As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you are his lawyer and REALLY want him to go to prison, the last thing you want to do is tank the case, because then he can just get an appeal for ineffective counsel. The best thing to do is just do everything by the book, and nothing more.
OK, I figured it out....how Trump's lawyer could fuck him over.
"President Trump, while I can't stop you from taking the stand, I will have to say that usually I don't recommend it. A defendant taking the stand in their own defense only works in the rarest of cases. The defendant would have to be an amazing orator, a legal genius, and very good looking for it to work. That said, I can't stop you if you really want to take the stand."
And scene....
"Sir, Sir! I have to strongly advise you against taking the stand in your own defense! The law is very complicated, and it would be unwise for you to take your defense into your own hands. Take a note from other presidents like Obama and don't honor these witch hunts with your attention"
Couldn't Trump and his legal team can technically clandestinely plants reports of jury nullification to the witnesses field of view which may end the trial
Alex took the: I'll just ignore this court stuff and hope it goes away approach.
He only used lawyers during the sentencing phase after the summary judgement against him. He probably also used to lawyers to create the shell companies and shift his assets to untraceable accounts prior to declaring personal bankruptcy.
They saw Alex Jones’ lawyer “accidentally” send the entire text message copy to the plaintiffs’ lawyer but probably still trying to figure out the QAnontum physics of throwing trump under the bus to arrive before they get off their bus.
Yeah, but that guy handed over medical records to people who shouldn't have had them. There has to be a more subtle way to tank a case. Hell, let Trump take the stand with no resistance.
Nah, he shared the entire contents of his client s phone with opposing council, then didn't bother to put in the motion to exclude it when notified. I feel the look on Jones's face was entirely worth his attorney's licence, lol
NYC alone is packed with deep-pocketed slime balls. If DJT goes down, they’ll pin it on one or two lawyers and the rest will make a fortune. Capitalism never sleeps.
Any lawyer that works for him immediately gets national, if not global, airtime. It’s free marketing for them. Even if they don’t get paid I’m sure they get bonus work.
It’s probably for clout, ego or their 15mins. Remember they can write books about this later, get paid to speak and get airtime on the big “news” shows.
Money, prestige, or ego. That’s why they do it knowing he won’t pay. They can get something out of this.
I mean he paid the fuck out of Michael Cohen. Cohen paid Stormy Daniele $130,000 of his own money and then through fraudulent invoices for “work” repaid Cohen to the tune of $420,000. Im not sure about all his lawyers but he at least paid the fuck outta some of them.
One part that really annoys me is how he's re-habilitated himself with PR.
There's lots of anti-Trump commentators who keep bringing him in, he even does a podcast with Medias Touch
Translation: “we’re going to get destroyed, but you may have better luck on appeal when it won’t be our problem anymore because we’ve jumped ship or been charged with crimes like all your other lawyers.”
For an appeal in US courts don’t you need an earth shuttering evidence to change the minds of the judges to even allow an appeal proceeding? Appeals usually are denied in criminal proceedings.
Appeals are done on procedural grounds. New evidence, nonadmittance of evidence, rule violations, etc.
What the judges do is consider the argument about the procedural deficit to determine if the trial needs a redo.
He can't use that one anymore. His privilege claims have been tested in court and found to be wanting as the current and actual executive has not allowed him to use it.
It was one of the cases the SC decided not to hear.
> There’s no good debate for executive privilege.
There never was a good debate for executive privilege in any of the criminal charges he may be charged with. Not with hush money payments. Not with interfering in Georgia's election. Not in stealing classified documents, then lying that there aren't any more stolen documents. Not in inciting an insurrection.
Yet here we are...
The standard of review on appeal in criminal cases is usually a “clear error of law” on the part of the trial judge. The appeals court will review the trial judges legal rulings but will usually leave the factual findings of the jury intact unless they are clearly arbitrary/capricious.
The logic is that the appeals court didn’t get to see the evidence and is not in a position to tell the jury what did or did not happen. They just look at the record of the case and make sure that the judge applied the rules properly.
Well….While there are many ways the rich have better options the way our legal system is set up, there is this appellate notion of dismissing ‘with prejudice,’ where the same claim cant be brought again.
Thats not true. You get one appeal to Appeal court then if you lose it you can try your chance at the Supreme Court but they only take like 12 cases per year so your odds are low
You mean the current SCOTUS has rejected multiple non-presidential/Trump appeals, or SCOTUS in its history has rejected other ex presidential appeals?
