174

Donald Trump May Have Won Iowa—but He Just Lost a Slew of Lawyers (newrepublic.com)

submitted 8 months ago by Five@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 29 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 40 points 8 months ago

I’m actually surprised he was able to find lawyers in the first place.

I’ve legitimately lost track of how many of his lawyers have been disbarred, fined stupid amounts of money, or pled guilty to felonies. I kept track for a while, but there are just too many.

Any lawyer accepting his cases at this point must be assumed to be dumber than potted light bulbs or under duress.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 19 points 8 months ago

Or they're in on the grift, somehow. Crooked lawyers, while likely rare, do still exist, as evidenced by the common names that have helped the likes of Alex Jones, Trump, etc. The rest are the greenhorns too naive to know that their career is effectively over, because they're not getting paid and they'll have lost the most important cases for their demigod.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Or they're in on the grift, somehow.

Thus the felony pleadings. I include those in ‘dumber than a box of hair’.

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Good work Barnes.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 3 points 8 months ago

Grape job, Barnes.

[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 32 points 8 months ago

Is it just the lighting, or did they photoshop in the extra orange on him? I know he is orange, but that picture has him hilariously cheetoh-flavored orange.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 22 points 8 months ago

He looks like he's throwing a Heil over a zoom call with a blurry background.

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago

Probably just flagging down someone or his car. Almost every New Yorker would be guilty of doing this otherwise.

[-] nxdefiant@startrek.website 15 points 8 months ago

It looks like he might be standing under some kind of very yellow/orange light.

[-] zaine00@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

In front of entrances for high end NYC hotels, they have awnings (roof?) That has light bulb looking heating elements so when people are waiting for a cab or car during winter the guests don't freeze. They had an orange tint to them so that's probably it.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Not only is he extra orange He's holding his hand out your general direction and it looks way tinier then it should even for his tiny hands.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

It must be the lighting or photoshop, because he’s not a good enough MUA to have considered the palms of his hands.

[+] menthol@lemm.ee 32 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

[deleted]

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There’s also the worry that he’s going to use the “advice of council” defense in some of his ongoing trials. Basically, people think he’s going to go “it wasn’t my fault I broke the law, because I did it on the advice of my legal council. The only reason I did it is because my lawyers told me it was legal. I can’t be held accountable for breaking the law, because a reasonable person would expect their lawyers to provide good council. My lawyers should be held accountable instead of me.”

Basically, people think Trump is going to put his lawyers on blast, to try and divert the charges away from himself. This waives his attorney-client privilege, (because it basically turns his attorney’s records into evidence, and prosecutors can inspect his attorney’s papers to see if they have him bad council,) but it could potentially land his lawyers in hot water if prosecutors discover that they did, in fact, provide bad council.

But this also means no lawyers are going to want to work with him in the future. Because he’s proven that when shit hits the fan, he’ll throw his legal council under the bus. Even if the attorneys have only done things by the book, no legal office is going to want to deal with that headache.

[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 7 points 8 months ago

But this also means no lawyers are going to want to work with him in the future

I am fairly sure there is still a long line of lawyers waiting to work for him. The quality of those lawyers is probably not awesome and they are probably too dumb to realize they are just more meat for the grinder.

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Huge pet peeve here, but it's counsel not council.

[-] vinylshrapnel@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 8 months ago

Making Attorneys Get Attorneys

[-] tylerkdurdan@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

MAGA making attornys get attorneys

[-] JoMomma@lemm.ee 24 points 8 months ago

He didn't "win" shit, this was always going to be a make-believe contest

[-] EnchiladaHole@kbin.social 9 points 8 months ago

Yeah, 50,000 of the most zealous R's in Iowa voted for him And about the same amount wished for pretty much anyone else. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

[-] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

nOboDy wAnTs tO WoRk aNy MorE

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

OH NO! I have lost all of my lawyers! Judge, it would be unfair if I went into my federally pardonable trial right now without representation! Could you please delay the trial AGAIN until after November so that I can find more suckers- I mean lawyers to defend me?

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

Again? Isn't this already like his 8th string team now?

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 9 points 8 months ago

Trump “has the most experienced, qualified, disciplined, and overall strongest legal team ever assembled,” according to his spokesman.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

his spokesman

John Barron?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

He knows the best people.

[-] GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-republic/

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy

[-] Crackhappy@lemmynsfw.com 12 points 8 months ago

You forgot this part of what you linked: We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information and a clean fact check record.

I don't rate New Republic very high personally because of their obvious bias.

[-] GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca -4 points 8 months ago

I didn’t forget anything. I simply posted the first paragraph of the report. That’s why the link is there.

this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024

174 points (97.3% liked)

politics

18894 readers

3211 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.
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.
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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News