Shiftless2
Well-known member
No question she's in a pickle ....
Trump Gets Triggered By Looming Criminal Charges & Melts Down
- Thread starter Shiftless2
- Start date
Barry Farber called it a "distinction without a difference".
It's an expenditure regardless of how labeled. Such expenditure is not a dollar less if called an "expense" instead of ... .
In any case if you're still unclear about the criticism, it's about nations in the red in graphic #353, not meeting the guideline, as those in green are shown to do.
ref:
The North Atlantic Treaty / Washington D.C. - 4 April 1949
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
04 Apr. 1949 - Last updated: 19 Oct. 2023 18:02
AHD provides half a dozen definitions for "betray", including: "commit treason against".
I don't dispute Trump would object. But is failing to collude equal to betrayal? To Trump perhaps.
The American Heritage Dictionary entry: betray
The American Heritage Dictionary entry: betray
ahdictionary.com
Aljazeera
Published On 12 Feb 202412
Former United States President Donald Trump has stirred strong reactions in Europe after saying Washington might not protect NATO allies from potential attack from Russia if he wins the November election unless some members of the alliance step up their military spending.
Speaking at a campaign rally on Saturday in South Carolina, the Republican Party’s presidential front runner said he told an unnamed leader of a “big country” that is part of NATO that he would “encourage them [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want” with nations that don’t spend sufficiently on defence.
NATO, which was formed during the Cold War, consists of 31 nations, all of them in Europe except for the US and Canada. Under Article 5 of the treaty that created the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, an attack on one member prompts a response from all.
Trump has made similar comments about military spending by other NATO members previously, including when he was president, saying the US unfairly shoulders the alliance’s defence burden.
But while the real estate developer-turned-politician’s rhetoric about the alliance remains unchanged, the spending by NATO members is different from what they were when Trump was in office.
A key reason: Russia’s war on Ukraine and the increased threat perception in Europe.
By 2017, when Trump was sworn in as US president, only four countries met that threshold: the US, Greece, the United Kingdom and Poland. Trump’s argument since then has been that the US needs to pressure allies to expand their military budgets.
Seven years later, NATO military spending has changed significantly, even though most members still do not commit 2 percent of their GDPs to defence.
By 2022, the number of NATO nations meeting that bar had reached eight — the US, UK, Greece, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Croatia.
Then, as the war in Ukraine continued and fears over Russia’s expansionist ambitions mounted, more European members increased their military budgets. The number rose to 11 in 2023 with Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and new NATO entrant Finland all spending more than 2 percent while Croatia tipped under the threshold.
Luxembourg (0.7 percent) spends the least in relation to its GDP. Belgium (1.1 percent), Turkey (1.3 percent), Spain (1.3 percent), Slovenia (1.4 percent) and Canada (1.4 percent) are other member nations at the bottom of the spending pile.
Yet even as more NATO members have increased their spending, the alliance’s dependence on the size and strength of the US military has only grown.
The US, whose military forms the core of the alliance, has consistently spent more than all other members combined. In 1990, the US accounted for 61 percent of the alliance’s defence spending. By 2020, the US share had increased to 70 percent.
www.aljazeera.com
Trump’s Russia threat against NATO: What US allies are spending on defence
The former president has repeatedly said the US is unfairly carrying the financial burden of the security alliance.Published On 12 Feb 202412
Former United States President Donald Trump has stirred strong reactions in Europe after saying Washington might not protect NATO allies from potential attack from Russia if he wins the November election unless some members of the alliance step up their military spending.
Speaking at a campaign rally on Saturday in South Carolina, the Republican Party’s presidential front runner said he told an unnamed leader of a “big country” that is part of NATO that he would “encourage them [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want” with nations that don’t spend sufficiently on defence.
NATO, which was formed during the Cold War, consists of 31 nations, all of them in Europe except for the US and Canada. Under Article 5 of the treaty that created the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, an attack on one member prompts a response from all.
Trump has made similar comments about military spending by other NATO members previously, including when he was president, saying the US unfairly shoulders the alliance’s defence burden.
But while the real estate developer-turned-politician’s rhetoric about the alliance remains unchanged, the spending by NATO members is different from what they were when Trump was in office.
A key reason: Russia’s war on Ukraine and the increased threat perception in Europe.
How much are NATO members spending on defence?
