USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »

Neo Rasa: Mar 8, 2007; Everyone should play DUKE games.

Xand_Man posted:

I think the only thing rhat *might* make it better is kneecapping Fox, and I'm not even sure that would do it by this point

I do genuinely think that level of deplatforming would work over time.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 02:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 06:30

Xand_Man: Mar 2, 2004; If what you say is true
Wutang might be dangerous

Neo Rasa posted:

I do genuinely think that level of deplatforming would work over time.

In general yes but I think the RWM media ecosystem is well-developed enough to be able to deal with it

# ? Sep 6, 2023 03:00

Gyges: Aug 4, 2004; NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Xand_Man posted:

I think the only thing rhat *might* make it better is kneecapping Fox, and I'm not even sure that would do it by this point

Kneecapping Facebook would probably be the more effective pipe dream. Fox has some level of degenerate morals, Facebook on the other hand is how you mainline Alex Jones types and pass the mind virus.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 03:03

Craig K: Nov 10, 2016; puck

yeah you hit fox news with some hypothetical sanctions or lawsuits or whatever kneecapping their existence, and their viewerbase just (and frankly, seems like they have already regardless) runs to OANN/Newsmax/etc.

facebook and twitter are the ones that actively cultivate feeding carefully tailored fascism directly to peoples' eyeballs

# ? Sep 6, 2023 03:11

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

Pretty much the entire 'Chinese debt trap' narrative has ranged from disingenuous to a hilarious degree of projection given the norm is the IMF and World Bank giving incredibly predatory loans that demand countries shred their social safety nets and focus entirely on extracting resources to sell at rock bottom prices. China's been building tangible infrastructure and making clear material improvements to people's lives, and they notice, especially the contrast with how Westerners talk high-mindedly and then boggle uncomprehending at China doing more for third world countries than the first world has in over a century.

And insisting it must be some perfidious oriental trick with hidden costs is also a pretty laughable reflex. The motivations are obvious, China wants more countries on its side, and giving genuine material assistance, building hospitals, roads and colleges, makes countries more robust and powerful, so China makes friends who are better positioned to provide material and social assistance in turn. It's pure pragmatism, it just contrasts against Western policy being so ridiculously blatantly predatory and built around making the global south knows its place while acting like it's doing them a favour.

Google Jeb Bush posted:

This is a weird and reductionist take on Bolivia, especially considering we sat on our hands / vaguely supported the fall of the coup government. Countries can sometimes have a little bit of their own agency. Yes, even in South America.

see also the interesting examples of Honduras (US government literally divided on it, some dod officials probably should have gotten canned) and Brazil (FBI helps lawfare Lula in the most indirect way possible, then when Bolsonaro loses election to him just recently the Biden admin tells Bolso to sit down and shut up)

Those are outliers, and probably more related to how the original US puppets turned out to be too wildly incompetent and belligerent to rely on, and/or even the CIA being subject to brainrot at this point.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Sep 6, 2023 03:56

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Main Paineframe posted:

Under the current conditions, that's definitely the case. In 2020, 74 million people turned out to cast their vote for thinly disguised fascism, and every indication so far suggests a substantial chunk of that number are willing to show up again in 2024 and vote for fascism that doesn't even bother disguising itself anymore. As long as that's the case, fascism isn't going away.

Even if the Republican Party magically ceases to exist tomorrow, the party that rises up to follow it will be one that's similarly appealing to those people. All the staffers and advisors from the former Republican Party will join that party too. Before long, it'd just be GOP Mark II, very similar except with a different name and a scrambled leadership slate.

Ultimately, the source of the political swing toward fascism in the US is not the Republican Party, or even Trump itself. It's the Republican voters (who in turn developed that stance thanks to the right-wing media outlets feeding them a steady diet of hate). Even Trump isn't really responsible for it - the rising tides of fascism were clearly visible a few years before 2016, Trump just demonstrated how high the waters had risen.

This is a good post. Though I'd say it's even more social medias fault in the past decade, than conservative media outlets.

The enclosed bubble of misinfo is radicalizing the republican base to fascism very quickly. I'm seeing more and more people on social media just being outright openly fascist and it's scary as gently caress.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 04:04

Morrow: Oct 31, 2010

Some of China being more generous with loans is also that they're just much more inexperienced. Western institutions usually attach many more conditions because they feel that's necessary to ensure they get paid back, while China until recently had looser standards.