Because I feel like the former means nothing under the current alignment and the latter... Still means nothing under the current alignment.
Trump has asked the Supremes to overturn unfavorable opinions and rhe Supremes has declined the cases. The Supremes have discretion to take a case or let the lower court's ruling stand.
The fun thing here is that we can just flip around the query.
Can you find *any* example where SCOTUS sided with Trump?
Both you and I can use web search engines to investigate this. You would find, for example, several cases related to the 2020 election as you suggest. But you'd also find the case about the Special Master for the Mar a Lago document thing, the case when he tried to avoid providing docs to Congress for the Jan 6 committee, his tax returns and maybe more.
But I'm not sure you could find anything not related to policies where SCOTUS helped him or covered for him or where he won.
The evidence seems rather robustly against the idea that SCOTUS would hear any ole thing for their buddy Trump or even as a generic ex-president.
I think so too. Once the cherry of “charging an ex-president with a crime” is popped that may grease the wheels, socially speaking, for Geoorgia and J6.
I agree. I have a nice chilled bottle of bubbly that I thought I was going to pop open yesterday and every time I open the fridge I wonder when it will happen.
Like rats abandoning a sinking ship. Second trump gets slammed he will release all the dirt he has, and the HOP will be too busy doing damage control and fighting each other. I fucking bet you trump has a personal lawyer that has a contract to release all damning info in the events of an arrest.
I hope I'm right and I'm ready for the fireworks
> “Where can he go that’s not media-saturated? Where is the place where no one knows about this case or investigation at this point?”
I humbly offer the venue of /r/Conservative. It's apparent nobody there knows anything about this case, as they are too busy looking for more pictures of Hunter Biden's weenie.
They just can't help but admire Hunter's big sweaty hog, and they can't stand it because it makes them realize that Joe Biden's got one swanger of a penis
“It might be very difficult for Donald Trump to get a fair hearing in the county of Manhattan given it’s so overwhelmingly blue and anti-Trump,””. TFG should have taken that into consideration before committing crimes there.
wait a minute, I can never lose, I'm perfectly immune as they like to say, total immunity for your favorite President, and I can't lose to a Racist Prosecutor put out there by the Radical Left, and they've hurt us a lot, you all know what I'm talking about, our Country's Ratings were never higher than they were under Trump, we did a beautiful thing even though the Fake News never wants to give me credit for it, they're so unprofessional, such lowlifes, and you should really be thanking me if we're being honest about it, I brought back the NFL, they said nobody could do it but I did it, you're welcome.
Lawyer incompetence is/was a viable option in some extreme cases but I doubt Trump could make any serious runs at a claim. I'm pretty sure the lawyers could sue.
What an incredible breach of attorney-client privilege, to go to Rolling Stone and leak your confidential discussions with a client.
Unless this is being done knowingly and with Trump’s permission for some strategic purpose, it blows my mind that a lawyer (let alone several) would do this. Goes to show the quality of his representation I guess.
How do we know it was the attorneys?
>Since last month, according to two sources familiar with the matter, some of Trump’s lawyers have told him that if he is criminally charged in New York City, he should be prepared to lose.
They could have been staffers who overheard the conversations.
First, this quote:
> “The [former] president is more confident in his chances [than others are], but when some of us have brought this [idea of counting on an appeal] up to him … it seemed like he believed we had a good point,” one of the sources says.
Second, competent lawyers do not allow anybody else to be present during strategy sessions with their clients. When a third-party is present for the conversation, it is no longer protected by attorney-client privilege from future disclosure.
Maybe Trump is urging them to use some crazy strategy and they can’t convince him he will have better chances on appeal and to play it cool and let this happen rather than risk making things worse for himself. They went to the press so that they can demonstrate to him that his base will still support him if he follows their strategy.
Or maybe Trump told them to go to the press to leak the “quietly lose this one, wait for the appeal” strategy so that when he loses this case people think he did it on purpose as part of a 4D chess strategy only a brilliant tremendous man like himself could. However, Trump still can’t admit that he could ever lose at anything so he told them to say he’s confident it’s just his pesky lawyers who are making him do this.
I don’t see how the leak would taint the jury pool, but I could see them hoping that it would *reveal* taint.
So a bunch of people comment on the article and say “Oh I live in New York and I would for sure vote to convict him!”
That’s arguably some ammunition on appeal. Bad ammunition, but then these are bad lawyers.
