Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted

I refuse to believe that any counsel is that incompetent as to let Trump and his DNA compelled perjury if talking self testify. Any attorney saying that Trump will testify must be saying that a portion of a Trump deposition will be played. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Gatorubet said:

I refuse to believe that any counsel is that incompetent as to let Trump and his DNA compelled perjury if talking self testify. Any attorney saying that Trump will testify must be saying that a portion of a Trump deposition will be played. 

Serious question:  can an attorney resign in real time, say if their client insists on taking the stand, or are attorneys compelled to give a certain amount of warning?

Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Serious question:  can an attorney resign in real time, say if their client insists on taking the stand, or are attorneys compelled to give a certain amount of warning?

He probably has to ride it out to prevent Trump from clawing back his $3M+ up front payment.  

Posted

Strange trial. I would bet that many people in America overstate their assets to obtain loans, only to understate the asset value for tax purposes. Banks and taxing authorities appear to not care too much.

I would say that NY state should look to any evidence that Trump signed off on the high value of a property, and nail him with the unpaid taxes on the discrepancy. Which I assume is what the state is going after here. Plus penalties. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Serious question:  can an attorney resign in real time, say if their client insists on taking the stand, or are attorneys compelled to give a certain amount of warning?

Technically, you can file a motion to withdraw at any time (at least, under the Texas and Federal rules as I understand them).  The chances of such motion being granted DURING a trial are....low.  You'd have to go back in chambers, probably just the judge, court reporter, you, and lead counsel for the other side, and explain....without breaching the privilege....that you cannot continue to represent him, it would violate my duties under the ethical rules and my duties to this court.  Which you functionally say with a wink, because everyone there knows what it means: your client insists on taking the stand, and you know with certainty that he intends to commit perjury.

That said....(and I don't know NY rules on this), but corporations/organizations can't just "represent themselves."  They HAVE to be represented by counsel.  So, you couldn't withdraw and just leave DJT to represent the Trump Organization.

The solution, of course -- and this is something that should be offered at every law school orientation from now on -- is DON'T REPRESENT A TRUMP.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

the way those two co-counsel look at one another when he first tries to say "Statue of Ruminations" 

eric looks poised though.  

one of you trump dipshits remind me why his wife isn't there to support him today though?  Was it parent-teacher conference day or what?  You fucking children.  

Posted
3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Strange trial. I would bet that many people in America overstate their assets to obtain loans, only to understate the asset value for tax purposes. Banks and taxing authorities appear to not care too much.

 

Ummm

Quote

Trump, his businesses and his two adult sons are accused of inflating assets by as much as $1.9 billion to $3.6 billion per year between 2011 and 2021 to save hundreds of millions of dollars on loans and insurance.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted
9 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Strange trial. I would bet that many people in America overstate their assets to obtain loans, only to understate the asset value for tax purposes. Banks and taxing authorities appear to not care too much.

 

Jokes on you! One would need assets first to overstate and undervalue. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

one of you trump dipshits remind me why his wife isn't there to support him today though?  Was it parent-teacher conference day or what?  You fucking children.  

 

You know the answer.

 

Besides, his girlfriend is sitting in the courtroom, along his side, facing the legal challenge together.

 

TELEMMGLPICT000351752357_16962768524420_

 

FfwinobWYAALofA.jpg

 

 

Edited by Francisco 2.0
  • Haha 1
Posted
4 hours ago, The Dog said:

Nobody because he keeps firing them. At least Kise is smart enough to get paid up front...twice:

 

He didn't fire him altogether.  He was banished from the Mar-A-Lago case because he kept telling the malignant shit funnel what he didn't want to hear.

He's one of the best Trump's got.  I've read a lot of his stuff, it's pretty sane considering the positions Trump has him stake out.  I think Blanche is number two.

Lauro seems to be number three.  Of the briefing I have seen.  Lauro is fairly outrageous, but at least tries to back it up.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 hours ago, Red Five said:

"Trump hating". Everyone with an IQ over about 95 hates you, and for good reason. You're the worst person on the planet. 

Oh no. No no no. He's not even close to the worst person on the planet.

Don't ask. You really, really, REALLY don't wanna know.

(But if you want a hint: The judge in THAT case had everyone excused from the court, including employees, unless they absolutely had to be present to hear when the charges were read, because simply hearing the charges were enough to be traumatizing.)

Posted
6 minutes ago, The Dog said:

First time I've seen that Habba was paid in advance.

I don't think those tweets are credible.

As I explained upthread or on the other one, I think a jury demand was due August 15, 2023 and by that time she was mostly off the team.  However, if that was a mistake, that's prima facie malpractice and they're all liable.

Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

He didn't fire him altogether.  He was banished from the Mar-A-Lago case because he kept telling the malignant shit funnel what he didn't want to hear.

He's one of the best Trump's got.  I've read a lot of his stuff, it's pretty sane considering the positions Trump has him stake out.  I think Blanche is number two.

Lauro seems to be number three.  Of the briefing I have seen.  Lauro is fairly outrageous, but at least tries to back it up.

At some point I have to think Trump is going to push even the most competent of those left over their ethical edge and force them to withdraw or succumb to evil.

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

Counter point:  Takes a lot of power to run a local AI lawyering bot.  CrapshootGPT requires some heavy processing power.

 

Yeah, that's not a good idea:

 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't think those tweets are credible.

As I explained upthread or on the other one, I think a jury demand was due August 15, 2023 and by that time she was mostly off the team.  However, if that was a mistake, that's prima facie malpractice and they're all liable.