I'm phone posting but China has pulled back on international lending the last few years because many BRI loans had to get written down.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 04:26

Chemtrailologist: Jul 8, 2007

Google Jeb Bush posted:

This is a weird and reductionist take on Bolivia, especially considering we sat on our hands / vaguely supported the fall of the coup government. Countries can sometimes have a little bit of their own agency. Yes, even in South America.

see also the interesting examples of Honduras (US government literally divided on it, some dod officials probably should have gotten canned) and Brazil (FBI helps lawfare Lula in the most indirect way possible, then when Bolsonaro loses election to him just recently the Biden admin tells Bolso to sit down and shut up)

Lula wasn't running on nationalizing the lithium mines.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 08:31

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

Xand_Man posted:

In general yes but I think the RWM media ecosystem is well-developed enough to be able to deal with it

I was gonna say, yeah, there's a ton of office workers, drivers and commuters who listen to nothing but talk radio all day in their vehicles or in their cubicles.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 11:22

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Politico asked all candidates for President in 2024 to name the 20 songs that give "the best insight into who they are as people or stir their souls."

Sadly, Biden, Trump, Williamson, DeSantis, and Pence did not respond.

But, it is interesting to see how the candidates want to portray themselves or what songs "stir their soul."

I only included some of them, because the whole list is too long, but you can see the full candidate and song list in the link. I don't know why, but I just found it funny that Vivek could only think of 8, West could only think of 4, and Chris Christie includes a bunch of New Jersey rock, Dad Rock, and then... Mr. Brightside.

Vivek only being able to come up with 8 and making a full 25% of his list Imagine Dragons songs (plus the Enimen song he is now legally barred from using at his rallies) is hilarious.

West only being able to come up with four, but making sure that one of those four was "Mississippi Goddam" is also extremely on-brand and funny.

Chris Christie

quote:

Thunder Road � Bruce Springsteen

I Saw Her Standing There � The Beatles

Gimme Shelter � Rolling Stones

Dream On � Aerosmith

Pink Houses � John Cougar Mellencamp

Pressure � Billy Joel

Livin� on a Prayer � Bon Jovi

Run to You � Bryan Adams

Every Teardrop is a Waterfall � Coldplay

In the Air Tonight � Phil Collins

Let�s Go Crazy � Prince & the Revolution

Castle on the Hill � Ed Sheeran

Tiny Dancer � Elton John

Roxanne � The Police

And She Was � Talking Heads

Where the Streets Have No Name � U2

Mr. Brightside � The Killers

Finish what Ya Started � Van Halen

Hotel California � The Eagles

Runnin� Down a Dream � Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers

Vivek Ramaswamy

quote:

*Ramaswamy was only able to contribute eight

Lose Yourself � Eminem

Rondo Alla Turca � Mozart

Centuries � Fall Out Boy

Believer � Imagine Dragons

Jolene � Dolly Parton

Thunder � Imagine Dragons

Dream On � Aerosmith

Pastures of Plenty � Woody Guthrie

Cornel West

quote:

*West was only able to contribute four

Love Supreme � John Coltrane

The Caravan of Love � The Isley Brothers

Respect � Aretha Franklin

Mississippi Goddam � Nina Simone

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/09/06/top-20-songs-chris-christie-nikki-haley-will-hurd-cornel-west-00113795

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Sep 6, 2023

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:23

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

Of course Christie would list a Springsteen song first even though Bruce hates his guts.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:31

Medullah: Aug 14, 2003; FEAR MY SHARK ROCKET IT REALLY SUCKS AND BLOWS

I would be willing to bet Trump couldn't name 10 songs period. He doesn't strike me as someone that listens to music, at all

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:36

Twincityhacker: Feb 18, 2011

I mean, "Mr. Brightside" is both a banger and The Killers are, sadly, considered "Dad Rock" now as well.

I am also deeply curious what Biden's would be, though I know it would just make him seem more old and out of touch when the latest song is from the 80's or something.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:41

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

Christie's list is exactly what you'd think except Talking Heads is a pleasant surprise.

Twincityhacker posted:

I am also deeply curious what Biden's would be, though I know it would just make him seem more old and out of touch when the latest song is from the 80's or something.

