Trump reportedly has told aides to refuse any payments to Giuliani

[SimplyMe]

Per John Harwood, a White House correspondent, on Twitter: “Trump has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees, and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president’s behalf to challenge election results in key states.”

 

[Subduction Zone]

Per John Harwood, a White House correspondent, on Twitter: “Trump has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees, and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president’s behalf to challenge election results in key states.”

I wonder if it was the "Trial by combat" line. Poor Rudy. I wonder if he could be persuaded to turn state's evidence. Attorney client privilege does not exist if both the client and attorney are breaking the law together.

 

[SimplyMe]

I wonder if it was the "Trial by combat" line. Poor Rudy. I wonder if he could be persuaded to turn state's evidence. Attorney client privilege does not exist if both the client and attorney are breaking the law together.

I suspect it is more the "You knew I was a snake when you took me in" story Trump likes to tell -- he's consistently stiffed people who have done work for him, so he's just acting in character when he stiffs Giuliani. For some reason, his supporters never figure out that Trump is talking about himself with that story.

 

[Valletta]

Per John Harwood, a White House correspondent, on Twitter: “Trump has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees, and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president’s behalf to challenge election results in key states.”

Hmm, President Trump is not allowed on Twitter to provide a response. Does this John Harwood name a source? There was just a story about Trump accepting responsibility for the attack at the Capitol based on anonymous source. These are the tactics of those who deceive. Our nation wasted three years about a Russian collusion conspiracy based upon an anonymous source. Quite the opposite of Americans who try to follow our Declaration and Constitution. Let's make the ballots and computer election records public and end this.

 

[mala]

Hmm, President Trump is not allowed on Twitter to provide a response. Does this John Harwood name a source? There was just a story about Trump accepting responsibility for the attack at the Capitol based on anonymous source. These are the tactics of those who deceive. Our nation wasted three years about a Russian collusion conspiracy based upon an anonymous source. Quite the opposite of Americans who try to follow our Declaration and Constitution. Let's make the ballots and computer election records public and end this.

it's more than likely true considering that trump has a well documented habit of not paying people who have done work for him and lying about it. so it means not a thing whether you choose to accept reality or not.

 

[lasthero]

Our nation wasted three years about a Russian collusion conspiracy based upon an anonymous source. Quite the opposite of Americans who try to follow our Declaration and Constitution

You make it so easy.

 

[tulc]

Hmm, President Trump is not allowed on Twitter to provide a response. (snip)

...or he could just walk down the hall and talk to all those reporters who would, you know, report what he said. Or he could call his press secretary and her talk to all those reporters who report what the President says. Or he could pick up the phone and talk to his friends on Fox and they could put him on air to say what he wants to say. Seems like of all the people in America the one person who doesn't need twitter to respond to anything it would be, you know, the guy with the biggest "bully pulpit" on earth.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

 

[Valletta]

it's more than likely true considering that trump has a well documented habit of not paying people who have done work for him and lying about it. so it means not a thing whether you choose to accept reality or not.

And you've reviewed this documentation?

 

[Valletta]

You make it so easy.

So if Trump does it that's OK for you to do it? It's OK to impeach a President without careful review and debate of the evidence? It's making a mockery of the Constitution, Trump said nothing to incite a riot, nothing like the inflammatory language of Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi and Cuomo. You and I know if he had the press would be playing the video since his whole speech was recorded. Hatred begets hatred, it's just an opportunity for real evil to get a firm grip on their followers. Quit the accusations, put all information out in the open. Let the cowards who make false accusations debate their opponents in a reasoned manner. Taking away people's speech is marching down the wrong avenue.

 

[disciple Clint]

Per John Harwood, a White House correspondent, on Twitter: “Trump has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees, and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president’s behalf to challenge election results in key states.”

shouldn't those expenses be paid by Trump himself or his campaign? Why would his aids have anything to do with this?

 

[Valletta]

You make it so easy.

I suspect it is more the "You knew I was a snake when you took me in" story Trump likes to tell -- he's consistently stiffed people who have done work for him, so he's just acting in character when he stiffs Giuliani. For some reason, his supporters never figure out that Trump is talking about himself with that story.

It certainly exists when Marxists are trying to frame a United States President. What do you think the President said that supports inciting insurrection?

 

[stevil]

Our nation wasted three years about a Russian collusion conspiracy based upon an anonymous source.

George Papadopoulos

 

[Sparagmos]

Per John Harwood, a White House correspondent, on Twitter: “Trump has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees, and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president’s behalf to challenge election results in key states.”

Whaaat? I know this should not surprise me...

 

[lasthero]

So if Trump does it that's OK for you to do it?

I didn't say that. I was only pointing out that, by your definition, Trump doesn't follow the Declaration or Constitution. He's perfectly fine with anonymous sources when he's using them.

Trump said nothing to incite a riot

I wasn't going to get into this tonight, but since you're so bent on it, let's review.

Trump lied to you. He lied to his supporters. He lied to every single one of them in that crowd. He told them, and had been telling them for day, that Mike Pence was their last hope, that this was their last stand, that, if they were strong enough, brave enough, that they could do something to keep him in office.