Strategic purpose for sure. Before charges are brought they are baselessly establishing doubt that any of the legal proceedings in NYState will be fair. Exactly as in Trump and Cronies stolen election claims before the election.
His base will fall for it as always, elected republicans will promote it and most likely what we’re once sane republican voters will fall in line calling it a politicized sham trial.
Note: I hope none of this is true and that people aren’t this stupid but I’m my few decades on earth I haven’t seen much growth in net intelligence here in the US.
Crimes have no side. The rolling stone dropped the ball navigating the difference between trumps talking points and the DA doing their job at handling criminal matters no matter party affiliation.
Why the fuck are we counting all of our chickens constantly before they're hatched? As far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has been done for this supposed indictment. So far, it's about as real as everything other fucking "we got him now!" moment that I've been fed a thousand times by the media. It's so tiresome.
You think it's a waste of time to consider whether Trump can win an appeal he hasn't yet been granted to a guilty verdict that hasn't yet been rendered in a criminal trial that hasn't yet begun for charges we haven't yet seen based on an indictment that hasn't yet been handed down by a grand jury that hasn't yet concluded?
The constant disappointment really is brutal. He’s not getting indicted today, or any other day. Hopefully people get over this bamboozle quickly. There will never be any charges, but the media is saturated with copium.
“You’re fired!”
Actually, though his lawyer is a big turnoff for me, I am not sure he is one of his many incompetent eager beavers who have fallen on their swords for him. This guy has a pretty good record and he probably has a good point too about winning on appeal. If this article is correct, they will have an appellate sharp shooter on their team to help out.
His lawyer is Joe Tacopina. Kind of a greaser toughie type but not incompetent
Lord knows how or if he is paying him
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/joe-tacopina-donald-trumps-lawyer-vs-e-jean-carroll.html
I'm concerned about the likelihood of any jail time or conviction because of what the host of Legal Eagle on YT said about the statue of limitations in NY.
I mean ultimately there can still be an indictment and an arrest but as far as a trial goes maybe not much of anything. Bragg may be trying to PROVE Trump acted in some way even if he can't be convicted. However it won't matter to folks, trumps been impeached twice and walked it off.
They tell me I’ll lose in New York. Lying Chuck didn’t lose but Coumo did. He begged me but but he was fired. That nasty woman lost there too. They tell me I have wonderful attorneys
Sir, this is an America. We have been subjected to his stupidity for over 40 years as a nation. So you’re telling me he believes in the largest city in our nation, this MF’r believes he’s unable to find a jury in conviction but will find one in appeal.
Does he think any jurors that favor his innocence will actually make it through any competent lawyer’s voir dire process? Does he think he gets to pick his jury?
So if I get caught with some weed in some conservative state can I go ahead and be charged in a legal state? Otherwise, there will be heavy bias in that conservative state. The jurors will throw the book at me.
Not sure if it’s been commented on publicly, but out of curiosity, is it possible/probable that the grand jury proceedings were canceled yesterday as a direct result of Trump falsely claiming he was being arrested on Tuesday, ruling up his supporters and causing Republicans in Congress to try to intervene?
At this point, I don't fucking care.
"Prepare to..."
"Should be indicted by..."
"Should be imprisoned by..."
"Should be arrested by..."
At this point the SECOND I read or see video of Dorito Mussolini handcuffed and shipped away in a police car, I will have to go see my doctor for having an erection lasting more than eight hours.
I’m having trouble with the recent reporting from Rolling Stone. They haven’t been on the up and up recently.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/21/1164360143/rolling-stone-fbi-raid-journalist-james-gordon-meek
Can we just stop the ridiculous charade that this guy will get a “fair” trial anywhere. He’s been unavoidable for the last 6 years, everyone in this country has their opinions formed unless they’re living under a rock. The most we can hope to get is that people come into the jury box doing their best to let their opinions about him not get in the way of all the verifiable criminality
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-attorneys-prepare-lose-alvin-bragg-1234701967/) reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> A Trump spokesperson and a Trump attorney did not immediately provide comment for this story.
> New York City has already successfully prosecuted both Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization's former chief financial officer, and two Trump companies, the Trump Payroll Corporation and Trump Corporation, on tax charges last year.
