Trump's deputy White House Counsel details Trump's plans in final days to hold onto power.

[AU9377 4,934]

There is no universe where someone can claim to value the Constitution of the United States of America while accepting the actions of Donald Trump in the final days of his presidency.  This account of what was happening is not being given by an outsider, but instead is being given by the Republican White House Deputy Counsel under Donald Trump.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/26/white-house-trump-2020-00149195

[aubiefifty 16,795]

Fake News!!!!! How dare you smear little jesus? get thee behind me................

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

And yet he didn’t do it.  

[AU9377 4,934]

20 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

And yet he didn’t do it.  

Only because the entire DOJ threatened to resign.  His AG did resign and is now sounding the alarms and warning everyone that the man should not be in the White House.

Walk into a bank and hand the teller a note that says "put the money in a bag"... If you then look up and realize that there are 2 security guards staring at you and you run out of the bank with no money, you will still be arrested.

[Leftfield 2,601]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

There is no universe where someone can claim to value the Constitution of the United States of America while accepting the actions of Donald Trump in the final days of his presidency.  This account of what was happening is not being given by an outsider, but instead is being given by the Republican White House Deputy Counsel under Donald Trump.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/26/white-house-trump-2020-00149195

"Though Philbin has spoken to both the Jan. 6 select committee and the federal grand jury that indicted Trump for his effort to seize a second term, no transcript or recording of his remarks has even been released."

Damn January 6 Committee suppressing tetimony again.

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

4 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Only because the entire DOJ threatened to resign.  His AG did resign and is now sounding the alarms and warning everyone that the man should not be in the White House.

Walk into a bank and hand the teller a note that says "put the money in a bag"... If you then look up and realize that there are 2 security guards staring at you and you run out of the bank with no money, you will still be arrested.

If that same person who wrote the note to the teller and never went in the bank, there is no charges.  Well up until now because now the thought is the crime.

Edited March 27 by I_M4_AU

[Leftfield 2,601]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

If that same person who wrote the note to the teller and never went in the bank, there is no charges.

9377's example is far more pertinent than yours. Yours indicates a person capable of self-reflection and remorse. That's not Trump. As 9377 pointed out, Trump only stopped because of the threat of mass resignation. 

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

1 minute ago, Leftfield said:

9377's example is far more pertinent than yours. Yours indicates a person capable of self-reflection and remorse. That's not Trump. As 9377 pointed out, Trump only stopped because of the threat of mass resignation. 

That was speculation on his part.  It could be true, but no matter, the bottom line is it didn’t happen.  You and 9377 are going to hang a man for a thought crime.  Very telling in this day and age.

[Leftfield 2,601]

42 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

That was speculation on his part.  It could be true, but no matter, the bottom line is it didn’t happen.  You and 9377 are going to hang a man for a thought crime.  Very telling in this day and age.

Lol...."thought crime." You debase yourself further with every post you defend him.

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

5 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Lol...."thought crime." You debase yourself further with every post you defend him.

I see you have no rebuttal.  Typical

[Leftfield 2,601]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

I see you have no rebuttal.  Typical

My rebuttal is you have no idea what you're talking about, per usual. You boil something down to simple because it's the only way you can understand it. Nobody here was advocating for him to be arrested solely because he was trying to force his guy in, you just tossed that out there in a pathetic attempt to paint your opposition as something they're not. This is important information because it continues to show the overall efforts Trump was making to steal the election and thwart the Constitution, and what he might have gotten away with if people weren't willing to fight him. You should appreciate that....you love people who "fight," right?

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

21 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

You boil something down to simple because it's the only way you can understand it.

I believe 9377 used a scenario involving a bank and I responded.  You are full of yourself.

23 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Nobody here was advocating for him to be arrested solely because he was trying to force his guy in, you just tossed that out there in a pathetic attempt to paint your opposition as something they're not.

Again 9377s scenario brought up someone being arrested.  

24 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

This is important information because it continues to show the overall efforts Trump was making to steal the election and thwart the Constitution, and what he might have gotten away with if people weren't willing to fight him.

Right now it is one man’s word that has not been rebutted.  This is typical of the left.  Trump’s first impeachment was drawn on a conversation that was overheard, not actually heard.  Bobulinski gave testimony under oath with records and text messages in front of congress and was not believed, yet you believe this guy without question.  Once again, very telling.

[Leftfield 2,601]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I believe 9377 used a scenario involving a bank and I responded.  You are full of yourself.

You responded with an irrelevant example, because it had no consequences. It was a person realizing that what they were about to do was wrong.

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Again 9377s scenario brought up someone being arrested.  

If you really thought the implication from the example was that Trump should have been arrested for just that, then you're very much proving the point from my previous post.

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Right now it is one man’s word that has not been rebutted.  This is typical of the left.

Do you believe him?

Has it not been rebutted because no one asked, or because no one can defend it?

9 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Trump’s first impeachment was drawn on a conversation that was overheard, not actually heard.  Bobulinski gave testimony under oath with records and text messages in front of congress and was not believed, yet you believe this guy without question.  Once again, very telling.

Deflection. This is typical of you.

 

[AU9377 4,934]

9 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

I believe 9377 used a scenario involving a bank and I responded.  You are full of yourself.

Again 9377s scenario brought up someone being arrested.  

Right now it is one man’s word that has not been rebutted.  This is typical of the left.  Trump’s first impeachment was drawn on a conversation that was overheard, not actually heard.  Bobulinski gave testimony under oath with records and text messages in front of congress and was not believed, yet you believe this guy without question.  Once again, very telling.

One man's word?  His White House Counsel, his White House Deputy Counsel, his Attorney General, his Vice President, and on and on and on.  It is hardly one man's word.

The point is not that he didn't do it... he simply did not succeed due to the unwillingness of several of his appointees to go along with the plan.  They swore an oath to uphold the constitution, not fealty to Donald Trump.

Edited March 28 by AU9377

[I_M4_AU 7,843]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

One man's word?  His White House Counsel, his White House Deputy Counsel, his Attorney General, his Vice President, and on and on and on.  It is hardly one man's word.

The point is not that he didn't do it... he simply did not succeed due to the unwillingness of several of his appointees to go along with the plan.  They swore an oath to uphold the constitution, not fealty to Donald Trump.

Well, put it all together and convict him of a crime.  Time’s a wasting.

[homersapien 11,377]

12 hours ago, AU9377 said:

One man's word?  His White House Counsel, his White House Deputy Counsel, his Attorney General, his Vice President, and on and on and on.  It is hardly one man's word.

The point is not that he didn't do it... he simply did not succeed due to the unwillingness of several of his appointees to go along with the plan.  They swore an oath to uphold the constitution, not fealty to Donald Trump.

And he won't make that mistake again.