This was a brazen lie. There was literally nothing his supporters or Pence or anyone could do to stop the process. The Vice President can't just reject the EC like that, he doesn't have that power, but Trump told his followers that Pence did have such a power, and they believed him. He told them that this was the final stand, that it all hinged on them, that this was the moment where they would take their country back. He fed them on false promises, knowing full well that that would never come.

So you have a large crowd of people who, for two months, have been fed lies about how the election was stolen for them, and are operating under the false assumption that this day could end in Trump's favor, if, somehow, they can reach their senators and push them in the right direction. Mixed in this crowd, you have inflammatory elements like the Proud Boys, Neo Nazis, et cetera. He has brought this people, some of whom from across the country at their own, great expense, all because of a false hope that he knows very well cannot be delivered. The votes have been certified, Trump lost his cases, this is over, and it doesn't matter how many times they kick and scream, nothing they can do will change that. So there is a strong potential for this situation to get out of hand.

Do I think Trump purposely incited a riot? No. At the least, it would be hard to prove that. But I think he played a crucial part in fueling that crowd, he gathered that crowd, and he pointed that crowd in the direction. It is undeniable that the events of last week occurred because of his actions - ultimately, it was his fault. He was the one who told them to gather, he was the one who told them where to go, and he was the one who got them riled up.

At minimum, he was grossly irresponsible and shortsighted.

 

[VirOptimus]

shouldn't those expenses be paid by Trump himself or his campaign? Why would his aids have anything to do with this?

Trump pay for something himself? That sounds very optimistic to believe.

 

[Valletta]

I didn't say that. I was only pointing out that, by your definition, Trump doesn't follow the Declaration or Constitution. He's perfectly fine with anonymous sources when he's using them.



I wasn't going to get into this tonight, but since you're so bent on it, let's review.

Trump lied to you. He lied to his supporters. He lied to every single one of them in that crowd. He told them, and had been telling them for day, that Mike Pence was their last hope, that this was their last stand, that, if they were strong enough, brave enough, that they could do something to keep him in office.

This was a brazen lie. There was literally nothing his supporters or Pence or anyone could do to stop the process. The Vice President can't just reject the EC like that, he doesn't have that power, but Trump told his followers that Pence did have such a power, and they believed him. He told them that this was the final stand, that it all hinged on them, that this was the moment where they would take their country back. He fed them on false promises, knowing full well that that would never come.

So you have a large crowd of people who, for two months, have been fed lies about how the election was stolen for them, and are operating under the false assumption that this day could end in Trump's favor, if, somehow, they can reach their senators and push them in the right direction. Mixed in this crowd, you have inflammatory elements like the Proud Boys, Neo Nazis, et cetera. He has brought this people, some of whom from across the country at their own, great expense, all because of a false hope that he knows very well cannot be delivered. The votes have been certified, Trump lost his cases, this is over, and it doesn't matter how many times they kick and scream, nothing they can do will change that. So there is a strong potential for this situation to get out of hand.

Do I think Trump purposely incited a riot? No. At the least, it would be hard to prove that. But I think he played a crucial part in fueling that crowd, he gathered that crowd, and he pointed that crowd in the direction. It is undeniable that the events of last week occurred because of his actions - ultimately, it was his fault. He was the one who told them to gather, he was the one who told them where to go, and he was the one who got them riled up.

At minimum, he was grossly irresponsible and shortsighted.

I appreciate your comments. Probably the biggest misunderstanding is about the hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Trump supporters who marched, many of whom have marched in or attended numerous other peaceful events. The vast vast majority of Trump supporters condemn ALL violence, burning, looting, the seizing of property, attacks against federal property whether in Portland or Washington D.C. As to supposedly getting people riled up, had that occurred it is not a crime. Telling up the huge amount of pork in an over 5000 page bill would rile up most honest Americans. Would you ban any speech that mentions pork or wrongdoing? In fact, the Capitol police had prior knowledge of an attack, and the situation had degraded so much that the National Guard was called in--before Trump had finished his speech! What kind of patriotic Trump supporters travels to Washington D.C. to a Trump rally and then leaves before Trump has finished his speech? I know one of the Capitol police committed suicide, and I don't know why the Capitol police, warned of an attack, allowed in 150 or so people before closing the doors. By this time Nancy Pelosi probably knows, but I don't know. Trump telling them to march peacefully and patriotically is not inciting a riot, not one word was unacceptable To the contrary, Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and other Democrats, including the vice-president to be, have made far more inflammatory comments. Establishment politicians are afraid that because of information that might come out in the next 45 months Trump would win in an honest and fair election. We know that election logs in Michigan for the past election are missing--that's a felony. You can come back to this comment in months and years from now, based on my experience in dealing with corrupt politicians I guess that election information will be destroyed, felony or no felony. rather than be revealed. Then the media will say there is no proof Trump won.

 

[disciple Clint]

Trump pay for something himself? That sounds very optimistic to believe.

Do you blame him, what did he get that he should feel the obligation to pay for?

 

[VirOptimus]

Do you blame him, what did he get that he should feel the obligation to pay for?

Wooosh

 

[disciple Clint]

Wooosh

wrong

 

[VirOptimus]

wrong

No