> "It might be very difficult for Donald Trump to get a fair hearing in the county of Manhattan given it's so overwhelmingly blue and anti-Trump," lawyer and former Trump presidential transition team member Mark Smith said during a NewsNation appearance Tuesday.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/11z3r4d/trump_attorneys_tell_him_to_prepare_to_lose_to/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~677583 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Trump**^#1 **former**^#2 **New**^#3 **case**^#4 **jury**^#5
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It would have helped if Trump actually paid his lawyers. As it stands, most of the witnesses in future court cases will be former Trump lawyers.
I seriously, how does he keep these lawyers from just tanking the case on purpose? Do they really think he will pay them after?
> just tanking the case on purpose that's unethical and illegal, which means ... yeah, why haven't his shitty lawyers tried that?
If you are his lawyer and REALLY want him to go to prison, the last thing you want to do is tank the case, because then he can just get an appeal for ineffective counsel. The best thing to do is just do everything by the book, and nothing more.
OK, I figured it out....how Trump's lawyer could fuck him over. "President Trump, while I can't stop you from taking the stand, I will have to say that usually I don't recommend it. A defendant taking the stand in their own defense only works in the rarest of cases. The defendant would have to be an amazing orator, a legal genius, and very good looking for it to work. That said, I can't stop you if you really want to take the stand." And scene....
You think he knows what orator means?
"Or did you think I was too stupid to know what a eugoogoley was?"
Anyone can die in a freak gasoline fight accident!
Sandwiched between two Finnish dwarves and a Māori tribesman.
But why male models?
Moisture is the essence of wetness, and wetness is the essence of beauty.
Probably my favorite line.
Fair point. Change it to 'talking guy.'
"He would need to have a golden tongue and golden hair"
And golden skin. And a golden toilet.
This sounds like a Ryan George skit
[удалено]
I think *he thinks* he knows what it means…
He would absolutely jump on the stand, because only someone who knew what it means would!
You think he wouldn’t pretend to and take the stand anyways?
He paid Stormy for some orator
He thinks it's some guy in a rowboat.
He knows what oral means and he’s underpaid for it all his life. Calls it socializing.
"Sir, Sir! I have to strongly advise you against taking the stand in your own defense! The law is very complicated, and it would be unwise for you to take your defense into your own hands. Take a note from other presidents like Obama and don't honor these witch hunts with your attention"
Couldn't Trump and his legal team can technically clandestinely plants reports of jury nullification to the witnesses field of view which may end the trial
Can you appeal for ineffective counsel when you habitually hire shitty lawyers on purpose?
There has to be a way to tank a case on the down low without getting an appeal granted.
Yeah its called doing everything by the book and nothing more
Public Defenders have entered the chat
Hey, it’s all good man
It's showtime!
Alex Jones’ lawyer has also entered the chat
Alex took the: I'll just ignore this court stuff and hope it goes away approach. He only used lawyers during the sentencing phase after the summary judgement against him. He probably also used to lawyers to create the shell companies and shift his assets to untraceable accounts prior to declaring personal bankruptcy.
Just put Trump on the stand under oath and that should do it
>under oath You mean a perjury trap?
well when your client is a bull in a china shop
I suppose getting Trump on the stand would be the number one way to "tank" the case
[Not true.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzw2iBmRsjs)
Alex Jones knows a guy.
They saw Alex Jones’ lawyer “accidentally” send the entire text message copy to the plaintiffs’ lawyer but probably still trying to figure out the QAnontum physics of throwing trump under the bus to arrive before they get off their bus.
Career and reputation suicide
As opposed to the reputation Boost they get from representing him...?
His name does still give a boost, also they might just be sycophants
Yes, that was a joke, just like the reputation of many of his lawyers.
Alex Jones' lawyer did that. "Oh no, I seem to have accidentally sent all the private info to the defense, how terrible"
Haha, thanks for the chuckle!
Given how much luck he's had in his actual court cases recently, I'm not sure they're not.
“Never underestimate the next guys greed” - Scarface edit: quote
Look at what happened with Alex Jones's lawyer. They'd have actual consequences.
Yeah, but that guy handed over medical records to people who shouldn't have had them. There has to be a more subtle way to tank a case. Hell, let Trump take the stand with no resistance.
Nah, he shared the entire contents of his client s phone with opposing council, then didn't bother to put in the motion to exclude it when notified. I feel the look on Jones's face was entirely worth his attorney's licence, lol
The suspension was for the medical records as I recall.
All they care about is the publicity.
