You'd be okay with criticizing people for their skin color then? That's also something not chosen. How about gender? You okay with that? Nationality?
It is always wrong to criticize people for things they did not choose, even when the person has made innumerable choices which are well and truly open to vigorous criticism. Your failure to pick literally any of those instead reveals you as a bigot.
No, we laugh at people who pretend they are something they aren't.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
We have been here before countless times: prematurely anticipating the end of Donald Trump on the basis of actions or implications that, for anyone else, would have proven fatal long ago.
Quick recap: the former president is facing four separate criminal cases, involving 91 felony counts, in four separate states; plus a civil fraud case currently being heard in Manhattan; plus a second defamation suit brought by the writer E Jean Carroll, whom earlier this year Trump was found guilty of sexually assaulting and defaming and ordered to pay $5m.
The question in all of these cases is less whether Trump will be found guilty than whether there is any outcome whatsoever that would be capable of preventing him from standing for president next year, or – the more depressing calculation, in some ways – of damaging his chances, if not.
For the former president, the most straightforwardly dangerous criminal trial – that is the one that is, simultaneously, the most serious and also appears to involve the most clear-cut evidence against him – is the so-called classified documents case, brought in Florida by special counsel Jack Smith.
But in the short term it does threaten to unseat his reputation as a businessman of any standing and strip him of his licence to operate a business in New York.
Unlike all the other legal actions against Trump, which he has apparently successfully been able to pass off as part of some vast conspiracy against him, the fraud case, in which it is alleged that he inflated the value of his businesses to secure better loan rates, lands differently.
The original article contains 1,052 words, the summary contains 268 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Did I miss a charge in the lineup somewhere that indicts him for some form of decency or intelligence? He’s riding the wave of populism, ignorant rage, and authoritarianism. The only thing that would hurt his chances with his followers is if they found out he actually got found out secretly using logic and reason or something.
There is one other case that is a bigger threat to trump. The Colorado suit to keep him off the ballot. Closing statements were made Wednesday and the judge is expected to give her verdict today. This is the first court testing if Trump incited the insurrection. If she judges in favor of the plantiffs, it will set legal precedent that trump incited the insurrection and be a springboard for every purple state.
I imagine the defense have the appeals paperwork ready to file, just in case.
Oh? Just one?
Listen. He’s knuckleheaded loyalists have had plenty of opportunity to turn on his traitorous ass. Theirs that remain are too fucking stupid to reason with.
It's not about his base abandoning him because he's no longer a billionaire (if he ever was) or a real estate tycoon. It's that he's built his identity around these things, and that court case could strip him of it.
The MAGoos will spin it to say that he lost his fortune because while he was President he couldn't manage his money correctly and blame the Deep State.