Football ...
Basketball ...
Baseball ...
Other Sports ...
Futbol ...
🤫995🤫 ...
Gambling ...
Movies & TV ...
Music ...
Hobbies ...
Lulz ...
Food & Travel
...
Daily Texan ...
Business & Markets ...
Cloak Room ...
Help ...
For Sale ...
Board Discussion ...
Advertise...
Tailgate Donations
dcbc
-
Posts
9,540 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by dcbc
-
-
Sir, this is an Arby's!
-
Curious, do you think they do that low and slow or hot an fast?
-
A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]
dcbc replied to Francisco 2.0's topic in Cloak Room
90% Rayon. Very nice. -
The gag order states that others may not comment "at his direction." The answer is "it depends" on things we don't know from her post alone. Even if she's still on the payroll, more info is needed, particularly if the next stop on the contempt train is jail.
-
-
A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]
dcbc replied to Francisco 2.0's topic in Cloak Room
Well, he is contemptuous. -
Nah, he's a soaker.
-
-
Set those pretrial motions for hearings and request a new trial setting. Username definitely checks out.
-
In my defense, I once turned down a client who asked me to represent him in a simple name change . . . to Skywalker.
-
It's going to sound killer on that Quadraphonic Blaupunkt. I saw the ad for it in last month's OUI, which, I assure you, I read mostly for the ads.
-
We had one of these in an old 1978 Chevy G20 Van we used to take on road trips. The noise that thing made when you tried to use the Rew/FF function.
-
We're going to need more Steely Dan.
-
You're not wrong.
-
And that, sir, is among many of the reasons I have that avatar (plus, who's cooler than Earl). But to be less lawyerly about it, she seems biased and incompetent to me.
-
I mean, I could have sworn McConnell pulled this out of his as, then reinserted it when it was Trump's time, but there's plenty I don't know. But this is the first I've heard of this from someone who I would not consider a lunatic.
-
Yeah, I mean, she's either in the tank for him or isn't competent enough to manage all of these pretrial motions involving voluminous documents before a trial date this month. Either idea is plausible, I suppose, or both. That's not to be construed as a defense on my part.
-
He has not testified and may not testify. If his denial come into evidence in some other way, that's another story. I still think there's an argument that it's relevant, but for the reasons mentioned above, it's in, it likely isn't harmful, and so it's a moot point.
-
To be more specific, because Trump's lawyer is bringing up the matter of their sexual encounter on cross, in Texas at least, it's unlikely that any admissibility challenge would be harmful because Trump's lawyer elicited cumulative testimony about the encounter on cross.
-
Same as the civil rules. Relevance is relevance. They're cross-examining her over whether she had sex with Trump. So the relevance of that testimony is now cumulative and any argument of error by Trump as to the admissibility of that fact (not the remaining details) would seem to be nugatory.
-
-
Yes. But imagine a scale. Only relevant evidence is admissible, and all evidence is prejudicial. But to be admissible, the evidence's relevance cannot be outweighed by its prejudicial effect.
-
That's a good point, but It might be admissible as some sort of same transaction contextual evidence? I get that that's more of a 404(b) (in Texas) exception and it still has to be relevant. But saying it's not relevant leads us to a story where, once upon a time, Michael Cohen paid Stormy Daniels to sign a nondisclosure agreement about nothing. The idea that their having sex isn't relevant is the type of technically-accurate discussion that makes people dislike lawyers.
