Trump Continues to Disavow the Mob that Sacrificed Their Lives for Him

As I have shown, Trump’s collective motions to dismiss his January 6 indictment selectively treat the five means alleged in the indictment (pressuring states, the fake elector plot, using Jeffrey Clark, pressuring Pence, and exploiting the mob), never actually dealing with all five as charged.

Rather than addressing the fifth, Mob (“directing supporters to the Capitol to obstruct the proceeding, id. at ¶¶ 86-105; and exploiting the violence and chaos that transpired at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021”), he instead filed a motion to strike all references to the mob.

Poof! It is a legalistic way to deny the very same mobsters (DOJ noted in their response) Trump has sung with and promised to pardon, and in so doing simply wish away the abundant evidence that Trump obstructed the vote certification.

It is the stuff of magic wands.

Trump’s reply uses a series of gimmicks to attempt to wish away parts of the indictment against him.

In one lengthy section that might invite a request to file a sur-reply by DOJ, Trump cites some of the greatest hits of articles by journalists who knew little about the investigation to claim that none of the investigation of the mob related to Trump.

12 Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch, Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated – sources, REUTERS (Aug. 20, 2021), at

13 William M. Arkin, Donald Trump Didn’t Run the January 6 Riot. So Why Did It Happen?, NEWSWEEK (Jan. 6, 2022), at

14 Carol D. Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis, FBI resisted opening probe into Trump’s role in Jan. 6 for more than a year, THE WASHINGTON POST (June 19, 2023), at

Trump also uses outdated and invented crowd numbers to claim that just a fraction of his mob was part of the mob, focusing just on the mob that entered the Capitol and not the one that besieged it, another part of this motion that might invite sur-reply.

In another place, Trump promises a motion in limine to eliminate all reference to the violence committed in his name, because the sheer violence of it will distract the jury.

For instance, the prosecution claims protesters were “extraordinarily violent and destructive.” Doc. 140, at 11. Even if marginally relevant, which it is emphatically not, the danger of “unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, [or] misleading the jury,” would far outweigh any probative value. F.R.E. 403. The fact that the prosecution even suggests that such inflammatory claims could have an appropriate place in the trial of President Trump only underscores the unfair and malicious way the Special Counsel is pursuing this case on behalf of the Biden Administration against its leading political opponent, President Trump.

In another paragraph of gibberish, Trump says that DOJ can’t include the actions (including of Couy Griffith, who had met with Trump personally) of people who weren’t charged with the same crimes he was and also says that because Merrick Garland generally defined Jack Smith’s mandate to crimes committed by those who weren’t at the Capitol, it means any crimes committed by people at the Capitol must be excluded.

Indeed, the January 6 cases relied on by the prosecution do not support its contention that “actions at the Capitol are relevant and probative evidence” of the charged conduct. Doc. 140, at 2. Several of the cases did not involve any of the charges brought against President Trump, rendering any relevance analysis inapplicable to this case. See, e.g., United States v. Griffith, No. CR 21-244-2, 2023 WL 2043223, at *1 (D.D.C. Feb. 16, 2023) (charges under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1752(a)(1), 1752(a)(2); 40 U.S.C. §§ 5104(e)(2)(D), 5104(e)(2)(G)); United States v. MacAndrew, No. CR 21-730, 2022 WL 17961247, at *1 (D.D.C. Dec. 27, 2022) (same). Those cases that did include at least one charge brought against President Trump (as well as charges not brought against him) all involved defendants who were personally present at the Capitol. Those are the types of cases that the Attorney General specifically carved out of the Special Counsel’s authority in Order No. 5559-2022: “This authorization does not apply to . . . future investigations and prosecutions of individuals for offenses they committed while physically present on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021.” Actual presence has been emphasized as an important factor in the relevance analysis. See, e.g., United States v. Stedman, No. CR 21-383 (BAH), 2023 WL 3303818, at *2 (D.D.C. May 8, 2023) (“defendant’s knowing joinder of a broader crowd is probative of his participation in a venture that interfered with a congressional proceeding”).

In yet another tactic, Trump falsely claims that a passage about how Trump’s manipulation of the mob demonstrates his motive pertains exclusively to his tweet attacking Mike Pence.