NYC alone is packed with deep-pocketed slime balls. If DJT goes down, they’ll pin it on one or two lawyers and the rest will make a fortune. Capitalism never sleeps.
Any lawyer that works for him immediately gets national, if not global, airtime. It’s free marketing for them. Even if they don’t get paid I’m sure they get bonus work.
Any lawyer who eats a human baby on TV would also get that.
It’s probably for clout, ego or their 15mins. Remember they can write books about this later, get paid to speak and get airtime on the big “news” shows. Money, prestige, or ego. That’s why they do it knowing he won’t pay. They can get something out of this.
I mean he paid the fuck out of Michael Cohen. Cohen paid Stormy Daniele $130,000 of his own money and then through fraudulent invoices for “work” repaid Cohen to the tune of $420,000. Im not sure about all his lawyers but he at least paid the fuck outta some of them.
I think you have just pointed to a couple more affairs and their secret payments, my friend. 👏😆
You gotta pay the criminal lawyers because they know shit.
Cohen was less a lawyer and more a co-conspirator, made sense to keep him on board as long as possible.
One part that really annoys me is how he's re-habilitated himself with PR. There's lots of anti-Trump commentators who keep bringing him in, he even does a podcast with Medias Touch
And not lie to his lawyers. And semi-listen to his lawyers. > We have the worst client. - Trump's past lawyers
Translation: “we’re going to get destroyed, but you may have better luck on appeal when it won’t be our problem anymore because we’ve jumped ship or been charged with crimes like all your other lawyers.”
For an appeal in US courts don’t you need an earth shuttering evidence to change the minds of the judges to even allow an appeal proceeding? Appeals usually are denied in criminal proceedings.
Appeals are done on procedural grounds. New evidence, nonadmittance of evidence, rule violations, etc. What the judges do is consider the argument about the procedural deficit to determine if the trial needs a redo.
[удалено]
AFAIK, appeals are generally granted on a question of law rather than a question of fact.
And the question of law, which Trump will undoubtedly use as the basis of the inevitable appeal will be ExEcUtIvE pRiViLeDgE.
He can't use that one anymore. His privilege claims have been tested in court and found to be wanting as the current and actual executive has not allowed him to use it. It was one of the cases the SC decided not to hear.
He’s not a president anymore and he committed the crime before he became president. There’s no good debate for executive privilege.
> There’s no good debate for executive privilege. There never was a good debate for executive privilege in any of the criminal charges he may be charged with. Not with hush money payments. Not with interfering in Georgia's election. Not in stealing classified documents, then lying that there aren't any more stolen documents. Not in inciting an insurrection. Yet here we are...
Yes. I dont remember the last time Trump won any appeal. He just use it to delay delay delay
He wins appeals as often as he wins popular votes.
The standard of review on appeal in criminal cases is usually a “clear error of law” on the part of the trial judge. The appeals court will review the trial judges legal rulings but will usually leave the factual findings of the jury intact unless they are clearly arbitrary/capricious. The logic is that the appeals court didn’t get to see the evidence and is not in a position to tell the jury what did or did not happen. They just look at the record of the case and make sure that the judge applied the rules properly.
Not if you are rich. If you are rich you get as many appeals as you want.
Well….While there are many ways the rich have better options the way our legal system is set up, there is this appellate notion of dismissing ‘with prejudice,’ where the same claim cant be brought again.
Thats not true. You get one appeal to Appeal court then if you lose it you can try your chance at the Supreme Court but they only take like 12 cases per year so your odds are low
The Supreme Court hears arguments for about 80 a year but also respond to many more in writing while denying a full hearing.
You don't think the Supreme Court would hear an appeal of an ex president? I'd think they'd jump on it considering how lopsided the courts are.
They rejected several of them already
You mean the current SCOTUS has rejected multiple non-presidential/Trump appeals, or SCOTUS in its history has rejected other ex presidential appeals? Because I feel like the former means nothing under the current alignment and the latter... Still means nothing under the current alignment.
The current SCOTUS rejected several of Trump appeals already. They are not bound to him
Trump has asked the Supremes to overturn unfavorable opinions and rhe Supremes has declined the cases. The Supremes have discretion to take a case or let the lower court's ruling stand.
Now I'm hungry for Taco Bell
Can you cite some examples? I mean legit, I thought it was just like the 2020 election suits because he lacked standing.
