811
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
811 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19145 readers
1533 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Good if his lawyers are actually competent. Maybe he'll listen to them this time. A good trial requires a good defense.
Donald Trump hasn't listened to anyone (who doesn't already agree with him) since his father died. These lawyers are smart enough to know that. This leak is all about making sure that when Trump does the dumb thing anyway, they don't get disbarred over it.
Why even represent him in the first place if he is such a massive risk?
Money. Then again, he doesn't pay. If they're smart, they will have somehow accounted for this.
A hefty retainer fee hopefully.
I see you've met my orthodontist
Take my upvote and go
Because everyone needs representation, and they probably convinced him to pay up front.
This might be a little bit reductive, but I'm pretty sure you can tell that they're not competent lawyers because they are Trump's lawyers.
He's known to ignore his lawyers, lie to them, refuse to pay them, and throw them under the bus. I can't imagine a competent lawyer wanting that client. Maybe someone just looking to get their name plastered everywhere, aka some kind of grifter, but definitely not a competent lawyer.
Pretty sure they're demanding payment upfront now
Hopefully they're still always meeting with him with another lawyer in the room so they can verify what he says.
My point, I think, still stands.
Like they do for us plebs? Last time I hired an attorney they required a retainer upfront.
I'm not interested in a 'good' trial. This isnt a netflix drama.
You should be. Otherwise there's grounds for a mistrial and we're right back where we started.
The defense can be merely adequate.
What are you even arguing?
In spirit, that strategically, the best thing is for Trump to have a defense that is competent enough to avoid a mistrial, but not competent enough to shield him from accountability in any meaningful way. This would be my preference.
I believe that it is obvious that he has committed crimes and should be held accountable for it. However, the spirit of our justice system as enshrined in the Bill of Rights is that everyone should get a fair trial and it shouldn't be any difference in this case. In a fair trial he would be properly held accountable for his crimes, assuming a fair trial goes both ways.
I do understand the sentiment behind wanting him to screw up so he is actually held accountable.
Sure. An adequate lawyer can get him a fair trial.
A good trial is one where all sides have presented the strongest case they can, the judgement reflects the quality of those cases, and the verdict leaves no doubt in anyone's mind that justice was done.
Poor counsel leads to poor, untrustworthy outcomes.
Yes I know, I am naive.
95% of all criminal cases end up in a plea bargain. The vast majority of Americans can't afford a good lawyer anyway and get fucked by our legal system.
He's as likely to listen to them as he is to pay them.