Biden's held elected office for the last 50 years. He's pulling songs from the Summer of Love at the latest

Failed Imagineer fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Sep 6, 2023

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:41

The Lord of Hats: Aug 22, 2010; Hello, yes! Is being very good day for posting, no?

Angry_Ed posted:

Of course Christie would list a Springsteen song first even though Bruce hates his guts.

Well yeah, he'd lose his New Jersey citizenship if he didn't.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:51

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

Vivek has a psycho list

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:52

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Twincityhacker posted:

I mean, "Mr. Brightside" is both a banger and The Killers are, sadly, considered "Dad Rock" now as well.

I am also deeply curious what Biden's would be, though I know it would just make him seem more old and out of touch when the latest song is from the 80's or something.

The NYT actually asked all the candidates in 2020 what their favorite songs were - slightly different question than what songs "best define you" or "stir your soul" that Politico asked - but, here's what it was for Biden and Trump.

Biden

quote:

David Bowie (�Heroes�)
Bruce Springsteen (�We Take Care of Our Own�)
The Head and the Heart �(All We Ever Knew�)
The 1975 (�The Sound�)
Lady Gaga (�The Edge of Glory�)
Moon Taxi (�Two High�)
The Revivalists (�Keep Going�)
Bleachers (�Rollercoaster�)
Dierks Bentley (�Home�)
Bill Withers (�Lovely Day�)
Jackie Wilson (�Higher & Higher�)
Aretha Franklin (�The Weight�)
Diana Ross (�I�m Coming Out�)
The Spinners (�Could It Be I�m Falling in Love�)
Stevie Wonder (�All I Do�)
Darius Rucker (�Learn to Live�)
King Curtis (�The Weight�)

Trump

quote:

Peggy Lee (Is That All There Is?)
Queen (We Are The Champions)
Tina Turner (The Best)
Survivor (Eye of the Tiger)
Gnarls Barkley (Crazy)
The Rolling Stones (You Can't Always Get What You Want)
Michael Jackson's (Beat It)
Elton John (Tiny Dancer)
REM (Everybody Hurts)
The Village People (Macho Man)
Laura Branigan (Gloria)
Lynyrd Skynyrd (Free Bird)
James Brown (Please, Please, Please)
Lee Greenwood (Proud to be an American)

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...e=PAYWALL#biden

FlamingLiberal posted:

Vivek has a psycho list

Anytime someone asks you about what songs "define you as a person" or "stir your soul" and you answer a Mozart symphony and Fall Out Boy, then you are either a rogue A.I. or a deranged individual who is capable of anything.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Sep 6, 2023

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:52

Oracle: Oct 9, 2004

Vahakyla posted:

Michigan passing safe storage law for firearms is awesome. It�s s great practical gun control measure that is proven to help.

my chud relatives are going to poo poo a brick lol

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:57

Harold Fjord: Jan 3, 2004

Atlanta PD RICO charging documents are alleging a criminal anarchist conspiracy to promote mutual aid and social solidarity beginning in the date of George Floyd's murder

# ? Sep 6, 2023 14:58

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

Twincityhacker posted:

I mean, "Mr. Brightside" is both a banger and The Killers are, sadly, considered "Dad Rock" now as well.

It's a song about discovering that your girlfriend is cheating on you, which is kind of a weird choice for a politician's workshopped answer to a fluff question

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:05

Devor: Nov 30, 2004; Lurking more.

haveblue posted:

It's a song about discovering that your girlfriend is cheating on you, which is kind of a weird choice for a politician's workshopped answer to a fluff question

*hits pause button on Every Breath You Take playing during my daughter's first dance at her wedding*

Say what now?

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:11

Tony Phillips: Feb 9, 2006

haveblue posted:

It's a song about discovering that your girlfriend is cheating on you, which is kind of a weird choice for a politician's workshopped answer to a fluff question

It's a 60 year old song and all, but even that Beatles song starts off with "She was just seventeen..."

"Christie likes the pedo song!"