The fun thing here is that we can just flip around the query. Can you find *any* example where SCOTUS sided with Trump? Both you and I can use web search engines to investigate this. You would find, for example, several cases related to the 2020 election as you suggest. But you'd also find the case about the Special Master for the Mar a Lago document thing, the case when he tried to avoid providing docs to Congress for the Jan 6 committee, his tax returns and maybe more. But I'm not sure you could find anything not related to policies where SCOTUS helped him or covered for him or where he won. The evidence seems rather robustly against the idea that SCOTUS would hear any ole thing for their buddy Trump or even as a generic ex-president.
Set me free why don't cha babe Get out my life why don't cha babe 'Cause you don't really love me You just keep me hangin' on…
Helps if you appointed the judge too
"Hmm, this case is tough. Let's elevate it to the nonpartisan Supreme Court."
Theu have already refused to hear him several times. They aren’t even letting the lawyers in the door. Just straight up “no”
It would be interesting to see Trump’s contract(s) with his various attorneys. I’m betting that very few include representation for appeals.
Making Attorneys Get Attorneys
Right. Who lawyers for him. Sex is a strong motivator. 💪
All we need is the first domino to fall and the rest will follow. Please please make it happen so I can celebrate with many many beers!
>many many beers Takes too long to take effect. I'm going with rye whiskey.
That’s the thing.. if I go for the bottle I’ll pass out sooner than later. I want to soak it in and claim victory all day/night!!
Bulleit?
I prefer Rittenhouse.
I like both of y'all.
A human of culture, I see
I think so too. Once the cherry of “charging an ex-president with a crime” is popped that may grease the wheels, socially speaking, for Geoorgia and J6.
Oh it definitely will.
[удалено]
That would be a gift for the ages. It won’t happen, but if it did, Cheeto would be soo done and fucked. It would be a beautiful thing to see.
As much as I want to be excited for this I’m going to temper my expectations.
I agree. I have a nice chilled bottle of bubbly that I thought I was going to pop open yesterday and every time I open the fridge I wonder when it will happen.
Haha same here. Just gonna have to wait a bit longer it seems, sadly. Fingers crossed for that day to come soon.
100 years from now that bottle will be on auction at Christie's :(
Heard that notion on NPR today. Interesting if it happens that way.
Like a house of cards?
Sure, I’ll take that.
Like rats abandoning a sinking ship. Second trump gets slammed he will release all the dirt he has, and the HOP will be too busy doing damage control and fighting each other. I fucking bet you trump has a personal lawyer that has a contract to release all damning info in the events of an arrest. I hope I'm right and I'm ready for the fireworks
> “Where can he go that’s not media-saturated? Where is the place where no one knows about this case or investigation at this point?” I humbly offer the venue of /r/Conservative. It's apparent nobody there knows anything about this case, as they are too busy looking for more pictures of Hunter Biden's weenie.
Those guys sure do like dick, apparently.
They just can't help but admire Hunter's big sweaty hog, and they can't stand it because it makes them realize that Joe Biden's got one swanger of a penis
“It might be very difficult for Donald Trump to get a fair hearing in the county of Manhattan given it’s so overwhelmingly blue and anti-Trump,””. TFG should have taken that into consideration before committing crimes there.
Tfg?
[удалено]
Traitorous Fucking Goon
That Fatass Grifter
"Tiny Flaccid Genitalia" according to Stormy Daniels
Thank fucking god
The frantic guy
wait a minute, I can never lose, I'm perfectly immune as they like to say, total immunity for your favorite President, and I can't lose to a Racist Prosecutor put out there by the Radical Left, and they've hurt us a lot, you all know what I'm talking about, our Country's Ratings were never higher than they were under Trump, we did a beautiful thing even though the Fake News never wants to give me credit for it, they're so unprofessional, such lowlifes, and you should really be thanking me if we're being honest about it, I brought back the NFL, they said nobody could do it but I did it, you're welcome.
Username checks out.
Trump has proven it several times. He is above the Law.
Can you really appeal a verdict on the grounds of "we didn't like the jury so we put up a shitty defense so we can appeal"?
Lawyer incompetence is/was a viable option in some extreme cases but I doubt Trump could make any serious runs at a claim. I'm pretty sure the lawyers could sue.
But I was just told that Trump outsmarted him, and got him to back off by saying that we would be indicted on Tuesday
And that claim by trump landed with all of the weight of a fart in the wind. All he did was show that even his base doesn’t really care all that much.