Despite three pages of narrative, the prosecution only suggests that one of the paragraphs that is subject to the Motion to Strike is appropriate for this purpose: paragraph 111, which relates to a social media post by President Trump concerning Mike Pence. Paragraph 111 does not show motive or intent as it relates to the actions at the Capitol.

In doing so, Trump ignores references to four other paragraphs explicitly cited in DOJ’s response.

As set forth in the indictment, on the morning of January 6, the defendant knew that the crowd that he had gathered in Washington for the certification “was going to be ‘angry.’” ECF No. 1 at ¶ 98. Despite this knowledge—or perhaps because of it—in his remarks to supporters, the defendant told knowing lies about the Vice President’s role in the congressional certification, stoked the crowd’s anger, and directed them to march to the Capitol and “fight.”


Although the defendant knew that the certification proceedings had been interrupted and suspended, he rejected multiple entreaties to calm the rioters and instead provoked them by publicly attacking the Vice President. ECF No. 1 at ¶111. And instead of decrying the rioters’ violence, he embraced them, issuing a video message telling them that they were “very special” and that “we love you.” Id. at ¶ 116. Finally, while the violent riot effectively suspended the proceedings over which the Vice President had been presiding, the defendant and his coconspirators sought to shore up efforts to overturn the election by securing further delay through knowing lies. Id. at ¶¶ 119, 120.

Trump here ignores the warning from his aides that the mob was angry, Trump’s video declaring “we love you” to his mob, and Trump’s renewed efforts to prevent the vote certification even after the mob left.

And in two different ways, Trump tries, again, to simply wish away the evidence that Trump corruptly tried to obstruct the vote certification, two of the charges against him. In one, Trump claims that the certification of the election at the Capitol provides no context to charges that he obstructed the certification of the election at the Capitol.

As a final, futile, attempt to establish relevance, the prosecution argues that the actions at the Capitol on January 6 provide “necessary context for all the charged conduct.” Doc. 140, at 12. Nevertheless, again, the prosecution did not charge President Trump with any crime relating to the actions at the Capitol, such as insurrection or incitement. Actions by others—whom the prosecution does not claim were part of any of the alleged conspiracies—do not provide any context for the actions based on which President Trump is charged.

And then, two paragraphs later, Trump points to the paragraph delimitation in just one charge — the conspiracy to defraud the vote certification — that doesn’t exist for the other three charges, to say that DOJ has excluded the actions described in the paragraphs about the mob.

The challenged allegations’ lack of relevance to the charges against President Trump is further demonstrated by the Indictment itself. The Indictment claims that President Trump “and his co-conspirators committed one or more of the acts to effect the object of the conspiracy alleged” in a list of paragraphs. Doc. 1, ¶ 124. The Indictment omits Paragraphs 10(d), 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112, or 113 from this list. Thus, the prosecution does not claim that the actions at the Capitol on January 6 were “acts to effect the object of the conspiracy,” an admission that these paragraphs lack relevance to the charged conduct.

Compare the list of paragraphs cited in the 18 USC 371 charge with paragraphs in the other three charges that cite paragraphs 8 through 123.

The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 4 and 8 through 123 of this Indictment are re-alleged and fully incorporated here by reference.

Not just his motion to strike, the promised motion in limine, and all his other efforts to, like the Apostle Peter, deny the mob he has made his religion are gimmicks, just efforts to wish away abundant evidence against him.

It all comes off as rather desperate.

And as you consider the flop sweat coming off Trump’s motion to strike, consider this: DOJ must have provided, in discovery, the evidence they plan to use to show what Trump’s mob did and that they did it because of him and his lies. DOJ has repeatedly said they’ve provided the evidence they plan to use at trial. Among the things Trump must have in his possession are the videos that show Danny Rodriguez went directly from hearing Trump’s speech to almost murdering Michael Fanone, and others responded to Trump’s Pence tweet by serving a critical role in opening a second front of the attack on the Capitol and breaching the Senate.

Trump has — must have!! — seen the evidence about his mob DOJ intends to use at trial. And his response is this blubbering effort to wish his mob away.

65 replies
  1. Peterr says:

    Shorter Trump: “Pay no attention to all those people waving Trump 2020 flags on the scaffolding around the Capitol building, breaking windows with those flags to gain entry, and parading those flags in the hallways as they looked for Nancy Pelosi and Mike Pence.”

