the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

[Bozo_Casanova 26,460]

32 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Spot on. This was all part of the Red Mirage strategy Bloomberg (yes that one) identified. I think the end game was to create so much chaos with election results that legislators (state) would decide a State's election. With the turndown by legislators who met with Trump today, we appear to be dealing with the death rattle of the Trump regime. But the good guys still have to win in Court and . . . knock on wood . . . so far so good.

Not quite. He’s going to raise now, and splash the pot like crazy. 
The next phase will not be in court. 

[henrygandorf 29,191]

53 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I’m not a big fan of citing actors using poker metaphors, but I’m a fair poker player and I’m with Edward Norton on this. All this courtroom shit is was his bluff at the flop. It got called. The bullshit with the legislators was his turn card bluff. It has now also been called. 

comparing trump to a poker player is an insult to poker players.  trump is not a poker player.

trump is the drunken asshole who's sitting at the poker table holding his cards and telling the dealer to "hit" before his friend drags him away.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

14 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Again, the reason the rest of us hate lawyers.  Everyone knows these asshats are acting a fool but the entire legal apparatus just shrugs it shoulders and says "Oh well."

Clean up your shop.

While I appreciate the sentiment you are wrong here. There is no doubt that trumps lawyers are acting the fool but nobody is just shrugging their shoulders about it. Lawyers for trump are not withdrawing just because of public pressure but from pressure from the bar itself.

No profession polices itself all that great but lawyers do a relatively good job of it compared to doctors and cops. With cops, they don’t police itself at all and in fact actively undermine any discipline at all.
 

Docs sweep it under the rug. At least lawyers try to do something. Is it great? Of course not. But there are consequences to unethical conduct. One difference is people rarely die due to lawyer misconduct. With the police and medicine, people die.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

The nation should be relieved by the results so far, but as Twicehorn and JimmyJ mention, they are going to fuck up everything they can before he leaves. 

[soapbox on]We need responsible champions of our Republic to insist the Cabinet and the VP to invoke the 25th Amendment. If they don't listen, shame them without mercy . . .

Quote

 

American Greatness has been the brightest when we have smooth transitions of power. We have taken those smooth transitions of power for granted for too long with this chap. Politicians ignore elections in the Third World. We are not a third world nation. Trump should never degrade American Greatness - ever. And certainly not for personal gain.

He knows little of what makes America respected by the world and what will be respected in hindsight. He is not well read on American Greatness, yet he just decided to take the label. It means nothing to him. He doesn't know what it means. America's greatness comes from Americans rising out of the muck. Trump wallows in the muck. 

He is confused. He has too many still indulging his aberrant behavior. He is negotiating his post-presidency in a panic. He is up Schitt's Creek. 

A smooth transition of power is not assured with this President. He needs time to take care of his personal affairs. He cannot run the Presidency presently

24 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Again, the reason the rest of us hate lawyers.  Everyone knows these asshats are acting a fool but the entire legal apparatus just shrugs it shoulders and says "Oh well."

Clean up your shop.

. 

That is what the 25th Amendment is designed to provide to the Nation. The President is removed if the cabinet questions his fitness to lead. The military has the same structures to prevent rogue leadership. The 25th needs to be laid on the table. It's immediate. Otherwise, the Cabinet needs to lock everything in place. No destroying/rearranging/renaming/losing anything. Locked in place procedure - full accounting for actions. The clock is ticking.

The Cabinet holds the power in this situation. What are they doing to determine whether they should invoke the 25th Amendment. What are their duties. Have they exercised their duties. There are weaknesses in the republic's structure being exploited here by this Administration. That is not good governance in any sense of the concept.

The 25th requires due diligence by current Cabinet members. Hold them to their duties.

And investigate for racketeering. 

 

[soapbox off]

Would Lockheed Martin allow him to run their corporation for one day?  Of course not. 

And foreshadowing - they are going to do the same thing to Biden when he takes office. No good deed goes unpunished in politics. 

 

[Hagbard Celine 10,864]

57 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Of course not. This has nothing to do with legal niceties. 
 

I’m not a big fan of citing actors using poker metaphors, but I’m a fair poker player and I’m with Edward Norton on this. All this courtroom shit is was his bluff at the flop. It got called. The bullshit with the legislators was his turn card bluff. It has now also been called. 
It is being reported that a number of rank and file GOP Senators are about to break, as soon as Monday. If that happens he’ll do something awful as a result. I can’t imagine what. All I know is that he won’t fold, and he needs to get called, no matter what. . 

yup, this is where i'm at now too.