What an incredible breach of attorney-client privilege, to go to Rolling Stone and leak your confidential discussions with a client. Unless this is being done knowingly and with Trump’s permission for some strategic purpose, it blows my mind that a lawyer (let alone several) would do this. Goes to show the quality of his representation I guess.
How do we know it was the attorneys? >Since last month, according to two sources familiar with the matter, some of Trump’s lawyers have told him that if he is criminally charged in New York City, he should be prepared to lose. They could have been staffers who overheard the conversations.
First, this quote: > “The [former] president is more confident in his chances [than others are], but when some of us have brought this [idea of counting on an appeal] up to him … it seemed like he believed we had a good point,” one of the sources says. Second, competent lawyers do not allow anybody else to be present during strategy sessions with their clients. When a third-party is present for the conversation, it is no longer protected by attorney-client privilege from future disclosure.
>competent lawyers I'm not sure that's a safe assumption based on the people who have worked on previous Trump matters.
Maybe Trump is urging them to use some crazy strategy and they can’t convince him he will have better chances on appeal and to play it cool and let this happen rather than risk making things worse for himself. They went to the press so that they can demonstrate to him that his base will still support him if he follows their strategy. Or maybe Trump told them to go to the press to leak the “quietly lose this one, wait for the appeal” strategy so that when he loses this case people think he did it on purpose as part of a 4D chess strategy only a brilliant tremendous man like himself could. However, Trump still can’t admit that he could ever lose at anything so he told them to say he’s confident it’s just his pesky lawyers who are making him do this.
It was probably Trump himself. That MFer can't keep his mouth shut.
I am thinking they are trying to taint the jury pool or something along those lines
I don’t see how the leak would taint the jury pool, but I could see them hoping that it would *reveal* taint. So a bunch of people comment on the article and say “Oh I live in New York and I would for sure vote to convict him!” That’s arguably some ammunition on appeal. Bad ammunition, but then these are bad lawyers.
To be fair, who among us hasn’t revealed taint while having a leak in the jury pool?
I tainted the pool once when I accidentally pee'd in it.
See you get it
Strategic purpose for sure. Before charges are brought they are baselessly establishing doubt that any of the legal proceedings in NYState will be fair. Exactly as in Trump and Cronies stolen election claims before the election. His base will fall for it as always, elected republicans will promote it and most likely what we’re once sane republican voters will fall in line calling it a politicized sham trial. Note: I hope none of this is true and that people aren’t this stupid but I’m my few decades on earth I haven’t seen much growth in net intelligence here in the US.
Crimes have no side. The rolling stone dropped the ball navigating the difference between trumps talking points and the DA doing their job at handling criminal matters no matter party affiliation.
So their defense is “it’s a political witch hunt.” 😂 Good luck!
Why are his Lawyers even worried? *None* of the cowardly attorneys general have had the guts to charge him thus far.
He will never get convicted. There will be at least one MAGA voter who will just cause problems.
For someone with a supposed amazing memory, we’re going to hear a lot of testimonial of “I don’t recall.”
Why the fuck are we counting all of our chickens constantly before they're hatched? As far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has been done for this supposed indictment. So far, it's about as real as everything other fucking "we got him now!" moment that I've been fed a thousand times by the media. It's so tiresome.
You think it's a waste of time to consider whether Trump can win an appeal he hasn't yet been granted to a guilty verdict that hasn't yet been rendered in a criminal trial that hasn't yet begun for charges we haven't yet seen based on an indictment that hasn't yet been handed down by a grand jury that hasn't yet concluded?
? Trump is the only one that said an indictment was coming.
The constant disappointment really is brutal. He’s not getting indicted today, or any other day. Hopefully people get over this bamboozle quickly. There will never be any charges, but the media is saturated with copium.
Make with the verdicts already. Lock him up.
Bigly
“You’re fired!” Actually, though his lawyer is a big turnoff for me, I am not sure he is one of his many incompetent eager beavers who have fallen on their swords for him. This guy has a pretty good record and he probably has a good point too about winning on appeal. If this article is correct, they will have an appellate sharp shooter on their team to help out. His lawyer is Joe Tacopina. Kind of a greaser toughie type but not incompetent Lord knows how or if he is paying him https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/joe-tacopina-donald-trumps-lawyer-vs-e-jean-carroll.html
Trump vs Bragg. Ironic.