    Poor Donald. In his old age, he must be having memory issues . . . From CNN on Feb 11, 2021:

    In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the US Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.

    “Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy.

    McCarthy insisted that the rioters were Trump’s supporters and begged Trump to call them off.

    Trump’s comment set off what Republican lawmakers familiar with the call described as a shouting match between the two men. A furious McCarthy told the then-President the rioters were breaking into his office through the windows, and asked Trump, “Who the f–k do you think you are talking to?” according to a Republican lawmaker familiar with the call.


    The Republican members of Congress said the exchange showed Trump had no intention of calling off the rioters even as lawmakers were pleading with him to intervene. Several said it amounted to a dereliction of his presidential duty.

    “He is not a blameless observer. He was rooting for them,” a Republican member of Congress said. “On January 13, Kevin McCarthy said on the floor of the House that the President bears responsibility and he does.”

    Speaking to the President from inside the besieged Capitol, McCarthy pressed Trump to call off his supporters and engaged in a heated disagreement about who comprised the crowd. . . .

    • John B. says:

      Yes. very true, but it’s not just TFG…it’s also MTG and many others who say things like it was grandmothers and tourists and patriots at the Capitol on 1/6…all trying to disavow what was shown on live TV and which we all saw and knew were Trump supporters attacking the capitol building.

  2. bgThenNow says:

    And now the video of Jenna Ellis, which has been widely reported, saying he had no intention of leaving the WH. I don’t know if she is a witness in this case, but it doesn’t help him. As compromised as the Supreme Cult is, I don’t see how they will help him either.

    • Ebenezer Scrooge says:

      I agree that the Supreme Court will not go out of its way to rescue Trump. Trump made a lot of mistakes in his first term that he won’t repeat if he gets a second term. One of them was outsourcing his Supreme Court appointments to the Federalists. Say what you will about the Federalists, most of them aren’t MAGAts: personally loyal to Trump. I think that Roberts and Kavanagh are willing to accept four more years of Joe Biden if that’s the price of eliminating Trump, especially because the Rs are likely to take the Senate. They’re smart enough to realize that the Supreme Court would quickly become irrelevant in an authoritarian polity. Maybe Barrett as well.

  3. Upisdown says:

    “Nothing will stop us….they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours….dark to light!”
    Ashli Babbitt, January 5th, 2021

    “It was amazing to get to see the president talk,” Babbitt said afterwards, in a Facebook video obtained by TMZ. “We are walking to the Capitol in a mob. There is a sea of nothing but red, white and blue patriots.” She was grinning.

    It really sickens me every time I see Babbitt’s mother in the gallery of a Congressional hearing, or as part of protest in support of 1/6 defendants.

    Her daughter’s blood is squarely on Trump’s hands.

    • Sussex Trafalgar says:

      Correct! Trump, the pathological liar and malignant narcissist who squandered the fortune he inherited from his father while BS-ing people into believing all along he was a financial genius, loves using gullible people to his advantage.

    • Marinela says:

      Especially when they follow the Trump rally circuit, reliable $20 / month donor that brings few more friends (misfits) to the rally to get in the email system and get fleeced themselves.
      And the cycle continues.

      At this point I would think the Trump rallies are really small but they are still happening.

  4. Matt Foley says:

    MTG is amazing! All those conjugal visits with J6 prisoners—oops, I mean patriots—and she still has plenty left for Trump. How does she DO IT?

  5. Rethfernhim says:

    IANAL, so it’s not clear to me what an effective set of motions (or simply setting up a good defense) would entail at this point. Given his past behavior, it’s possible that flurries of legal challenges, well-grounded or not, are intended primarily to delay and set up appeals. Maybe some “court of public opinion” play is afoot here, too.

    I trust Marcy’s assessment, but what’s his legal strategy alternative at this point?

  6. dadidoc1 says:

    I’m still bothered by the gallows. Someone planned the construction in advance. They didn’t just find random building materials on the way to the Capitol. Does DOJ know who built it? Pretty damning if they know.