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:15

gurragadon: Jul 28, 2006

You're not supposed to listen to lyrics anyway. Knowing what the singer is actually saying ruins like 95% of songs. At least Ramaswamy went all in with how workshopped the question is to the candidates. Mozart, Eminem, Woody Guthrie, Dolly Parton, Fall Out Boy, got to hit everyone's favorite genre when you answer and he did it in 8.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:27

Blue Footed Booby: Oct 4, 2006; got those happy feet

haveblue posted:

It's a song about discovering that your girlfriend is cheating on you, which is kind of a weird choice for a politician's workshopped answer to a fluff question

I think that's a clue his answer was sincere.

gurragadon posted:

You're not supposed to listen to lyrics anyway. Knowing what the singer is actually saying ruins like 95% of songs. At least Ramaswamy went all in with how workshopped the question is to the candidates. Mozart, Eminem, Woody Guthrie, Dolly Parton, Fall Out Boy, got to hit everyone's favorite genre when you answer and he did it in 8.

I've deleted albums I liked because I looked up translated lyrics and whoops, turns out they're Nazis.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:31

RBA Starblade: Apr 28, 2008; Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

gurragadon posted:

You're not supposed to listen to lyrics anyway. Knowing what the singer is actually saying ruins like 95% of songs. At least Ramaswamy went all in with how workshopped the question is to the candidates. Mozart, Eminem, Woody Guthrie, Dolly Parton, Fall Out Boy, got to hit everyone's favorite genre when you answer and he did it in 8.

Yeah but he listed Imagine Dragons twice, so something went badly wrong there

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:32

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

"the best insight into who they are as people or stir their souls" is a stupid question and is absolute nonsense. What song "stirs my soul" tends to depend on my mood at the time.

That being said, it is funny to point at laugh at their tastes in music.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:45

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

The DOJ is taking Google to court over monopoly concerns. This will be the first major tech monopoly case law established in the modern internet era. The last big tech monopoly case that went to trial under the DOJ was Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior of paying PC companies to sideline Netscape Navigator and rival operating systems in the late 90's and early 2000's.

The case centers on whether Google illegally cemented its dominance and squashed competition by paying Apple and other companies to make its internet search engine the default on the iPhone as well as on other devices and platforms. Additionally, the DOJ is arguing that Google giving prominence to its own products on search results over competitors constitutes unfair practices.

The trial is scheduled to last 10 weeks.

quote:

In Its First Monopoly Trial of Modern Internet Era, U.S. Sets Sights on Google

The Justice Department has spent three years over two presidential administrations building the case that Google illegally abused its power over online search to throttle competition. To defend itself, Google has enlisted hundreds of employees and three powerful law firms and spent millions of dollars on legal fees and lobbyists.

On Tuesday, a judge in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will begin considering their arguments at a trial that cuts to the heart of a long-simmering question: Did today�s tech giants become dominant by breaking the law?

The case � U.S. et al v. Google � is the federal government�s first monopoly trial of the modern internet era, as a generation of tech companies has come to wield immense influence over commerce, information, public discourse, entertainment and labor. The trial moves the antitrust battle against those companies to a new phase, shifting from challenging their mergers and acquisitions to more deeply examining the businesses that thrust them into power.

Such a consequential case over tech power has not unfolded since the Justice Department took Microsoft to court in 1998 for antitrust violations. But since then, companies like Google, Apple, Amazon and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, have woven themselves into people�s lives to an even greater degree. Any ruling from the trial could have broad ripple effects, slowing down or potentially dismantling the largest internet companies after decades of unbridled growth.

The stakes are particularly high for Google, the Silicon Valley company founded in 1998, which grew into a $1.7 trillion giant by becoming the first place people turned to online to search the web. The government has said in its complaint that it wants Google to change its monopolistic business practices, potentially pay damages and restructure itself.

�This is a pivotal case and a moment to create precedents for these new platforms that lend themselves to real and durable market power,� said Laura Phillips-Sawyer, who teaches antitrust law at the University of Georgia School of Law.

The case centers on whether Google illegally cemented its dominance and squashed competition by paying Apple and other companies to make its internet search engine the default on the iPhone as well as on other devices and platforms.

In legal filings, the Justice Department has argued that Google maintained a monopoly through such agreements, making it harder for consumers to use other search engines. Google has said that its deals with Apple and others were not exclusive and that consumers could alter the default settings on their devices to choose alternative search engines.

Google has amassed 90 percent of the search engine market in the United States and 91 percent globally, according to Similarweb, a data analysis firm.

Fireworks are expected at the trial, which is scheduled to last 10 weeks. Google�s chief executive, Sundar Pichai, as well as executives from Apple and other tech companies will probably be called as witnesses.

