Trump Legal Troubles

[TGHusker]

16 minutes ago, funhusker said:

The voters are failing.  Donald Trump is the who the Republican party is.  Joe Biden is who the Democrats are.  The government is whoever we put there.  Until voters realize we are doing this to ourselves, nothing is going to change.

Ultimately yes.  But the Dems and the Repubs party establishment  have traditionally pushed their favorite candidate - typically 'the next guy (gal) up'.  

Amazing how the field cleared for Biden in 2020.  The GOP is doing the same today.   Hillary had to relinquish her push for the nomination in 2008 after Obama was "anointed" by the party during the primaries.  In 2016 - the rules were stacked against Bernie and others to benefit the next one up - Hillary.    Trump in 2016 was the wild card that broke that trend. 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

tRump hires only the best.  

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

[Archy1221]

 

[BigRedBuster]

4 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Dang...but she was doing such a good job.

[Archy1221]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

Dang...but she was doing such a good job.

At looking fine, but that’s about all.   From what I read, only an incompetent boob like her coulda lost the E Jean trials.   Sounds like she was a terrible lawyer and obviously Trump acted like a terrible defendant.  

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

[Mike Mcdee]

59 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

At looking fine, but that’s about all.   From what I read, only an incompetent boob like her coulda lost the E Jean trials.   Sounds like she was a terrible lawyer and obviously Trump acted like a terrible defendant.  

Not that you would know the answer to this, but why would he hire a transactional/real estate lawyer to litigate a trial? He had that Taco guy and loosing only cost him $5m. He then used her and it cost him $83m. She was once asked if she'd rather be pretty or smart. She chose pretty because "you can fake being smart". No... in fact you can't.

[Archy1221]

1 minute ago, Mike Mcdee said:

Not that you would know the answer to this, but why would he hire a transactional/real estate lawyer to litigate a trial? He had that Taco guy and loosing only cost him $5m. He then used her and it cost him $83m. She was once asked if she'd rather be pretty or smart. She chose pretty because "you can fake being smart". No... in fact you can't.

As you pointed out, Im not sure why he hired her.  However, a good guess would be that he’s an extremely difficult client and past lawyers have had trouble getting paid.   So maybe that’s all he could get

 

I only followed the E Jean case from a top line standpoint.  It’s amazing he lost the civil case.   It was a he said/she said argument and his lawyers failed to have him testify!  So she gets to state her case, she doesn’t know what year this allegedly happened, no dna evidence that I saw was presented (I think both sides agreed to this) 30 plus years of her not expressing an issue about it publicly all the while Trump is in the public eye, her favorite TV is the apprentice at one point!   Who does that????  Allegedly gets sexually assaulted, then really enjoys watching the person who assaulted her be on tv?!?

 

It sounded like his attorney had no clue how to approach the case other than in the media, which obviously didn’t work and probably backfired.  He shoulda paid competent attorneys up front, won the case, then sued for attorney fees.  Instead he chose the route that as you said ended in an $83 million judgement. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

At looking fine, but that’s about all.   From what I read, only an incompetent boob like her coulda lost the E Jean trials.   Sounds like she was a terrible lawyer and obviously Trump acted like a terrible defendant.  

 

The headline is that these continue to be the only lawyers willing to represent a billionaire former President.  

 

Remember, Trump also hired a legal team that misspelled The United States of America in its brief.  

 

Also, a better lawyer might easily have lost the E.Jean trial, too, because Trump is guilty of almost everything he's been accused of, and probably worse, dating to well before his narcissistic journey to the presidency. Some boobs actually voted for this human s#!t-stain twice. 

[Ulty]

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

As you pointed out, Im not sure why he hired her.  However, a good guess would be that he’s an extremely difficult client and past lawyers have had trouble getting paid.   So maybe that’s all he could get

No competent lawyer who values their reputation, their credibility, or their accounts billable would touch Trump with a 39 and a half foot pole. All he's left to pick from are quacks and losers. His next attorney, if he can find one, is going to be equally $h!tty or worse. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

I only followed the E Jean case from a top line standpoint.  It’s amazing he lost the civil case.   It was a he said/she said argument and his lawyers failed to have him testify!  So she gets to state her case, she doesn’t know what year this allegedly happened, no dna evidence that I saw was presented (I think both sides agreed to this) 30 plus years of her not expressing an issue about it publicly all the while Trump is in the public eye, her favorite TV is the apprentice at one point!   Who does that????  Allegedly gets sexually assaulted, then really enjoys watching the person who assaulted her be on tv?!?

Classic victim blaming here, nice job. Let's have a quick look at this:

 

People who have been victimized/traumatized will not always act the way we might expect, which in turn makes it difficult to assess their claims. But it is extremely common for sexual assault survivors to not report their complaint or pursue any major action. This happens for a variety of reasons, and your victim-blaming posts is one of the responses that many survivors wish to avoid. Survivors fear retaliation. Survivors often realize the uphill battle that awaits them if they are bold enough to file the complaint, especially if there is no physical evidence or witnesses (which is the case the majority of the time). This is especially true when there is a real or perceived power imbalance and the perpetrator has more resources. 

 

On top of that, a traumatic response might make people do weird things. Victims return to their abusers all the time. Victims often remember events in a non-linear fashion. Victims might take unusual steps to try to reclaim control of the situation in their heads. I don't know why she enjoyed watching the Apprentice, but it is plausible to think that maybe she was trying to cope with the situation, trying to identify with her attack her, or otherwise trying to rationalize what happened. Maybe she was still drawn to Trump's power and charisma, even though she had been assaulted. We don't know for sure, but these are not foreign concepts if you are trauma-informed. 

 

As to the court case itself: he said/she said cases happen all the time with sexual assault matters. You know how these cases are decided when it is one person's word against another without much other evidence? You have to weigh credibility! Hell, given what we know about Donald Trump's credibility, I could probably accuse him of sexual assault and win. Because he has absolutely no credibility at all.

 

You say his lawyers failed to have him testify? LOL! The man would either perjure himself or incriminate himself with every word that came out of his mouth. 

 

I'm not saying the civil case was a slam dunk; both sides still had to make compelling arguments. But a civil judgment does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If you have to base a lot of the decision on credibility, and the defendant behaves in the way Trump does - never presenting a cogent argument and only attacking, defaming, and making a fool of himself - winning this case was actually much easier than it would be for the typical sexual assault survivor. The hard part for her was coming forward in the first place, and withstanding Trump's nationwide army of dumbasses and people like you who would rather blame her than believe her. 

[teachercd]

3 hours ago, Mike Mcdee said:

Not that you would know the answer to this, but why would he hire a transactional/real estate lawyer to litigate a trial? He had that Taco guy and loosing only cost him $5m. He then used her and it cost him $83m. She was once asked if she'd rather be pretty or smart. She chose pretty because "you can fake being smart". No... in fact you can't.

Ehhhhh...pretty girls have it way better than smart girls.  If you are only picking one, pretty girls win out in life.

 

They win out in life because there are a lot of dumb a$$ guys with money.  

[teachercd]

2 minutes ago, Ulty said:

No competent lawyer who values their reputation, their credibility, or their accounts billable would touch Trump with a 39 and a half foot pole. All he's left to pick from are quacks and losers. His next attorney, if he can find one, is going to be equally $h!tty or worse. 

 

 

Classic victim blaming here, nice job. Let's have a quick look at this:

 

People who have been victimized/traumatized will not always act the way we might expect, which in turn makes it difficult to assess their claims. But it is extremely common for sexual assault survivors to not report their complaint or pursue any major action. This happens for a variety of reasons, and your victim-blaming posts is one of the responses that many survivors wish to avoid. Survivors fear retaliation. Survivors often realize the uphill battle that awaits them if they are bold enough to file the complaint, especially if there is no physical evidence or witnesses (which is the case the majority of the time). This is especially true when there is a real or perceived power imbalance and the perpetrator has more resources. 

 

On top of that, a traumatic response might make people do weird things. Victims return to their abusers all the time. Victims often remember events in a non-linear fashion. Victims might take unusual steps to try to reclaim control of the situation in their heads. I don't know why she enjoyed watching the Apprentice, but it is plausible to think that maybe she was trying to cope with the situation, trying to identify with her attack her, or otherwise trying to rationalize what happened. Maybe she was still drawn to Trump's power and charisma, even though she had been assaulted. We don't know for sure, but these are not foreign concepts if you are trauma-informed. 

 

As to the court case itself: he said/she said cases happen all the time with sexual assault matters. You know how these cases are decided when it is one person's word against another without much other evidence? You have to weigh credibility! Hell, given what we know about Donald Trump's credibility, I could probably accuse him of sexual assault and win. Because he has absolutely no credibility at all.

 

You say his lawyers failed to have him testify? LOL! The man would either perjure himself or incriminate himself with every word that came out of his mouth. 

 

I'm not saying the civil case was a slam dunk; both sides still had to make compelling arguments. But a civil judgment does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If you have to base a lot of the decision on credibility, and the defendant behaves in the way Trump does - never presenting a cogent argument and only attacking, defaming, and making a fool of himself - winning this case was actually much easier than it would be for the typical sexual assault survivor. The hard part for her was coming forward in the first place, and withstanding Trump's nationwide army of dumbasses and people like you who would rather blame her than believe her. 

So as someone that teaches a class on this stuff, this is pretty spot on.  

 

I think the #1 reason that it is not reported though, is that a lot of people don't actually know if they have become "a victim", as in, they don't really know if it was assault. 

 

The biggest issue is the belief that a lot of these filings are false or made up, but that is just not the case.  MAYBE 3% are fake, maybe.  If anything, they are underreported by a ton.

 

Oh and dudes basically never report, I think it is less than 1%, so it pretty much is impossible to study.  

[Guy Chamberlin]

3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

So as someone that teaches a class on this stuff, this is pretty spot on.  

 

 

What is the name of that class, and what do the students call you?