  7. harpie says:

    Pretty much right out of the gate of TRUMP’s RABBLE ROUSING on 1/6/21
    [ie: just after bashing and whining about the media] TRUMP tries to DEFLECT RESPONSIBILITY for TRUMP and STONE’s whole StoptheSteal “movement” ONTO his supporters:

    12:02 PM

    TRUMP: All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they’re doing. And stolen by the fake news media. That’s what they’ve done and what they’re doing. We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn’t happen. (cheering) You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore (cheering) and that’s what this is all about.

    And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with: We will stop the steal.

    On 1/3/21, someone at TRUMP’s White House DIRECTED Alex JONES to lead TRUMP’s MOB from the Ellipse to the Capitol, and how to assist TRUMP’s plans when he gets them there.

    During the RABBLE ROUSING, TRUMP promises his MOB that he will be with them,
    but then TRUMP abandons them.

    • ExRacerX says:

      Agreed on most points, but doesn’t evidence indicate Trump did his best to get to his mob, but was thwarted rather than abandoned them?

      That he’s disavowing his mob and their actions now—as he faces the fallout—is no surprise because eventually, Trump fucks all who associate with him.

      • harpie says:

        Someone saved TRUMP from himself, so that he can now conveniently use the fact that he wasn’t there in order to distance himself from the insurrection he instigated. But I think he WAS in constant communication with the leaders on the ground throughout. It does seem that he sent a fake convoy to fool his MOB, so that they wouldn’t lose heart.

        • Rugger_9 says:

          If the NSA has the signals in and out of the Willard ‘war room’ you may get your answer there. I also find it curious that Roger Stone is keeping such a low profile for someone who is as much as an attention whore as he is. There has to be a reason for it, and we know Roger ostentatiously holed up at the Willard during J6.

        • Kick the Darkness says:

          The Stone angle is interesting. As I’ve followed the story as its been laid out here, it seems DOJ went from militias to Trump/fake electors, not going through Stone. As a cat with nine lives, maybe-NSA nothwithstanding-he’s just that good at covering his tracks. Or, from his own statements that day, he seemed to feel he was cut out of the loop. He brought the muscle but was set up to take the fall-maybe-and so something DOJ can deal with later. But yeah, it seems a quiet spot with respect to him.

        • Rayne says:

          I wish folks would stop with the NSA angle. Domestic law enforcement and intelligence are only supposed to surveil U.S. citizens on U.S. soil after obtaining a warrant. NSA may not be involved in any way, shape, or form considering the FBI/DOJ have ample investigatory tools available to them including warrants for geotracking through telecom/ISP providers.

          The public does not know nor should know with absolute certainty what federal law enforcement including the Special Counsel’s office has obtained or is doing in terms of surveillance and investigatory intelligence. The quiet may mean they’re working and without leaks.

        • Rugger_9 says:

          The other thing to consider whether someone from the LEO world was listening in is the claim that ‘ANTIFA’ was going to create havoc which is the ostensible reason for all the RW riff-raff to be there on J6.

          I would guess where/when ANTIFA is mentioned the LEOs would listen.

        • Kick the Darkness says:

          Thanks. Agree on domestic surveillance (there was an antecedent in posting re the NSA intercepting communications for the Willard hotel). And by no means did i mean to imply that quiet on the Stone front equates to neglect.

        • emptywheel says:

          You probably should follow this site more closely.

          DOJ seized a number of phones, starting even before the attack, that got comms with Stone. Stone showed up repeatedly in the Oath Keeper trial but not, curiously, where he had even closer ties — the Proud Boys. But Stone’s ties to the Proud Boys is a very critical part of two Florida Proud Boys’ guilty verdicts.

          I have good reason to believe this remains active.

        • Rugger_9 says:

          While Rayne is correct that LEOs cannot legally snoop without a warrant, I also know that especially under GOP administrations that requirement has been bypassed repeatedly with subsequent exposure.

          For EW, is it possible Stone is flipping? I wouldn’t expect it from a guy who has Nixon tattooed on his back but then again Roger is remarkably free of principles.

        • vigetnovus says:

          Oh, EW, I very much hope you are correct. The Stone angle seems to me to be analogous to the missing critical pieces in the very center of the puzzle that allows you to understand what you are actually looking at. I assume that if this is ongoing that it is secretive as it is due to ongoing operational and national security concerns.

