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


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

All of the above is something of a generality.  But the broad strokes apply in general terms of thinking about things.

I was an English major, and not a hyper-technical one (although I've become a bit more comfortable with grammar - /checks post for grammar mistakes; probably made a lot).  But outside of the mundane, I'm writing for rhythm.  But yes, I get that my post was more about the process of communicating the thought-process than about the substance of the thought process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But his lawyers horseshit is considerably more grounded in some form of reality than Trump's.

It's extremely relative to Trump's grip on reality.

 

I mean, take his money, I guess, in theory.  But I'm of the school of there's some money you don't need to make.  Representing Trump is a line you don't cross twice.  The fact that their legal arguments are more grounded than his vile spewings, while true, is still in that grey-if-I'm-being-generous area that I wouldn't go under threat. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dcbc said:

It's extremely relative to Trump's grip on reality.

 

I mean, take his money, I guess, in theory.  But I'm of the school of there's some money you don't need to make.  Representing Trump is a line you don't cross twice.  The fact that their legal arguments are more grounded than his vile spewings, while true, is still in that grey-if-I'm-being-generous area that I wouldn't go under threat. 

Oh completely agree.  I detest problem clients, of which Trump is exhibit A1.  And I would have a very difficult time making some of the arguments Trumpco lawyers make with a straight face.  But that also applies to a lot of criminal defense lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Oh completely agree.  I detest problem clients, of which Trump is exhibit A1.  And I would have a very difficult time making some of the arguments Trumpco lawyers make with a straight face.  But that also applies to a lot of criminal defense lawyers.

Things you do if he -- or some PAC connected to him -- is going to pay you $3M or so to represent him for a couple of months. Just know that it's a one-and-done situation and 50% of this country will never work with you again if they learn you had anything to do with that gigantic tub of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Things you do if he -- or some PAC connected to him -- is going to pay you $3M or so to represent him for a couple of months. Just know that it's a one-and-done situation and 50% of this country will never work with you again if they learn you had anything to do with that gigantic tub of shit.

You ever watch the ID channel?  Many people will kill a loved one for less than $3 million.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Oh completely agree.  I detest problem clients, of which Trump is exhibit A1.  And I would have a very difficult time making some of the arguments Trumpco lawyers make with a straight face.  But that also applies to a lot of criminal defense lawyers.

_john_03-30-2005_PE45JEV.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, goddammit.  If there was the slightest deviation from the holding of the DC Circuit, there was going to be a remand, further proceedings, and likely further appeals.  And I was virtually certain that there would be deviation, although I was hoping we could avoid the remand and further proceedings.

I like that Chutkan gets it on remand.

The irony of the decision, which in the moment seems bad, is that not granting a president immunity for conclusively constitutional actions (murderous drone strikes as CinC for example), leaves prosecution for presidential acts up to the good faith of prosecutors not to bring bullshit charges, as against Biden for homicide for Afghanistan, as an example.  And it is Trump himself that has demonstrated that good faith cannot be presumed or assumed going forward.

Fucking VOTE.  And grab your do-nothing neighbors and drag their asses to the polls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...