Judge Amit P. Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2014, is presiding over the trial, which will not have a jury, and he will issue the final ruling. Kenneth Dintzer, a 30-year veteran litigator for the Justice Department, will lead the government�s arguments in the courtroom, while John E. Schmidtlein, a partner at the law firm Williams & Connolly, will do the same for Google.

The jockeying over the trial has already been intense. The Justice Department and Google have deposed more than 150 people for the case and produced more than five million pages of documents. Google has argued that Jonathan Kanter, the Justice Department�s head of antitrust, is biased because of his earlier work as a private lawyer representing Microsoft and News Corp. The Justice Department has accused Google of destroying employees� instant messages that could have contained relevant information for the case.

Kent Walker, Google�s president of global affairs, said in an interview last month that the company�s tactics were �completely lawful� and that its success �comes down to the quality of our products.�

�It�s frustrating � maybe it�s ironic � that we�re seeing this backward-looking case and really unprecedented, forward-looking innovation,� he said.

The Justice Department declined to comment.

Google�s search engine was created by Sergey Brin and Larry Page when they were students at Stanford University in the 1990s. Their technology was widely praised for serving up more relevant results than other web search tools. Google eventually parlayed that success into new business lines including online advertising, video streaming, maps, office apps, driverless cars and artificial intelligence.

Rivals have long accused Google of brandishing its power in search to suppress competitors� links to travel, restaurant reviews and maps, while giving greater prominence to its own content. Those complaints brought scrutiny from regulators, though little action was taken.

In 2019, under President Donald J. Trump, the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission decided to mount new antitrust investigations into tech companies as part of a broad crackdown. The Justice Department agreed to oversee inquiries into Apple and Google.

In October 2020, the government sued Google for abusing its dominance in online search. In its lawsuit, the government accused Google of hurting rivals like Microsoft�s Bing and DuckDuckGo by employing agreements with Apple and other smartphone makers to become the default search engine on their web browsers or be preinstalled on their devices.

�Two decades ago, Google became the darling of Silicon Valley as a scrappy start-up with an innovative way to search the emerging internet,� the Justice Department said in its lawsuit. �That Google is long gone.�

Google�s actions had harmed consumers and stifled competition, the agency said, and could affect the future technological landscape as the company positioned itself to control �emerging channels� for search distribution. The agency added that Google had behaved similarly to Microsoft in the 1990s, when the software giant made its own web browser the default on the Windows operating system, crushing competitors.

A group of 35 states, Guam, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia also filed a lawsuit in 2020 accusing Google of abusing its monopoly in search and search advertising to illegally wedge out competitors. That case will be tried alongside the Justice Department lawsuit, though Judge Mehta threw out many of the states� key arguments in a ruling last month.

In January, the Justice Department filed a separate antitrust suit against Google, accusing it of abusing its monopoly power in advertising technology. The company faces two other lawsuits from states that accused it of abusing monopolies in ad tech and for blocking competition in its Google Play app store.

For decades, judges have generally ruled against companies in antitrust cases only when their conduct hurts consumers, particularly if they have raised prices. Critics have said that lets companies like Google � which provides internet search for free � off the hook.

Google�s Mr. Walker said the case was a moment for the court to double down on that standard.

�American law should be about promoting benefits for consumers,� he said, adding: �If we move away from that and make it harder for companies to provide great goods and services for consumers, that�s going to be bad for everyone.�

Monopoly trials can change the direction of industries. In 1984, under pressure from the Justice Department, AT&T split itself into seven regional telecom companies. The breakup transformed the telecommunications industry by making it more competitive at the dawn of the mobile phone era.

But the effects of the government�s antitrust battle with Microsoft in the early 2000s were less clear cut. The two sides eventually settled after Microsoft agreed to end certain contracts with PC makers that blocked rival software makers.

Some tech executives said the Justice Department�s actions made Microsoft more cautious, clearing the way for start-ups like Google to compete in the next era of computing. Bill Gates, a Microsoft founder, has blamed the hangover from the antitrust suit for the company�s slow entry into mobile technology and the failure of its Windows phone. But others have argued that the settlement did little to increase competition.

Ultimately, the Google trial will test whether antitrust laws written in 1890 to break up sugar, steel and railroad monopolies can still work in today�s economy, said Rebecca Allensworth, a professor at Vanderbilt University�s law school.