#teamnorton

is he batshit?

is he an asshole?

is he a narcissicst?

would he see 10,000 or 100,000 americans die every day to save his own ass?

yes to all.

the full aggy magatts, trumpkins, and aggy, are just a symptom of and a by-product of the madness.

the madness is the largest shambling mound of orange makeup in the world scared shitless of being out of power and accountable for his crimes.

a moment of truth is coming.

 

[washparkhorn 9,939]

4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Again, the reason the rest of us hate lawyers. 

You misread Shakespeare . . . it happens.

Only a tyrant says the first thing we need to do is kill all the lawyers.

This legal machine is more steampunk than Swiss-made movement. And no lawyer I know looks the other way when treachery is afoot. We have reporting requirements in Colorado - to the Supreme Court of Colorado, not the bar association. Lawyer discipline is conducted by the Supreme Court of Colorado. Lawyers are becoming much more efficient and integrated into systems. Corruption is inefficient, so the legal system as a whole benefits from its removal. But Steampunk or Columbo, not Swiss-movement. 

 

[Hagbard Celine 10,864]

41 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Interesting 

 

Chewbacca attack?  Chewbacca counter-attack.  Sun-Tzu-approved.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,585]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Ergo, ipso facto, 

LEGGO MY EGGO!!!

[Mole 4,333]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The First Amendment pretty much assumes that the best remedy for utter bullshit is non-bullshit and that shitty ideas can be debunked.

I think the last four years serves as a pretty strong rebuttal to this assumption.

[atomheartbevo 89,665]

Trump is just tweeting out OAN clips that side with him, and the talking heads make it clear they 100% will support him no matter what.

Guess he's done with Fox News.  Except when he talks to Fox News or runs their clips.  But he's totally over Fox News.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

11 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

You misread Shakespeare . . . it happens.

Only a tyrant says the first thing we need to do is kill all the lawyers.

This legal machine is more steampunk than Swiss-made movement. And no lawyer I know looks the other way when treachery is afoot. We have reporting requirements in Colorado - to the Supreme Court of Colorado, not the bar association. Lawyer discipline is conducted by the Supreme Court of Colorado. Lawyers are becoming much more efficient and integrated into systems. Corruption is inefficient, so the legal system as a whole benefits from its removal. But Steampunk or Columbo, not Swiss-movement. 

 

No one said dick about killing all the lawyers until you did.  We hate all the lawyers.

Quote

And no lawyer I know looks the other way when treachery is afoot.

Well maybe look outside your apparent safe space of Colorado because the silence from everyone else is deafening with regards to the upstanding legal team of Rudy G and Sidney Pottier Powell Whoever.

And just because the legal machine is more steampunk than Swiss-made movement means you need to fix your shit.  That goes back to the "Oh well... nothing we can do about it."  Do I expect a bunch of dipshits to turn a bunch of Timex watches into Patek Philippe's?  No, but you can at least get to Casio levels.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

at least get to Casio levels.

Legal AI working on that as we speak. 

You don't want casio watches running our legal system. That is called getting crushed by the wheels of justice. It makes cancel culture look righteous.

[TheRealRonWeaver? 1,258]

Again, the reason the rest of us hate lawyers.  Everyone knows these asshats are acting a fool but the entire legal apparatus just shrugs it shoulders and says "Oh well."
Clean up your shop.

Hey! Lawyers hate lawyers, too!
#toomanylawyers

[TheRealRonWeaver? 1,258]

The problem, again, is not shrugging of the shoulders.  It's that the legal profession recognizes limitations on its ability to discipline lawyers for speech.
None of this is really new to the legal profession, we've been there, done that, taken our lumps.
When you attempt to discipline a lawyer, they have an annoying tendency to fight back and to literally make a federal case out of it.  And then those federal cases become limitations on what the profession can do it itself.

Omertà.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

47 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

While I appreciate the sentiment you are wrong here. There is no doubt that trumps lawyers are acting the fool but nobody is just shrugging their shoulders about it. Lawyers for trump are not withdrawing just because of public pressure but from pressure from the bar itself.

No profession polices itself all that great but lawyers do a relatively good job of it compared to doctors and cops. With cops, they don’t police itself at all and in fact actively undermine any discipline at all.
 