Many are reporting this and it appears that Trump's lawyers didn't fill out the form at all:

https://www.aol.com/why-trump-fraud-trial-doesn-212001903.html

Quote

In July, a form filled out by Ms James’s office included a box with two options: “Trial by jury demanded” or “Trial without jury.” The filing includes a checkmark in “Trial without jury.”

 

Attorneys for Mr Trump did not fill out that form.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, The Dog said:

Many are reporting this and it appears that Trump's lawyers didn't fill out the form at all:

https://www.aol.com/why-trump-fraud-trial-doesn-212001903.html

 

Right, and that form was filed July 31, 2023, giving Trump 15 days.  That's the first accurate story I've seen.

Most say it was due when they filed suit and it was not.  But by then, mostly grownups were in charge of the suit, not Habba dabba do.  It may well have been intentional at that point.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

C’mon guys. Habbabigtits checked the jury box. The deep state has this super secret chemical called White Out they used to uncheck it.

Do your research and don’t be so gullible.

  • Haha 3
Posted
3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't think those tweets are credible.

As I explained upthread or on the other one, I think a jury demand was due August 15, 2023 and by that time she was mostly off the team.  However, if that was a mistake, that's prima facie malpractice and they're all liable.

Yeah but how could they prove it made a difference?

Posted
8 hours ago, Rimbo said:

The only reason you pay more is to get that high end experience... the nice display, the quiet laptop, snappy UI response times, long battery life... only one of which you'd get from a ROG/Alienware etc.

In short, the probability she's using that laptop for its intended purpose -- games -- is basically 1, minus maybe a few ten thousandths.

6 hours ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

Counter point:  Takes a lot of power to run a local AI lawyering bot.  CrapshootGPT requires some heavy processing power.

She went into Best Buy, bought the first gaming laptop she saw, because she wanted to play this

a4f21c4638201d9b2037c0e3ead4e90a2f64b6f7

  • Haha 2
Posted

Just having John Kelly's comments/testimony is enough to indict this man:

John Kelly, the longest-serving White House chief of staff for Donald Trump, offered his harshest criticism yet of the former president in an exclusive statement to CNN.

Kelly set the record straight with on-the-record confirmation of a number of damning stories about statements Trump made behind closed doors attacking US service members and veterans, listing a number of objectionable comments Kelly witnessed Trump make firsthand.

“What can I add that has not already been said?” Kelly said, when asked if he wanted to weigh in on his former boss in light of recent comments made by other former Trump officials. “A person that thinks those who defend their country in uniform, or are shot down or seriously wounded in combat, or spend years being tortured as POWs are all ‘suckers’ because ‘there is nothing in it for them.’ A person that did not want to be seen in the presence of military amputees because ‘it doesn’t look good for me.’ A person who demonstrated open contempt for a Gold Star family – for all Gold Star families – on TV during the 2016 campaign, and rants that our most precious heroes who gave their lives in America’s defense are ‘losers’ and wouldn’t visit their graves in France.

“A person who is not truthful regarding his position on the protection of unborn life, on women, on minorities, on evangelical Christians, on Jews, on working men and women,” Kelly continued. “A person that has no idea what America stands for and has no idea what America is all about. A person who cavalierly suggests that a selfless warrior who has served his country for 40 years in peacetime and war should lose his life for treason – in expectation that someone will take action. A person who admires autocrats and murderous dictators. A person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution, and the rule of law.

There is nothing more that can be said,” Kelly concluded. “God help us.

In the statement, Kelly is confirming, on the record, a number of details in a 2020 story in The Atlantic by editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, including Trump turning to Kelly on Memorial Day 2017, as they stood among those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq in Section 60 at Arlington National Cemetery, and saying, “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?”

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Right, and that form was filed July 31, 2023, giving Trump 15 days.  That's the first accurate story I've seen.

Most say it was due when they filed suit and it was not.  But by then, mostly grownups were in charge of the suit, not Habba dabba do.  It may well have been intentional at that point.

What's the game plan behind intentionally lowering your chances of winning?  Does he think that if he loses this case, the other cases will go away?

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

They likely did this on purpose to either delay or use it for an appeal later.

 

2 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

 

Bold Strategy Cotton GIF by MOODMAN

 

28 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

She went into Best Buy, bought the first gaming laptop she saw, because she wanted to play this

a4f21c4638201d9b2037c0e3ead4e90a2f64b6f7

 

ace-attorney-phoenix-wright.gif

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Rimbo said:

Thing is, most gaming laptops don't have great-looking displays. They tend to be lower rez (1440p for something that size) and poorer color quality, but really fast refresh rates and updates. And it turns out, those are also the cheapest LCDs.

You pay extra to get a high powered CPU, a discrete GPU, lots of storage space (games are space hungry), RAM. Everything else, you can cheap out on. So gaming stuff tends to be more expensive than budget, but still much cheaper than the high end good stuff.

For lawyering, you don't need more than a budget computer. You aren't rendering 3D, you aren't doing digital creation, you aren't doing development.

The only reason you pay more is to get that high end experience... the nice display, the quiet laptop, snappy UI response times, long battery life... only one of which you'd get from a ROG/Alienware etc.

In short, the probability she's using that laptop for its intended purpose -- games -- is basically 1, minus maybe a few ten thousandths.

She needs it to activate her Lovesense Lush when somebody tips 50 tokens on chaturbate.

Edited by Gil Bang


×
×
  • Create New...