45 Comments

Trump's evil genius is using litigation and endless appeals to get away with all sorts of crimes and malfeasance for decades -- screwing contractors and business partners, and now the American people. He knows his opponents will eventually just crap out and give up. I would not doubt the heavily-stacked appeals court will side with him, but if not, I am sure Elon Musk, the Murdochs, Putin, Orban, or the Saudis will come through with aid. I bet the Heritage Fund alone can front him. And they each can do it legally by buying Trump's real estate at inflated rates. It's the perfect bribe, pre-laundered money.

Expand full comment

I am very worried about the upcoming election, as too many people don't understand the stakes. Odds are strong that if a person is reading this Substack, they are NOT among those who don't understand what's at risk. For those who don't have enough free-floating anxiety, Google "Project 2025".

Expand full comment

“Trump has asked the appeals court to pause the $454 million judgment that a New York judge imposed on Mr. Trump last month, or accept a bond of only $100 million.”

And the court's only response should be a polite “Fuck that. Judgement was for $454 million and you will pay $454 million. Now pay up!”

Any felon found guilty and sentenced to 45 years in jail who said “I don’t feel like serving 45 years. So let’s make it 10.” would get their motion denied in a pico-second and possibly sanctioned for wasting the Court’s time with such obvious bullshit.

Expand full comment

I was just listening to your weekend podcast; thanks! One thing I want to point out: I doubt Hur will be welcome in the next Trump administration. According to Sarah Isgur on her Advisory Opinions podcast, Hur worked on the Mueller Report.

Expand full comment

The only qualification required for serving in a Trump administration is a willingness to lie blatantly and to publicly debase yourself for Trump.

Hur has shown himself to be overly qualified to serve in a Trump administration.

Expand full comment

Your fellow left leaning writers are spinning this into something it's not. Yes the word bloodbath was used but they are chopping up sound bites just to get clicks:

https://substack.com/@paulrpace/note/c-51909675

Expand full comment

I watched the speech. There was no chopping up of soundbites.

Expand full comment

Got to the one (below I have copied it) from Tiedrich article I restacked, the one I posted shows he was referring to the auto industry. It's chopped

https://youtu.be/Yq4MC7zGXiw

Expand full comment

The quote is verbatim.

Expand full comment

Right wing writers sure are falling all over themselves to parse it out to claim he wasn’t using violent rhetoric anywhere in his speech. Their insistence that “bloodbath” doesn’t mean “bloodbath” is very telling.

Expand full comment

Do you understand what context means?

example: "my son lost 19-0 in his baseball game last Saturday, it was a bloodbath!" Or "That scene from Scarface was a real blood bath!" Or see full quote from Trump's economic message and try telling me it's violent rhetoric again (fwiw, I voted for Biden):

"But if you look at the United Auto Workers, what they've done to their people is horrible. They want to do this all-electric nonsense where the cars don't go far. They cost too much. And they’re all made in China. And the head of the United Auto Workers never probably shook hands with a Republican before they're destroying — you know, Mexico has taken, over a period of 30 years, 34% of the automobile manufacturing business in our country, think of it, went to Mexico.

"China now is building a couple of massive plants, where they're going to build the cars in Mexico and … they think that they're going to sell those cars into the United States with no tax at the border. Let me tell you something to China. If you're listening, President Xi, and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal, those big, monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now, and you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans, and you're going to sell the cars to us, no. We're going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you're not going to be able to sell those cars.

"If I get elected. Now, if I don't get elected, it's gonna be a bloodbath for the whole, that's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That'll be the least of it. But they're not gonna sell those cars."

Expand full comment

His use of the word "bloodbath" fits a long, storied pattern of violent language. What did he mean in this context? It's hard to say exactly, but my guess is its part of a plan to prime his cult followers to behave violently in the future. One way of doing this is to pretend Democrats are going to turn the country into a "bloodbath," so therefore they need to respond in kind.

Expand full comment

You are being dangerous and misleading, he was referring to the notion of the auto industry experiencing a “bloodbath” if he wasn’t elected. You shouldn’t have to lie about Trump to make the case against him. This is exactly why democrats are losing support

Expand full comment

“This is exactly why democrats are losing support”

Except… they’re not.

Democrats are beating Republicans is nearly every measure. Fund raising. Number of donors (popular support). Margins by which their nominee wins primaries. Success in recent elections.

Republicans are bleeding support all over the place.

Expand full comment

If you want to look at context then let’s go for it. Let’s look at what Trump said in the context of the speech he gave.

It was full of threats and calls to violence. The context he’s working to create is one in which his supporters (self-injuring fools that they are) see violence as the only acceptable response to the (false) picture Trump paints of the state of affairs in America.

That defenders of what he said are so desperately vehement about declaring he mean “bloodbath” only in the very narrow context of cars just shows they they’re aware of the larger context where Trump is calling for violence if he doesn’t win the election.

Expand full comment

Oh Christopher, did you watch the speech or are you side saddling this nonsense because you can’t think for yourself?

Expand full comment

Do you really have nothing to put forth as a counter argument that you can only resort to baseless "Well, you don't know what you're talking about" accusations?

Care to try again?

Expand full comment

I’ll make it easy for you as I see you are struggling with this one here it is have fun with the mental gymnastics in trying to turn this into an insurrection :

“Mexico has taken over a period of 30 years, 34 percent of the automobile-manufacturing business in our country,” the former president observed, warning that China was building auto plants in Mexico as a way to circumvent trade restrictions.

“We’re going to put a 100 percent tariff on every single car that comes across the line,” Trump said, “and you’re not going to be able to sell those cars—if I get elected. Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole—that’s gonna be the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars.”

Expand full comment

Role the tape brother, I have already put it out there. It speaks for itself. You are jumping to conclusions which is typical.

Expand full comment

OK. Let’s accept your premise, that he is talking about the auto industry. So, for clarity, let’s clear up an ambiguity by interpolating a couple of words: “Now, if I don't get elected, it's gonna be a bloodbath for the whole [auto industry]; that's going to be the least of it, it's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That'll be the least of it.”

So a bloodbath will hit the auto industry, but that’s not all. “That’s going to be the least of it” clearly implies more, that the “bloodbath” will spread beyond there, becoming one “for the whole country”. And what would you think is the antecedent for that “is”? 🤔😉😊

Expand full comment

So you are focused on what was not said? Man, you are reaching aren’t you? You shouldn’t be so desperate besides why aren’t you more offended by what he said about migrants

Expand full comment

Yawn. 🤔😉😊

Expand full comment

The ultra wealthy are forever telling us that once you reach a certain level of wealth then the money is just a way of keeping score

Well if this is true I have a simple suggestion, when Forbes does its Rich 100 or Fortune Magazine does the Fortune 500 to tell us who the richest American is then I have a simple way of keeping score, whoever pays the most tax that year is the richest person that year, 2nd most tax is second richest and so on

No more calling a billionaire and asking them how rich they are instead let’s do it properly, release your tax returns and most tax paid equals wealthiest American

Expand full comment

Who the fuck really is Ian Miles Cheong and how much does Elon Musk pay him a year to spread disinformation propaganda on his shitstain website?

Expand full comment