NATO defence spending declined sharply after the Cold War – from 4.1 percent of combined gross domestic product (GDP) in 1990 to 2.6 percent in 2000 – even as the group expanded. To boost funding, members agreed at a 2014 summit in Wales to contribute at least 2 percent of their GDPs to the alliance by 2024.By 2017, when Trump was sworn in as US president, only four countries met that threshold: the US, Greece, the United Kingdom and Poland. Trump’s argument since then has been that the US needs to pressure allies to expand their military budgets.
Seven years later, NATO military spending has changed significantly, even though most members still do not commit 2 percent of their GDPs to defence.
By 2022, the number of NATO nations meeting that bar had reached eight — the US, UK, Greece, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Croatia.
Then, as the war in Ukraine continued and fears over Russia’s expansionist ambitions mounted, more European members increased their military budgets. The number rose to 11 in 2023 with Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and new NATO entrant Finland all spending more than 2 percent while Croatia tipped under the threshold.
Luxembourg (0.7 percent) spends the least in relation to its GDP. Belgium (1.1 percent), Turkey (1.3 percent), Spain (1.3 percent), Slovenia (1.4 percent) and Canada (1.4 percent) are other member nations at the bottom of the spending pile.
Yet even as more NATO members have increased their spending, the alliance’s dependence on the size and strength of the US military has only grown.
The US, whose military forms the core of the alliance, has consistently spent more than all other members combined. In 1990, the US accounted for 61 percent of the alliance’s defence spending. By 2020, the US share had increased to 70 percent.
Trump’s Russia threat against NATO: What US allies are spending on defence
The former president has repeatedly said the US is unfairly carrying the financial burden of the security alliance.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Trump’s First Criminal Trial Is Starting Next Month
A Manhattan judge ruled that the former president's New York fraud trail will kick off with jury selection on March 25BY RYAN BORT
Donald Trump‘s first criminal trial is slated to begin in March 25.
A Manhattan judge on Thursday rejected Trump’s bid to toss out District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s criminal case accusing the former president of fraudulently paying off a porn star ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Judge Juan Merchan followed up tossing the motion to dismiss the charges by slating the trial to begin with jury selection on March 25. It will be Trump’s first criminal trial during a presidential campaign that has and surely will continue to be dominated by his mountain of legal woes, which include three other criminal indictments — two from the Justice Department and one in Georgia.
Bragg indicted Trump last April on 34 felony counts related to the falsifying of business records with the intent to defraud. Trump allegedly had Michael Cohen, his former fixer who has already served prison time for this role in the scheme, pay off adult film star Stormy Daniels so she would keep quiet ahead of the 2016 election about an alleged affair with Trump. Trump allegedly repaid Cohen for the hush money payment but fraudulently classified the reimbursement as pertaining to legal fees rather than ...
CONTINUED
Thursday Trump had two civil trials, one in Georgia, one in New York.
Trump stimulates the economy with all his legal troubles, Biden gets the credit.
Not impossible to imagine this all working out well for Nikki Haley.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Trump opts against Supreme Court appeal on civil immunity claim over Jan. 6 lawsuits
Story by Lawrence Hurley and Daniel BarnesWASHINGTON — Lawsuits seeking to hold Donald Trump personally accountable for his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol can move forward after the former president chose not to take his broad immunity claim to the Supreme Court.
Trump had a Thursday deadline to file a petition at the Supreme Court contesting an appeals court decision from December that rejected his immunity arguments, but he did not do so.
The appeals court made it clear that Trump could still claim immunity later in the proceedings in three cases brought by Capitol Police officers and members of Congress.
"President Trump will continue to fight for presidential immunity all across the spectrum," said Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesman.
The civil lawsuits against Trump are separate from ....
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Trump Ordered to Pay $355 Million in New York Fraud Case
The former president has also been barred from running a company in the state for three yearsBY NIKKI MCCANN RAMIREZ, ASAWIN SUEBSAENG
Donald Trump has been ordered to pay $355 million in damages and barred the former president “from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for a period of three years.”
Judge Arthur Engoron handed the ruling down on Friday in the wake of Trump and the Trump Organization being found liable for financial fraud. Trump is expected to appeal the rulings.
The scathing decision concludes a contentious, high-profile lawsuit that New York Attorney General Letitia James brought against Trump in September of 2022. James accused the former president, his adult children, and several of his associates, of committing widespread fraud through his real estate empire.
Engoron had already ruled last September that Trump was liable for fraud. The trial that followed was meant exclusively to determine the punishment — which turned out to be stiff.