Docs sweep it under the rug. At least lawyers try to do something. Is it great? Of course not. But there are consequences to unethical conduct. One difference is people rarely die due to lawyer misconduct. With the police and medicine, people die.

JFC JJ.  Don’t ever plug doctors in the god damn cop bucket.  Fucking hell.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26,460]

54 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

comparing trump to a poker player is an insult to poker players.  trump is not a poker player.

trump is the drunken asshole who's sitting at the poker table holding his cards and telling the dealer to "hit" before his friend drags him away.

Worst bad beat I’ve ever taken was from one of those guys. Mandalay Bay, 2007. I’ll never forget it. 

Edited November 21, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[JimmyJames 12,271]

4 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

JFC JJ.  Don’t ever plug doctors in the god damn cop bucket.  Fucking hell.  

Wasn’t trying to but you are right. Not even close to being comparable. Lazy on my part.

[Brian Fantana 6,687]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

comparing trump to a poker player is an insult to poker players.  trump is not a poker player.

trump is the drunken asshole who's sitting at the poker table holding his cards and telling the dealer to "hit" before his friend drags him away.

Trump would never play poker because you have to pay upfront.

[Rimbo 25,933]

28 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Trump is just tweeting out OAN clips that side with him, and the talking heads make it clear they 100% will support him no matter what.

Guess he's done with Fox News.  Except when he talks to Fox News or runs their clips.  But he's totally over Fox News.

You know that OANN is a subsidiary of RT News, which is the mouthpiece of the Russian government, right?

Just putting that out there.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2,674]

11 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

JFC JJ.  Don’t ever plug doctors in the god damn cop bucket.  Fucking hell.  

Don't think he was really equating the two but maybe it's a Texas thing......

Disclosure: I'm a lawyer, and the state Bar Journal that every single lawyer gets monthly has a section fully outing all the lawyers who've been disciplined up to disbarment, full names and their city. Really, it's the only entertaining thing in there. I also did open records rulings for a while, and the process for doctor discipline w/the board of medical examiners is only marginally less internal and compromised than the cops' process. Hell, we had a doctor here who was either purposely or negligently paralyzing people because he had zero qualifications for the back surgeries he was doing and he was coked up all the time -- and it practically took an act of god to get him to stop. The doctors' lobby in Texas is crazy powerful and they don't just submit to requests for accountability or even continuing education. Things may be different where you practice. Just saying.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

11 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Trump would never play poker because you have to pay upfront.

Not when the chips have his name on them. 

[Bullneck 19,090]

12 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

You know that OANN is a subsidiary of RT News, which is the mouthpiece of the Russian government, right?

Just putting that out there.

RT = Russia Today.  (Really)

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

12 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

You know that OANN is a subsidiary of RT News, which is the mouthpiece of the Russian government, right?

Just putting that out there.

Don't think that's accurate.  It's owned by Robert "Red" Herring, a crackpot old white dude.  It is a strategic partnership with Moonie loony Washington Times.

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

16 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Don't think he was really equating the two but maybe it's a Texas thing......

Disclosure: I'm a lawyer, and the state Bar Journal that every single lawyer gets monthly has a section fully outing all the lawyers who've been disciplined up to disbarment, full names and their city. Really, it's the only entertaining thing in there. I also did open records rulings for a while, and the process for doctor discipline w/the board of medical examiners is only marginally less internal and compromised than the cops' process. Hell, we had a doctor here who was either purposely or negligently paralyzing people because he had zero qualifications for the back surgeries he was doing and he was coked up all the time -- and it practically took an act of god to get him to stop. The doctors' lobby in Texas is crazy powerful and they don't just submit to requests for accountability or even continuing education. Things may be different where you practice. Just saying.

The Texas Bar does whack peepees with pretty good frequency, and pretty swiftly at that.  The biggest problem, in my observation, is wild inconsistency with what happens to various offenders.

The problem with Giuliani et al is that what they are doing is ultimately speech.  It is false and dangerous speech, but, unfortunately the First Amendment protects such speech in most cases.  The disciplinary arms of most state bars are going to be state actors and will not be able to abridge their speech, even under the notion that lawyers should be held to a higher standard.

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[UpperWestside 6,163]

Dotard seems to be as dominant at election lawsuits as Greg Davis on 3rd and 5.