�The Google trial is a big test for the government�s entire antitrust agenda because its theory of monopolization is very much in play with many big tech companies,� she said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/06/technology/modern-internet-first-monopoly-trial-us-google-dominance.html

# ? Sep 6, 2023 15:47

Fork of Unknown Origins: Oct 21, 2005; Gotta Herd On?

Blue Footed Booby posted:

I think that's a clue his answer was sincere.

I've deleted albums I liked because I looked up translated lyrics and whoops, turns out they're Nazis.

I liked a couple unfortunate artists on Spotify because one of their non-chud songs came on and I liked it, only to later find out no they�re actually a chud. Which means now, months later, it still thinks I want to listen to right wing rappers and rock bands and and on the discover playlist I�ll be bopping along until I start hearing about the �pedophile in the White House� or something and have to delete another one�

# ? Sep 6, 2023 16:13

Sephyr: Aug 28, 2012

Chemtrailologist posted:

Lula wasn't running on nationalizing the lithium mines.

He did run on NOT privatizing Petrobras, the massive state energy company. It's something neoliberal shills inside Brazil and outside have been drooling over for year.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 16:18

Twincityhacker: Feb 18, 2011

Harold Fjord posted:

Atlanta PD RICO charging documents are alleging a criminal anarchist conspiracy to promote mutual aid and social solidarity beginning in the date of George Floyd's murder

Yeah, that's completley loving terrifying. "Mutual aide and bail funds are actually money laundering schemes" is up there with "trying to put together a coup" on the "bad for democracy" scale.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 16:26

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

ABC news have transcripts and audio recordings from one of Trump's former attorneys detailing Trump asking about hiding documents or lying to the FBI. He also discusses how he snuck documents out of the White House on his way out.

The specifics of the tapes are pretty incredible and also pretty funny because it confirms that Trump basically just has one mode no matter what or who he is talking to.

https://twitter.com/KFaulders/status/1699366955285963117

quote:

In May of last year, shortly after the Justice Department issued a subpoena to former President Donald Trump for all classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, Trump's then-lead attorney on the matter, Evan Corcoran, warned the former president in person, at Mar-a-Lago, that not only did Trump have to fully comply with the subpoena, but that the FBI might search the estate if he didn't, according to Corcoran's audio notes following the conversation.

Only minutes later, during a pool-side chat away from Trump, Corcoran got his own warning from another Trump attorney: If you push Trump to comply with the subpoena, "he's just going to go ballistic," Corcoran recalled.

Corcoran's recollections, captured in a series of voice memos he made on his phone the next day, help illuminate Trump's alleged efforts to defy a federal grand jury subpoena, and appear to shed more light on his frame of mind when he allegedly launched what prosecutors say was a criminal conspiracy to hide classified documents from both the FBI and Corcoran, his own attorney.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him and has denied any wrongdoing.

The recordings, which have become a key piece of evidence in special counsel Jack Smith's classified documents case against Trump, contain information that was later described in Smith's publicly released indictment and in media reports -- but many of the details in them have never been made public.

ABC News has reviewed copies of transcripts of the recordings, which appear to show the way Trump allegedly deceived his own attorney, and how classified documents, according to prosecutors, ended up at Mar-a-Lago in the first place.

Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung, responding to the development, told ABC News, "The attorney-client privilege is one of the oldest and most fundamental principles in our legal system, and its primary purpose is to promote the rule of law. Whether attorneys' notes are detailed or not makes no difference -- these notes reflect the legal opinions and thoughts of the lawyer, not the client."

Cheung added that Trump "offered full cooperation with DOJ, and told the key DOJ official, in person, 'Anything you need from us, just let us know.'"

A spokesperson for the special counsel's office declined to comment to ABC News. Corcoran did not immediately return ABC News' request for comment.

'Complying with that subpoena'

When Corcoran joined Trump's legal team in April last year, the FBI had already launched a criminal investigation into Trump's handling of classified information. Nearly 200 classified documents had been found in 15 boxes that Trump reluctantly returned to the National Archives "after months of demands," as the indictment stated.

But Justice Department officials believed Trump was holding onto even more classified documents in other boxes at Mar-a-Lago and refusing to return them -- so on May 11, 2022, the Justice Department issued a federal grand jury subpoena demanding the return of any and all classified documents.

Corcoran and another Trump attorney, Jennifer Little, flew to Florida to meet with Trump. "The next step was to speak with the former president about complying with that subpoena," Corcoran recalled in a voice memo the next day.