The ruling comes just weeks after a jury ordered Trump to pay E. Jean Carroll, whom he sexually assaulted in the ‘90s, over $83 million in defamation-related damages. Trump had already been ordered to pay Carroll $5 million last year, and the fine Engoron handed down on Friday means the frontrunner to land the Republican nomination for president now owes over $400 million in civil litigation penalties. The weight of all of this, on top of the financial costs of paying for lawyers handling Trump’s vast array of criminal prosecution and other matters, has led to exploding legal bills and a gigantic money drain in the middle of Trump’s campaign to retake the White House.
Trump’s team is gearing up for a protracted conflict over Engoron’s judgment. In conversations with lawyers and other advisers in recent months, Trump has indicated he expects to be fighting for his business empire’s survival for quite a while, and maybe even into a potential second presidential term.
In these discussions, according to a person with knowledge of the matter and another source briefed on it, Trump has agreed that he should expect an appeals process in the New York civil fraud case to go on potentially for years. “He is aware this could take a … [while] to resolve,” says the source familiar with the situation. Trump, this person adds, “feels good about his chances” at appeal. Indeed, the heavily chaotic approach that Trump and his legal team brought to this trial since last year was built off of an internal assumption that defeat in this trial was a foregone conclusion, and that appealing was their only hope. ...
CONTINUED
I haven't figured this one out yet.
- Is this strategy?
- Or is it merely a lack of resources to do what Trump would otherwise insist upon?
I share the common belief Trump doesn't have liquid assets to immediately satisfy this.
Not sure what happens if that's true.
Isn't the U.S. judicial tradition:
- pay the fine, or
- go to jail?
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Re the $355 million - my understanding is that if he wants to appeal that award he's going to have to post collateral or a bond for the full amount - no idea where he's going to come up with that much cash. And that doesn't count the award re the sexual assault case
Trump Tower is alliterative. If Uncle Sam takes it over, renaming it "Sam Tower" lacks zap.
How about "Sam's Spire"? "Donald's Downfall"?
Back to #369
Some reports indicate Trump has been using political donations to pay his legal bills.
But wouldn't / shouldn't Trump's political donation inflow taper down once donors realize Trump isn't fit to run? terra incognita
On the evening of this ruling Friday Feb. 16, 2024 ref. post #367:
Trump fined $350 $Million for business fraud 24/02/16
NBC-TV
"Today justice has been served. Today we proved that no one is above the law." New York State Attorney General Letitia James 24/02/16
"These are radical left Democrats. They're lunatics and it's election interference. ... If I weren't running none of this stuff would have ever happened." Trump 24/02/16
BUT !
Trump previously stated, on camera / open mic: "I became president because of the brand." Trump
Yes former president Trump, a brand you burnished with fraud.
tsk tsk D.J.
Trump fined $350 $Million for business fraud 24/02/16
NBC-TV
"Today justice has been served. Today we proved that no one is above the law." New York State Attorney General Letitia James 24/02/16
"These are radical left Democrats. They're lunatics and it's election interference. ... If I weren't running none of this stuff would have ever happened." Trump 24/02/16
BUT !
Trump previously stated, on camera / open mic: "I became president because of the brand." Trump
Yes former president Trump, a brand you burnished with fraud.
If Trump's legal appeal fails "... Mr. Trump is facing not only a massive penalty here, but the number itself could balloon with all of the interest involved. A real question for this company, will it have to sell off some of Mr. Trump's most prized assets to pay for this judgment." NBC-TV News Senior Legal Correspondent Laura Jarrett 24/02/16
tsk tsk D.J.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
His sycophants will just keep paying - after all, didn't you know that this is nothing but a witch hunt and the grift must continue.
History (his story) provides slim glimpses of what happens when a segment of the population goes mad.
- Salem, MA: might mold from food (perhaps bread) been poisoned by ergot fungus, resulting in LSD induced madness? And then the infamous "Salem witch" trials?
- British Arctic explorer Captain Sir John Franklin & crew, suffering insanity from Lead poisoning, from canned food sealed with Lead?
- Hitler's Germany? - let's kill all the Jews, & take over the world -
Insanity, mental defect severe enough to induce dysfunction might before 2016 have seemed rare, a tolerable inconvenience out of a quarter-billion population. BUT !
What the %$#@!
They prefer treachery and implausible lies (Trump [R]) to peace and prosperity (Biden [D])?!
This is not some small but embarrassing segment of the population. Trump is leading in the polls, against candidates of BOTH parties ! “Toto,I have a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore.”
NEWS FLASH !
Once the gunwales are submerged, bailing is ineffective.