[atomheartbevo 89,665]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Don't think that's accurate.  It's owned by Robert "Red" Herring, a crackpot old white dude.  It is a strategic partnership with Moonie loony Washington Times.

No, I think @Rimbo is just asking questions, and it's something we should start asking around about.

[Rimbo 25,933]

4 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

No, I think @Rimbo is just asking questions, and it's something we should start asking around about.

[hpslugga 4,058]

18 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

No, I think @Rimbo is just asking questions, and it's something we should start asking around about.

PEOPLE ARE SAYING!!!

I'M HEARING!!!

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

41 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

You know that OANN is a subsidiary of RT News, which is the mouthpiece of the Russian government, right?

Just putting that out there.

Well, then.  By all means, proceed!

[washparkhorn 9,939]

Would she lie to you . . . 

[Bateshorn 9,927]

Here’s the thing:  there are 4 GOP senators (Murkowski, Collins, Romney, and Sasse) who could temporarily flip parties right now, deprive the senate from Trump and make it clear the election is over.  They haven’t.  
 

which means at heart, their hedging to see if he can pull this off.

[Serak The Preparer 3,431]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

The problem with Giuliani et al is that what they are doing is ultimately speech.  It is false and dangerous speech, but, unfortunately the First Amendment protects such speech in most cases.  The disciplinary arms of most state bars are going to be state actors and will not be able to abridge their speech, even under the notion that lawyers should be held to a higher standard.

 

Calling Giuliani's actions "free speech" is bullshit. I am sure that it is 100% correct, legally, but it is also 100% bullshit. If he just gave a press conference and ranted on Fox / Twitter then sure, it's speech. But filing lawsuits is different. That requires legal defense, generally requiring time and money. So not just false and dangerous but explicitly financially costly to the state and taxpayers.

It is obvious that I am not a lawyer but I've never read about a lawsuit and thought "That's some mighty fine Free Speech!"

[conVINCEd 21,469]

3 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Calling Giuliani's actions "free speech" is bullshit. I am sure that it is 100% correct, legally, but it is also 100% bullshit. If he just gave a press conference and ranted on Fox / Twitter then sure, it's speech. But filing lawsuits is different. That requires legal defense, generally requiring time and money. So not just false and dangerous but explicitly financially costly to the state and taxpayers.

It is obvious that I am not a lawyer but I've never read about a lawsuit and thought "That's some mighty fine Free Speech!"

We’re gonna have lots of things pushed to their limit over the next 2 months. 

[SilasCoade 2,622]

1 hour ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Don't think he was really equating the two but maybe it's a Texas thing......

Disclosure: I'm a lawyer, and the state Bar Journal that every single lawyer gets monthly has a section fully outing all the lawyers who've been disciplined up to disbarment, full names and their city. Really, it's the only entertaining thing in there. I also did open records rulings for a while, and the process for doctor discipline w/the board of medical examiners is only marginally less internal and compromised than the cops' process. Hell, we had a doctor here who was either purposely or negligently paralyzing people because he had zero qualifications for the back surgeries he was doing and he was coked up all the time -- and it practically took an act of god to get him to stop. The doctors' lobby in Texas is crazy powerful and they don't just submit to requests for accountability or even continuing education. Things may be different where you practice. Just saying.

It was other doctors who actively tried to stop that guy. Hospital admins were the ones who kept letting him maim people. And the Texas Medical Board sends out a regular newsletter as well, listing all the disciplinary actions with names and dates to shame people. There is no doctors' lobby. Doctors have done a very very shitty job of protecting their interests and their autonomy.

[C-Man 27,225]

5 minutes ago, Llogg said:

It was other doctors who actively tried to stop that guy. Hospital admins were the ones who kept letting him maim people. And the Texas Medical Board sends out a regular newsletter as well, listing all the disciplinary actions with names and dates to shame people. There is no doctors' lobby. Doctors have done a very very shitty job of protecting their interests and their autonomy.

I'm good friends with one of them (Dr Randy Kirby) here in Dallas. /csb

Edited November 21, 2020 by C-Man

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Don't think he was really equating the two but maybe it's a Texas thing......