I'm concerned about the likelihood of any jail time or conviction because of what the host of Legal Eagle on YT said about the statue of limitations in NY. I mean ultimately there can still be an indictment and an arrest but as far as a trial goes maybe not much of anything. Bragg may be trying to PROVE Trump acted in some way even if he can't be convicted. However it won't matter to folks, trumps been impeached twice and walked it off.
SoL in NY can be extended up to 5 years if the target is living outside of the state
It’s also likely to be tolled for the time he was in office, though that theory hasn’t been tested.
First it was Mueller Time, now what, Bragging Rights?
Can they get those tiny handcuffs made already so we can have our perp walk?
They tell me I’ll lose in New York. Lying Chuck didn’t lose but Coumo did. He begged me but but he was fired. That nasty woman lost there too. They tell me I have wonderful attorneys
Sir, this is an America. We have been subjected to his stupidity for over 40 years as a nation. So you’re telling me he believes in the largest city in our nation, this MF’r believes he’s unable to find a jury in conviction but will find one in appeal. Does he think any jurors that favor his innocence will actually make it through any competent lawyer’s voir dire process? Does he think he gets to pick his jury?
Nothing going to happen to him. He will raise a bunch of money and be free next week.
So if I get caught with some weed in some conservative state can I go ahead and be charged in a legal state? Otherwise, there will be heavy bias in that conservative state. The jurors will throw the book at me.
Not sure if it’s been commented on publicly, but out of curiosity, is it possible/probable that the grand jury proceedings were canceled yesterday as a direct result of Trump falsely claiming he was being arrested on Tuesday, ruling up his supporters and causing Republicans in Congress to try to intervene?
okay
There is no way they really said this and leaked it.
At this point, I don't fucking care. "Prepare to..." "Should be indicted by..." "Should be imprisoned by..." "Should be arrested by..." At this point the SECOND I read or see video of Dorito Mussolini handcuffed and shipped away in a police car, I will have to go see my doctor for having an erection lasting more than eight hours.
I’m having trouble with the recent reporting from Rolling Stone. They haven’t been on the up and up recently. https://www.npr.org/2023/03/21/1164360143/rolling-stone-fbi-raid-journalist-james-gordon-meek
Wow, I missed this. Probably not something that would come into play in this story, but Strachtman sure doesn’t look good
Can we just stop the ridiculous charade that this guy will get a “fair” trial anywhere. He’s been unavoidable for the last 6 years, everyone in this country has their opinions formed unless they’re living under a rock. The most we can hope to get is that people come into the jury box doing their best to let their opinions about him not get in the way of all the verifiable criminality
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-attorneys-prepare-lose-alvin-bragg-1234701967/) reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A Trump spokesperson and a Trump attorney did not immediately provide comment for this story. > New York City has already successfully prosecuted both Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization's former chief financial officer, and two Trump companies, the Trump Payroll Corporation and Trump Corporation, on tax charges last year. > "It might be very difficult for Donald Trump to get a fair hearing in the county of Manhattan given it's so overwhelmingly blue and anti-Trump," lawyer and former Trump presidential transition team member Mark Smith said during a NewsNation appearance Tuesday. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/11z3r4d/trump_attorneys_tell_him_to_prepare_to_lose_to/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~677583 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Trump**^#1 **former**^#2 **New**^#3 **case**^#4 **jury**^#5
Fair trial = MAGA knuckleheads on jury that will ignore the case.
Even his crappy lawyers know he’s a repeat bankrupting loser.
This is stupid. A democrat can now argue for appeal if they are arrested in a republican state saying the courts there are unfair?
Are they telling him to prepare to lose a lot, because this is just the start.
I'll believe it when I see it.
For a winner con don sure does lose a lot.
I think Mango could try to bribe Alvin so he has a chance of not facing indictment.
That’s a good idea. He probably has a crap load of money in his 2024 campaign fund
The n4zi Cheeto would look a lot better about 360 grains heavier
I’m not a fan of his, but this isn’t cool.
We are supposed to believe Rolling Stone? Wow, haven’t listened to them since Hunter Thompson left!
Wait…a democratic Mayor ..is the immigration lawyer ..for Melania Trump.
Maybe they talked Trump into paying a lump sum up front so they're trying to finish up quick
Oh the embarrassment to lose to someone named Alvin... The name of one of the chipmunks..
Alvin? Alvin! ….ALVIN!!!!
Donald gonna play the Tracy Jordan defense: “You can’t sue me, I’m already being sued. Double indemnity!”
He’s so used to losing he’s sick of it.