If you're still sweet on this world-class swindler,
*send him a bouquet.
Leaving me to wonder:
"Men never do evil so fully and cheerfully as when we do it out of conscience." French scientist,philosopher Blaise Pascal (1623-62)
Do "they", the millions of MAGAs that support this convicted criminal, now a ~$half-$Bil in the hole, actually perceive they are legitimately justified supporting Trump?
Or is the thrill of crossing the line as Trump so frequently does so rewarding that trashing the Constitution is an acceptable casualty for their enjoyment?
Trump's leading in the polls ! Merciful Heavens
* Note on A.I., & authenticity:
I don't know the provenance of this feminized rendering of Trump. I'm aware some Americans attend costume parties. I doubt that explains this Trump-like graphic.
Indications of computer graphic falsification include the wig hairline, and what seem to be pierced-earings.
It is not included to question Trump's sexual preference. Instead it's satire, intended to tease / annoy / awaken those that blindly support Trump.
Who gets the $money?
And if as NBC reported Trump has to liquidate assets to satisfy the judgment, what's Trump's deadline?
Those with the ability to buy from Trump would be s a v v y enough about high $finance to know that if Trump has a deadline, they can $"low-ball" Trump and acquire the property for a fraction of its market value once the deadline is reached.
Conversely a bidding war might break out, and Trump gains windfall.
Or anywhere in between.
But the premise of the $penalty is Trump's bidness partners were jeopardized. Will those jeopardized receive a proportional share?
Shiftless2
Well-known member
More on the award
The decision by Justice Arthur F. Engoron caps a chaotic, yearslong case in which New York’s attorney general put Mr. Trump’s fantastical claims of wealth on trial. With no jury, the power was in Justice Engoron’s hands alone, and he came down hard: The judge delivered a sweeping array of punishments that threatens the former president’s business empire as he simultaneously contends with four criminal prosecutions and seeks to regain the White House.
Justice Engoron barred Mr. Trump for three years from ...
CONTINUED
That page also contains a link to the actual ruling
Note there is an annotated version but without a subscription I can't read it. If anyone can do so and can post a link that doesn't require the reader to be a subscriber please do.
Trump Fraud Trial Penalty Will Exceed $450 Million
The ruling in Donald J. Trump’s civil fraud case could cost him all his available cash. The judge said that the former president’s “complete lack of contrition” bordered on pathological.
The civil trial tested Donald J. Trump’s claims of wealth and a judge found them fraudulent. The former president is expected to appeal. Credit...Maansi Srivastava/The New York Times
By Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess
The decision by Justice Arthur F. Engoron caps a chaotic, yearslong case in which New York’s attorney general put Mr. Trump’s fantastical claims of wealth on trial. With no jury, the power was in Justice Engoron’s hands alone, and he came down hard: The judge delivered a sweeping array of punishments that threatens the former president’s business empire as he simultaneously contends with four criminal prosecutions and seeks to regain the White House.
Justice Engoron barred Mr. Trump for three years from ...
CONTINUED
That page also contains a link to the actual ruling
Note there is an annotated version but without a subscription I can't read it. If anyone can do so and can post a link that doesn't require the reader to be a subscriber please do.
Last edited:
I haven't seen any deadline designated.
And what happens if Trump does not meet the deadline?
And without a deadline, what makes the law judge there will be payment?
I get that from The New York Times and elsewhere. It may be an embarrassing ignorance, but I avoid that out of concern for increased malware risk. I totally have to switch to Linux. MS Win is a loser's game. I may have to go to college to learn to use Linux, though I've run Linux before.
I'm not quite as proficient w/ Linux as I am w/ Win7 / Win10.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
The blog-o-sphere is on this one.
The sentiment being that if Musk is dumb enough to pay $44 billion for Twitter he is probably dumb enough to "loan" Trump the money he needs in order to appeal ...
The sentiment being that if Musk is dumb enough to pay $44 billion for Twitter he is probably dumb enough to "loan" Trump the money he needs in order to appeal ...
Engineers are the sorcerers of the modern age.
The dysfortune with Musk is his reach exceeds his grasp.
Not clear to me if Musk would do that, because he deliberately desires to achieve the objective,
or merely because he can, or considers the excitement worth the $cost.
The dysfortune with Musk is his reach exceeds his grasp.
Not clear to me if Musk would do that, because he deliberately desires to achieve the objective,
or merely because he can, or considers the excitement worth the $cost.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
But the total amount he'd have to post is only about 1% of what he paid for Twitter.