        • Kick the Darkness says:

          Thanks. Follow more closely-certainly that’s true. I do generally remember from your work there may be a Stone tie in to the 1776 document. “Quiet” was not meant as “why doesn’t DOJ do something”. It would stand to reason things are percolating along and his time may come. Stone’s a fascinating character and when his name came up my ears perked. I’ll search the site and read up-why might he have been marginalized-as he claimed he was-come the big day.

        • vigetnovus says:

          I should know this better, but NSA cannot collect sigint on American persons on American soil, correct?

          I thought the only way to get such intel would be if the subject had a FISA warrant open on them and they were communicating with a foreign national. American to American on American soil, I believe is exempt from FISA collection; to collect such communications in real time you would need a title III warrant, or have a CHS provide their end of the communication, which certainly could have been possible.

          But, please, correct me if I’m wrong!

        • Rugger_9 says:

          As noted by Rayne and myself above, it would be illegal. However, GOP administrations are notorious for breaking those laws quietly, and with ANTIFA being tossed about in the chat rooms, I think the LEOs including the NSA would push the envelope.

          Remember it’s the NSA under Defendant-1 so we may not hear about it.

        • harpie says:

          I thought PB’s actually saw a convoy [can’t think of the right word right now] and thought it might be TRUMP…I’ll go back and check…this stuff has been going on such a long time…sigh… maybe I just need more sleep.

        • harpie says:

          Well, it’s a pretty thin reed, but I have this:

          Despite the fact that TRUMP was back at the WH at
          1:20 PM, Politico reporter Eugene Daniels tweeted at:

          1:43 PM that “Per the pool report”: TRUMP has JUST arrived back at the WH [< harpie note: Was this a FAKE MOTORCADE?]

        • harpie says:

          A minute after TRUMP is back at the WH:

          1:21 PM [Man recording] President TRUMP is here at the Capitol building with us. We saw the motorcade. Shit is about to get real.

          <3 <3 EUREKA response:

          (2) were they — as may be suggested by that 1:21 PM comment […] using any such motorcade as theater to fuel and deceive the crowd

          We had been discussing Alex JONES’ movements.

        • Ginevra diBenci says:

          Convoy, motorcade…I knew what you meant! Same thing, different vehicles. Thanks, harpie, for chasing this down. How strange that it’s gotten lost in the ruck of that day; I wonder what that “Man recording” actually saw.

          Given the profusion of black SUVs among self-important government types, it could have been a cabinet secretary’s staff taking his dog to the groomer.

        • harpie says:

          It’s interesting that we’re talking about this today, because a conversation between TRUMP and Jonothan Karl about his aborted trip to the Capitol was just aired on CNN yesterday. I transcribed that bit and will put it towards the end of this comment section.

        • Kick the Darkness says:

          “Someone saved Trump from himself”-yes I suppose. Another way to look at it is if he had succeeded in getting to the Capitol, which seemed to be his intention, events in the certification might have unfolded differently. The conquering hero arrives is a key box that didn’t get checked.

        • ExRacerX says:

          Admittedly, I was splitting hairs, but thanks. You’re right, though—in a way, Trump really lucked out in that regard. If he’d gotten to the Capitol, he’d have said or done something—or more likely, multiple things—to incriminate himself even more than he has already.

          That said, the outcome might have been even worse, as Kick the Darkness suggests.

  8. Douglas Erhard says:

    Trump’s continued filing of bogus motions is a feature, not a bug. He knows that each motion will be broadcast to the nation, without cost to him, through the free press.

    He also knows that if none of the judges ever accept any of his motions, he can claim that they’re biased against him.

    All part of the plan to politically negate any conviction that might arise.

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You published this comment as “Douglas S Erhard”; you’ve published 30 comments previously as “Douglas Erhard.” I’ve edited this comment’s username but note that future mismatches in username may not clear moderation. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  9. SteveBev says:

    Trump’s defense in part is the pretence that weasel phrases within his Ellipse speech save it from being criminalised as ‘Incitement’, and as such he should escape all criminal responsibility for those speech acts.

    As the SC has noted on multiple occasions, the indictment does not charge Trump with incitement or insurrection, but does set out a clear basis for his criminal liability for all the acts articulated within the indictment within the charges set out – principally criminal conspiracies.

    As Marcy noted in this post

    “Because Nichols recorded much of what he did with a GoPro and/or on his phone, this is precisely the kind of evidence that prosecutors may use to show how Trump mobilized a mob against Congress, and Mike Pence in particular, to obstruct the vote certification on January 6.”

    And the evidence from the GoPro is illuminating in all sorts of ways, but this passage in particular has struck me :

    “I watched patriots gather and on the way down Pennsylvania Avenue after we listened to President Trump speak, we heard that Pence did the wrong thing. And as we got [sic] the Capitol building the consensus across the board was the same, that if Pence did the wrong thing and sold us out, then we have to fight.


    They showed where Pennsylvania said yesterday, “hey, we screwed up. We want to change this,” but Pence did the wrong thing and allowed them to continue with the vote. So we stormed the Capitol building, and they stopped the vote. “

    This is a very expressive distillation of the TACIT AGREEMENT amongst the crowd to act as they did, and in the belief that as a body of people they would be acting in a way which had been tacitly urged upon them by and agreed by them with Trump.

    Trump had tacitly urged desired and approved such actions ( albeit with occasional sideways nods to ‘peaceful protest’ which he and they knew were not intended to be restraints in substance)

    As SC puts it :
    “The indictment also alleges, and the Government will prove at trial, that the defendant used the angry crowd at the Capitol as a tool in his pressure campaign on the Vice President and to obstruct the congressional certification. Through testimony and video evidence, the Government will establish that rioters were singularly focused on entering the Capitol building, and once inside sought out where lawmakers were conducting the certification proceeding and where the electoral votes were being counted. And in particular, the Government will establish through testimony and video evidence that after the defendant repeatedly and publicly pressured and attacked the Vice President, the rioting crowd at the Capitol turned their anger toward the Vice President when they learned he would not halt the certification, asking where the Vice President was and chanting that they would hang him.”

    Trump’s subsequent actions and purposeful inactions on Jan6, and later praise for the rioters, are all evidence of his criminal and conspiratorial intent towards them all along.

  10. SunZoomSpark says:

    Little Feat (willin’) was referenced above. In 1982 I married my wife, in part, because she surprised me when she answered the “who is your favorite band?” question by calling out the Feat.

    With regards to TFG I am hoping this Alan Toussaint cover will become appropriate.

    “People you misuse on the way up, you might meet up….. on the way down”

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      Love Little Feat. That line has been on a loop in my head for years. When will it ever apply to Donald Trump? Or did what seem like immutable laws of interpersonal physics simply fracture when he stepped on them?

  11. harpie says:

    Newly released audio reveals Trump’s words about January 6 crowd Erin Burnett Out Front

    TRUMP: But, if you look at the real size of that crowd, it was never reported correctly. There were – it’s the biggest crowd I’ve ever spoken in front of by far.

    JK: Really?

    TRUMP: By far. That went down to the Washington, that went back to the Washington Monument. Umm.

    JK: You told them you were going to go up to the Capitol. Were you just —

    TRUMP: I – no, I was going to and then Secret Service said you can’t, and then by the time – I would have, and then when I get back, I saw – I wanted to go back. I was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem, doing it myself. Secret Service didn’t like that idea too much.

    JK: So, so what —

    TRUMP: And I could’ve done that. And you know what? I would have been very well received. Don’t forget, the people that went to Washington that day, in my opinion, they went because they thought the election was rigged. That’s why they went.

    • harpie says:

      [So sorry about getting in the pokey again…]

      TRUMP: I was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem, doing it myself.

      I wonder exactly WHAT “the problem” was that TRUMP thought he could stop by himself…might be different than what we might call “the problem” that day.

    • Epicurus says:

      “I -no, I was going to and then the Secret Service said you can’t…..”

      When I read Trump tried to wrest the steering wheel from the SS driver unsuccessfully I immediately thought of the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz; “Put ’em up, put ’em up! Which one of you first? I’ll fight you both together if you want. I’ll fight you with one paw tied behind my back. I’ll fight you standing on one foot. I’ll fight you with my eyes closed… ohh, pullin’ an axe on me, eh? Sneaking up on me, eh? Why, I’ll… Ruff” And then, was it Dorothy who batted him and he turned docile?

      What a piece of work. I suspect it suddenly dawned on him if he went to Capital Building he would have a real problem like Michael Corleone hanging around Louis Restaurant after he shot Sollozzo and McCluskey.

Comments are closed.