Disclosure: I'm a lawyer, and the state Bar Journal that every single lawyer gets monthly has a section fully outing all the lawyers who've been disciplined up to disbarment, full names and their city. Really, it's the only entertaining thing in there. I also did open records rulings for a while, and the process for doctor discipline w/the board of medical examiners is only marginally less internal and compromised than the cops' process. Hell, we had a doctor here who was either purposely or negligently paralyzing people because he had zero qualifications for the back surgeries he was doing and he was coked up all the time -- and it practically took an act of god to get him to stop. The doctors' lobby in Texas is crazy powerful and they don't just submit to requests for accountability or even continuing education. Things may be different where you practice. Just saying.

I did make a mistake conflating docs with cops. There’s no comparison there.

As far as docs in their own though, they do not police themselves. Interestingly enough though in my opinion that’s due at least in part recently to potential liability created by the plaintiff lawyer bar.   
 

No easy answers here. Docs and lawyers should try to set standards that are not determined by insurance companies 

[Sawbonz 27,561]

3 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

No profession polices itself all that great but lawyers do a relatively good job of it compared to doctors and cops

Been awhile since I looked at it but in Texas at least physicians are formally sanctioned by the Texas medical board at a higher rate than are lawyers by the State bar. Not sure about losing medical license vs being disbarred. In both cases very hard to accomplish due to...lawyers

[SaucyJack 3,488]

5 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

So is there any kind of Google spreadsheet or something tracking all of the lawsuits, and which states no longer have any post-election cases pending?  And which states have certified?

Because it kind of feels like we are in the endgame here, and things are accelerating.  Trump has struck out in Arizona and now Michigan.

https://www.democracydocket.com/states/

[Sawbonz 27,561]

2 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

I also did open records rulings for a while, and the process for doctor discipline w/the board of medical examiners is only marginally less internal and compromised than the cops' process.

Not sure what you mean here. There is a list published monthly of every board order levied against a physician in the state giving the name, practice location, specific violations no matter how minor or egregious, and final disposition including fines and required remedial action, up to and including surrender of license

[SilasCoade 2,622]

28 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

I did make a mistake conflating docs with cops. There’s no comparison there.

As far as docs in their own though, they do not police themselves. Interestingly enough though in my opinion that’s due at least in part recently to potential liability created by the plaintiff lawyer bar.   
 

No easy answers here. Docs and lawyers should try to set standards that are not determined by insurance companies 

As someone who has been on credentialing committees I can tell you the bolded statement is false.

[ultimaton 2,981]

2 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Would she lie to you . . . 

Is it just me, or does literally every single screen shot of OAN look like it's from a porn parody to anybody else?

[ultimaton 2,981]

Also, how much is all this bullshit costing taxpayers in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, etc?

[Degenerate Gardner 4,085]

4 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

 

trump is the drunken asshole who's sitting at the poker table holding his cards and telling the dealer to "hit" before his friend drags him away.

Except Trump has never had a friend in his life. Associates, co conspirators, enablers, sure. I can't suspend enough disbelief to imagine Trump's friend.

[TexLonghorn 5,667]

"B-b-but, your honor, we couldn't prove these affidavits to be false, so ipso ergo facto and thusly, they must be true.  We promise we were very thorough, your honor - we removed all of the affidavits that wanted to sell us Viagra, provided a phone number for a Chuck E. Cheese, or appeared to be submitted from seemingly false names like "Mr. Grittysez Gofuckyorself."  You must admit, your honor, very thorough.  And the affidavits that remain, then, must be loquitur res henceforthly deemed to be truthful."

[Bookman 4,639]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/20/affidavit-giuliani-vote-fraud/

Quote

Shocking allegations of voter irregularities revealed in 234 pages of signed and sworn affidavits,” the Trump campaign wrote on Twitter.

 

But a closer look at the affidavits showed that many did not allege any wrongdoing with ballots. Instead, they showed poll challengers complaining about other things: a loud public-address system, mean looks from poll workers, and a Democratic poll watcher who said “Go back to the suburbs, Karen.”

 

Some poll observers had become suspicious simply after seeing many ballots cast for Democrats — in Detroit, a heavily Democratic city where Biden won 94 percent of the vote. “I specifically noticed that every ballot I observed was cast for Joe Biden,” one observer wrote. The Trump campaign filed that as evidence in court.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

5 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Calling Giuliani's actions "free speech" is bullshit. I am sure that it is 100% correct, legally, but it is also 100% bullshit. If he just gave a press conference and ranted on Fox / Twitter then sure, it's speech. But filing lawsuits is different. That requires legal defense, generally requiring time and money. So not just false and dangerous but explicitly financially costly to the state and taxpayers.

