311
Oh look at Trumph pretending to give a shit about his offspring when we all know he’s going to pretend he hardly knows them the second they flip on him.
Well, it’s not entirely fake. Instead of just wanting to fuck Ivanka, he’ll want to hate-fuck Ivanka.
He knows Ivanka well enough to know he wants to fuck her.
At last, orange grandpa managed to recall the best conservative line of defence: but what about kids?
He’s crackin’ . . .
Additionally, however, the Financial Statements Values are Conservative (LOW!), Mar-a-Lago is worth MUCH MORE than $18,000,000
I'd bet 18 million he valued it as less than that on his taxes...
Yeah he's on trial for this exact thing. Baffling he would bring that up.
Doesn't this violate his gag order?
Don't worry. Hell be fined $1.37 for it.
It was about that time I noticed the judge was about 8 stories tall and a Crustacean from the Protozoic era.
"Hopeful he's learned a lesson" -Susan Collins
No, the gag order for this case was only to get him to stop terrorizing the courtroom staff, like the judge's clerks. He was making up bizarre conspiracy theories about them. The judge left himself out of the order.
There's multiple gag orders in multiple cases though that are all a bit different, depending on how Trump has tried to undermine courtroom proceedings in each case. So it gets a little confusing.
Actually no. He's not threatening his own kids...yet.
I can't keep track. Was there a gag order in place for this particular case?
There is one, there was one. All I really know is he's not right.
😭 leave my children alone! 😭
🤣🤣🤣🤣
(edit) Since people apparently have lost the ability to recognise the presence of subtext, let me spell it out. I'm certain that Trump is saying all of that out of concern not for his offsprings but for his own benefit, by trying to change the narrative from the facts of the case to the apparent harrassment of his children. I doubt he is capable of love, fatherly or otherwise.
(/edit)
You can't fault a man for protecting his children.
But I seriously doubt that sentient pile of spray-on tan has the emotional capacity to recognise its human-shaped wank-stains as its children beyond whatever publicity pity-points it can get out of them.
Not sure why you are getting down voted
While the general "can't fault a man for protecting his children" is a milquetoast statement we can all agree with, it's obfuscating what really happened.
He wasn't chasing away a coyote with a pointed stick: the dude posted a bizarre attack (name-calling, non sequiturs, claims of fraud) on attorneys and the judge for what appears to be a legitimate inquiry.
Did you happen to completely miss the second part of the comment?
No, I just didn't think the second part negated the first part. I read it as the defense being to some degree legitimate, but that he was doing so out of self-interest. I was trying to underscore how absurd his so-called defense was.
In other words, my apologies! I didn't intend for my attempt at an explanation as criticism of you, or start some pointless quibbling internet argument (because I imagine we're all tired of those). Take care out there.
I've noticed that the "anything other than complete opposition and full condemnation of everything they say and are associated with = support" mindset is present here, too.
Holy shit, maybe someone should tell him to lay off the amphetamines... I can barely understand that word salad.
He posted that at 2:30 in the morning, following a post that he made the day before at 4:30. That doesn't sound like the hours a normal, healthy person keeps.
There's not much about him that is normal or healthy.
Yep. Just keep violating that gag order, Don.
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2023
311 points (100.0% liked)
News
36142 readers
3358 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS