487
Donald Trump spent over $52 million in PAC donor money on legal fees last year. Here's where it all went.
(www.businessinsider.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
487 points (97.3% liked)
News
24768 readers
5807 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The PAC may have considered the costs strategic value. Trump is their nominee, and his removal would cause a power vacuum. This would splinter the vote-base and hand the victory to the democrats.
As for the individuals who still donated… if after all the horrible bullshit the republicans have done, well not paying trumps fees and risking his removal would be akin to not participating at all. So they have no choice but to be satisfied with the cost.
But it does point out the quagmire that drains the PAC’s funds that could have been used in the campaign, and thats an obstacle of their own making.
Definitely has some strategic value. According to polls a sizable fraction have said they wouldn't vote for a convicted candidate, so in effort to not lose voters he has to delay cases past the election or obtain not guilty verdicts.
Problem is getting a conviction in time. Of all the criminal cases, the only one that might have a verdict in time is the hush money one and I don't think that rises to a felony.
power vacuums are a myth
You're really gonna sit there and say that if Trump was removed, there wouldn't be a mad scramble to be the next candidate and that wouldn't have far reaching implications for the voter base that largely only wants to vote for Trump?
I'm saying that power vacuums are a myth
You describe repercussions in general, not what a power vaccuum does.
The repercussions of a power vaccuum.
No, you'te literally just saying, "things will be different" No fucking shit, Sherlock.
This is all a weird argument to take against my statement. There is no question that if trump is removed from the ballot that those who could take his place would fracture the party vote. Even if there was no one to replace him, or the party mandated who his replacement would be, states that individually remove him from the ballot would literally have a voting hole that no other candidate could fill, and cut into trumps vote block. His removal is the vacuum. It is the mechanism for change you agreed to with the phrase “no fucking shit, Sherlock”
Still not buying it. He's getting removed from the ballot in states he's going to lose either way. If he was removed all around, the Republicans would march out someone easily.
If that cannot happen, then there was no power for which a vaccuum would come.
No one gets to pick up the crown of a narcissist's cult. The narcissists themselves make sure of it. If the power isn't with the RNC, no vaccuum is made.
It just collapses.