But while sitting together in Trump's office, in front of a Norman Rockwell-style painting depicting Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Bill Clinton and Trump playing poker, Trump, according to Corcoran's notes, wanted to discuss something else first: how he was being unfairly targeted.

As Corcoran later recalled in his recordings, Trump continuously wandered off to topics unrelated to the subpoena -- Hillary Clinton, "the great things" he's done for the country, and his big lead in the polls in the run-up to the 2024 Republican presidential primary race that Trump would officially join in November. But Corcoran and Little "kept returning to the boxes," according to the transcripts.

Corcoran wanted Trump to understand "we were there to discuss responding to the subpoena," Corcoran said in the memos.

The FBI 'could arrive here'

As Corcoran described it in his recordings, he explained to Trump during that meeting what the former president was facing. "We've got a grand jury subpoena and the alternative is if you don't comply with the grand jury subpoena you could be held in contempt," Corcoran recalled telling Trump.

Trump responded with a line included in the indictment against him, asking, "what happens if we just don't respond at all or don't play ball with them?"

The transcripts reviewed by ABC News reveal what Corcoran says he then told Trump. "Well, there's a prospect that they could go to a judge and get a search warrant, and that they could arrive here," Corcoran recalled warning the former president as they sat at Mar-a-Lago.

Still, as depicted in Corcoran's recordings and in the public indictment, Trump repeatedly suggested it might be better if they refused to cooperate.

The indictment says that although Corcoran -- who ABC News believes to be "Attorney 1" in the indictment -- and Little -- believed to be "Attorney 2" -- "told Trump that they needed to search for documents that would be responsive to the subpoena and provide a certification that there had been compliance with the subpoena," Trump still insisted to them, "I don't want anybody looking through my boxes," and, "Wouldn't it be better if we just told them we don't have anything here?"

And in a private, pool-side conversation during a break at Mar-a-Lago that day, according to Corcoran's recordings, Little relayed to him what she was told herself by two other Trump attorneys: that Trump would "go ballistic" over complying with the subpoena -- "that there's no way he's going to agree to anything, and that he was going to deny that there were any more boxes at all," Corcoran recalled on his recordings.

In the indictment, prosecutors allege Trump did something just like that.

The indictment describes how, before the May 23 meeting with Corcoran at Mar-a-Lago ended, Trump "confirmed" a plan for Corcoran to return to Mar-a-Lago two weeks later to search for any classified documents. And, according to the indictment, Corcoran "made it clear to Trump" that he would conduct that search in a basement storage room.

Corcoran's recordings suggest he was told by others that the only location at Mar-a-Lago that contained classified documents was the basement storage room. "I've got boxes in my basement that I really wouldn't want you to go through," Corcoran recalled Trump telling him.

And sources told ABC News that, when speaking to investigators, Corcoran explained that he checked with many people about where classified documents could be found, and everyone, including Trump, created the impression that any classified documents would be in the boxes in the storage room.

A 'shocking break-in'

Over the next two weeks, before Corcoran returned to Mar-a-Lago to search for classified documents in the storage room, Trump's two co-defendants in the documents case, Mar-a-Lago staffers Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, allegedly removed dozens of boxes from the storage room -- all "at Trump's direction" and with the goal "that many boxes were not searched and many documents responsive to the May 11 Subpoena could not be found," according to the indictment.

Corcoran ultimately found 38 classified documents in the boxes that remained in the storage room, and he handed them over to the FBI, along with a certification -- allegedly endorsed by Trump -- that the former president had now fully complied with the subpoena.

But when FBI agents searched Mar-a-Lago three months later, they found 102 more classified documents in Trump's office and elsewhere.

Despite Corcoran warning him months earlier, according to the recordings, that the FBI might show up at Mar-a-Lago if he didn't fully comply with the subpoena, Trump called the FBI move a "shocking BREAK-IN," with "no way to justify" it, in posts on his social media platform.

According to the indictment, Trump "knowingly" deceived the FBI and his own attorney, providing "just some of the documents called for by the grand jury subpoena, while claiming that he was cooperating fully."

'Should be declassified'

The transcripts of Corcoran's recordings also appear to offer new insight into how classified documents ended up in boxes at Mar-a-Lago in the first place, and whether Trump truly believed those documents had been declassified.