It is obvious that I am not a lawyer but I've never read about a lawsuit and thought "That's some mighty fine Free Speech!"

Well, Giuliani made one appearance in one case.  Powell and Ellis none, AFAIK.  So they, in particular, are not subject to sanction for the 33 suits.

And, if a trial judge declares any of those suits to have been frivolous or otherwise sanctionable, that is a different deal.

The bar is not going to get involved until more than one lawsuit filed by the same attorney is declared frivolous by the trial judge.

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

4 hours ago, Llogg said:

As someone who has been on credentialing committees I can tell you the bolded statement is false.

Meaning at a hospital or clinic or other facility, correct?

Yes, facilities routinely deny credentials to bad docs.

But my question to you, Gregg, is what do you do to insure that those docs cannot practice anywhere else?  Because what we're talking about here relates to licensure and it does appear that the medical profession is quite lax at revoking and suspending licenses.

Arguably, credentialing committees are in the business of protecting the facility from lawsuits rather than protecting the public from bad docs.

[TwiceHorn 31,470]

1 hour ago, TexLonghorn said:

"B-b-but, your honor, we couldn't prove these affidavits to be false, so ipso ergo facto and thusly, they must be true.  We promise we were very thorough, your honor - we removed all of the affidavits that wanted to sell us Viagra, provided a phone number for a Chuck E. Cheese, or appeared to be submitted from seemingly false names like "Mr. Grittysez Gofuckyorself."  You must admit, your honor, very thorough.  And the affidavits that remain, then, must be loquitur res henceforthly deemed to be truthful."

Really, though, the judge there is applying the sort of reasoning the plaintiffs want:  some of these are bad, so we should throw them all out.

It's sort of semantic, but the judge would have been better off focusing his inquiry on the online solicitation, that the attorneys never met, interviewed, or evaluated the credibility of any of these witnesses, but rather accepted anything someone was willing to sign under penalty of perjury unless it was facially false.  And that process then produced, predictably, a number of facially false affidavits and some that weren't facially false.  But because the lawyers never met or dealt with the witnesses, have no ability to vouch for them other than the document itself, signed under penalty of perjury.

Besides that, unless a procedure calls specifically for affidavits (i.e. summary judgement), and there is an evidentiary hearing as appears to be the case here, those affidavits are hearsay and inadmissible, period.

That is probably sanctionable.  Not disbarrable.

But what's probably happening here is the defendants are defending these cases "on the merits" because that is the most linear path to victory.  After securing victory, they could at least move for attorneys fees or another sanction for bad litigation conduct.  But the reality of the thing is that they probably won't.  The victory is sufficient.  The judges could do it on their own, but probably won't.

Now, some of you will argue that that is the profession protecting itself.  But it isn't really.  Sanctioning attorneys often becomes a litigation unto itself, taking weeks or months and entailing appeals that drag on into years.  A winning party is usually content with the win and doesn't want to foot the bill for another several months of litigation over what the other side did.

When I was a baby lawyer in the early 90s, the S&L litigation had created a cottage legal industry in Rule 11 and sanctions motions, often met with a counter-motion and completely devolving into a shit-flinging contest by which the longhorn internets would be truly impressed..  That shit got more involved than the original litigation that provoked the sanctions motion.

My mentor said, if you are considering filing a motion for sanctions, you had better be able to hold up a bloody stump.  And even then, the game isn't often worth the candle.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,460]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

Now, some of you will argue that that is the profession protecting itself.  But it isn't really.  Sanctioning attorneys often becomes a litigation unto itself, taking weeks or months and entailing appeals that drag on into years. 

 

“Now, some of you will argue that that is the profession protecting itself.  But it isn't really.  Sanctioning doctors often becomes a litigation unto itself, taking weeks or months and entailing appeals that drag on into years.”

 

[Sawbonz 27,561]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Because what we're talking about here relates to licensure and it does appear that the medical profession is quite lax at revoking and suspending licenses.

Those doctors all have lawyers vigorously fighting the attempts to revoke and even just suspend their licenses. Despite that fact every month there are several who are suspended. Again I’m not sure how revocation I’d license and disbarment compare but revocation is always permanent I believe disbarred lawyers can seek reinstatement 

 

. See pages 13-24