politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Of course Trump wanted to do one of his usual "omg witch hunt" speeches. He didn't seem to realize that the trial was already over, and in the penalty phase, or that the speech would not be on TV. The email chain between Trump's incompetent lawyer (who had previously been reported on as one of his 'good' ones) was hilarious but also just sad, I mean, the guy can't even be bothered to capitalize words starting sentences and the request to 'delay until Jan 29th because Melania's parent died' is ludicrously transparent. Anyway, his lawyer needs to be fined or formally censured some more.
I am convinced his 'incompetent" lawyers are just a means for appeal. He will say his defense was inadequate and that his lawyers did not do their due diligence to give adequate defense or some such bullshit.
I'm not sure "I'm such a fucking deadbeat that no reputable lawyer will go near me" is a winning proposition.
I didn't say it would work but at this point, I think everything is on the table for this shit show.
So appoint a public defender! 🤣😂🤣🤣
To me it feels like the lawyer was trying to make sure Trump wouldn't be allowed to do the speech (because allowing your client to talk is always bad), but couldn't convince him to do it himself. So he tried to get the judge to do it for him (and eventually failed anyway).
Perhaps, and also some of the emails practically read like they were dictated by Trump. I doubt if the lawyer has 100% control since surely Trump insists on things and tries to micromanage it himself.
I saw a pundit claim that you can tell some stuff was pasted in because it was in a different job, so wouldn't surprise me.
Wouldn't put it past TFG to kill an in-law (or even a blood relative) in an effort to delay just a bit longer.
I'm willing to bet he didn't even know she was still alive.
Most likely... Unless she owed him money.
He knows he's lost the case, and has nothing left to lose. He might as well try to make the whole thing political. He's backed in ca corner & his only hope is to become president again. (Notice I didn't say win the election. Winning would be great, but the means is unimportant to him)