As Trump described it to Corcoran according to the transcripts, he had a nightly practice while still in the White House: He would bring newspaper articles, photos and notes to his bedroom so he could review them.

He would also bring classified documents, according to Corcoran.

"That's the only time I could read something, and I had to read them so I could be ready for calls or meetings the next day," Trump told Corcoran, according to Corcoran's recordings.

However, in their meeting, Trump insisted to Corcoran that he made clear to those around him that "anything that comes into the residence should be declassified," the transcript reads.

"I don't know what was done," Corcoran recalled Trump telling him. "I don't know how they were marked. But that was my position."

Those comments from Trump, as recalled by Corcoran, suggest Trump understood that -- despite subsequent public claims to the contrary -- classified documents were not declassified simply by bringing them to the residence.

As for how classified documents ended up in boxes, Trump "had a lot of boxes" in his bedroom, and when he was done reading a newspaper article or a classified document, he'd "throw them" into one of the boxes, according to Corcoran.

So when it came time for Trump to leave the White House in January 2021, many of those boxes from the bedroom ended up at Mar-a-Lago in the storage room.

Corcoran provided special counsel Smith's team with his recordings after, as previously reported by ABC News, the now-former chief judge of the federal court in Washington ordered him to do so, finding that Smith's office had made a "prima facie showing that the former president had committed criminal violations" by deliberately misleading his attorneys about his handling of classified materials, sources familiar with the matter said at the time.

As a result of that legal fight, Corcoran recused himself from continuing to represent Trump in the documents case. But when Trump was arraigned in Washington on federal charges accusing him of trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election, Corcoran attended the hearing and sat in the courtroom behind Trump.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 16:38

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

ABC news have transcripts and audio recordings from one of Trump's former attorneys detailing Trump asking about hiding documents or lying to the FBI. He also discusses how he snuck documents out of the White House on his way out.

The specifics of the tapes are pretty incredible and also pretty funny because it confirms that Trump basically just has one mode no matter what or who he is talking to.

https://twitter.com/KFaulders/status/1699366955285963117

Oh lordy there are tapes :laffo:

# ? Sep 6, 2023 16:51

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

Of course Christie would pick some Van Hagar trash over the real deal.

And of course Vivek would pick not one but two Imagine Dragons songs.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 18:24

Lib and let die: Aug 26, 2004

Sorry to just drop a tweet and run, but I'm still reeling from being laid off, and this is definitely newsworthy w/r/t US elections.

Our rough estimates from the union are that ~25% of the affected workers were unionized workers like myself.

https://twitter.com/OrganizerMemes/status/1699462319892246652

# ? Sep 6, 2023 18:38

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1699466086553444500

I like that Erickson is alleging some sort of conspiracy here when it's actually his sides ratfucking conspiracy backing RFK blew up in their faces when it turned out that he was getting more traction with Trump voters than Dems. We aren't hearing about RFK because his GOP donors aren't funding him anymore.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:06

Shrecknet: Jan 2, 2005

quote:

NGP VAN is the leading technology provider to Democratic and progressive political campaigns and organizations, nonprofits, municipalities, and other groups.

for context for those of you who have no idea what the nebulously-named NGP VAN actually is or does.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:06

Lib and let die: Aug 26, 2004

Shrecknet posted:

for context for those of you who have no idea what the nebulously-named NGP VAN actually is or does.

I just did a migration for fifteen million contacts in Hillary's GOTV committee. Thanks for my service.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:08

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Lib and let die posted:

I just did a migration for fifteen million contacts in Hillary's GOTV committee. Thanks for my service.

I can't PM you, but that sucks about layoff. Hope everything is going okay.

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:14

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

zoux posted:

https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1699466086553444500

I like that Erickson is alleging some sort of conspiracy here when it's actually his sides ratfucking conspiracy backing RFK blew up in their faces when it turned out that he was getting more traction with Trump voters than Dems. We aren't hearing about RFK because his GOP donors aren't funding him anymore.

Also if anything he got way more coverage than he should have, then proceeded to look like the moron he is when answering questions

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 06:30

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

Shrecknet posted:

for context for those of you who have no idea what the nebulously-named NGP VAN actually is or does.

The last time it made major news was last May, when it was bought by a private equity firm. At the time a lot of people predicted something like this was inevitable, so, yeah. :capitalism:

# ? Sep 6, 2023 19:16

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »