What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

everlast75 wrote: »

1) i hope so much Rudy gets the gig!
2) perhaps they resigned because they saw the evidence and its worse than we know. That would also line up with the Reps wanting to stop it before it began as
3) an awful defence will make it harder for reps to hold their nose and vote to acquit

I think Rudy has already said he can't do it because he's a potential witness given the speech he made at the Trump rally prior to the riot.

Either way, no decent lawyer is going to take on such a public case and argue something they know is completely unwinnable. If they argued the technicalities of the impeachment and lost, fair enough at least they would have put forward the strongest case to try win the case. If they're being told to argue it on election fraud and the evidence on which that's based is "Well @Patriot4Trump74927649 on twitter said...", they'd destroy their own reputation.

They need to find someone who is smart enough to become a lawyer, dumb enough to truly believe twitter/Qanon/Trump election fraud lies and stake their reputation on it, and who isn't Rudy Giuliani.

I think this speaks for itself!

https://twitter.com/earlymodjustice/status/1355593228490321922?s=20

https://images.dailykos.com/images/911561/large/SecDefLtr.jpg?1611927085

Overheal wrote: »

I think this speaks for itself!

https://twitter.com/earlymodjustice/status/1355593228490321922?s=20

https://images.dailykos.com/images/911561/large/SecDefLtr.jpg?1611927085

Miller was the guy made acting defense secretary in November after Trump fired Esper. looking more and more planned.

iebamm2580 wrote: »

Some messed up character co founder of the Lincoln project is.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9207455/Lincoln-Project-founder-John-Weave-sexual-overtures-young-men.html

Scott Stedmen broke this story some time ago and it was mentioned on this thread I think.

Nyt now reporting it.

1) goes to Scott's bona fides which were understandably questioned here and

2) goes to show how hard independent reporters work and how often their work is not credited

Leroy42 wrote: »

I trust Manic will have a better read of that that many of us, but my layman reading of that is that the NG can be sent in to support law enforcement but without any weapons, riot gear, air support etc. Basically, they can stand around and look tough!

Is that right?

Can't even touch them unless in self defense. It's ridiculous. It was a coup.

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

He won't be convicted in this impeachment or with state charges.

He will walk and run again in 2024.

He will lose again though.

They will try and take it illegally.

They will fail.

The gop implodes.

The GOP is currently imploding

iebamm2580 wrote: »

Some messed up character co founder of the Lincoln project is.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9207455/Lincoln-Project-founder-John-Weave-sexual-overtures-young-men.html

Pretty disgusting people really.

I'd be shocked if any of the others were as clueless about it as they claim.

Wilson is on record as saying some pretty disgusting things on twitter while his wife has a soft spot for the Confederacy. The other chap Schmidt supported the Iraq war and carried a lot of water for George Bush.

Dreadful people whose impact I don't really see, their entire target base is basically MSNBC viewers.

And before somebody does a whataboutism, Trump should at the very least have a day in court for the numerous accusations aimed at him.

Here's the statement.

Clearly written by small hands himself.

https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1356015238932557824?s=09

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why would a billionaire need to save money by defending himself?

He only played the part of a billionaire on a TV show, WWE and Home Alone 2.

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1356140768461807619?s=19

Grifters gonna grift

At least the country isn't footing the bill anymore. I don't have any sympathy for the people donating to him now and who will likely getting burnes further down the line.

Fools and their money are soon parted.

BobbyMalone wrote: »

This is a very apt take on the whole situation:


https://twitter.com/MikeLarsenOH/status/1355997195238051842

Even still it was a job that had to be done, that's the point of a defense attorney.

Why bother hiring a defence team? We all know he's going to be acquitted anyway. People have talked about him defending himself. He might as well. It would play great with the base. See the OANN headlines: "Trump Puts Swamp on Trial". Trump wouldn't even perjure himself by making the trial all about a rigged election, since I think it's something he firmly believes to be true.

nolivesmatter wrote: »

No, I'm aware of circumstance for the tweet. I'm saying defending Manson was a job for a criminal defense lawyer that had to be done. No moral reason to quit there once you've taken that job in the first place.

there is no compulsion on a lawyer to remain as defence counsel. If a nutter like manson can retain counsel it is worrying for trump that he is unable to do so.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is no compulsion on a lawyer to remain as defence counsel. If a nutter like manson can retain counsel it is worrying for trump that he is unable to do so.

Of course not. But a defense attorney already knows kind of thing they're going to be defending.

Trumps lawyers likely don't know the full extent of the situation until the get in there. Also they're undoubted facing a lot of social pressure not to defend a man who is perceived as dividing the country and inciting an insurrection. Defending him unfairly carry's a potential career ending stigma.