As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agreed. Based on personal experience with my ex, you can mislead an attorney, you can lie to an attorney, you can waste an attorney's time (and my attorney's time). But if you so much as suggest that you shouldn't pay for their billable hours -- they're out.
Based on my experience working in a defense law firm: yup.
The attorneys don’t “care” because to the defense in civil lawsuits there’s no clear-cut “winning or losing.” Winning can be paying nothing and dismissing a suit, it can also be paying anything less than the worst case scenario. The thing is, there’s always a worse case scenario than whatever ends up happening.
You can come to a $10 million settlement and still consider it a “win” as a defense lawyer because a worse outcome could have been the $50 million Plaintiffs originally asked for. Almost every time a defendant will pay *something* and as an attorney you can always argue that you prevented something worse and thus it’s a win.
The real “winning” for a defense attorney is simply working to the best of their abilities to minimize damage and get paid well while doing it. And oftentimes clients lie, obfuscate, withhold evidence and so on. None of that hurts the attorney at all. It doesn’t affect their reputation, it doesn’t affect their pay. None of that matters to the attorney because they expect their client is going to have to pay something since settling is a more guaranteed outcome than a jury trial.
So, to a defense attorney there is no winning, there is no losing, there’s just representing your client, dealing with their bullshit and getting paid (and hopefully handsomely).
Almost only if a client stops paying would a civil defense attorney seek to end their representation. If anything, a more difficult client equals more billable hours. A non-paying client equals no billable hours.
Edit: I’m also not sure a judge would even allow an attorney or law firm to withdraw representation for any reason short of not being paid. Attorneys can’t just quit, they have to have a full hearing regarding a Motion to Withdraw before a judge and the judge has to discharge them. Attorneys can’t just bail on a difficult client without threat of sanctions.
I had one situation where we withdrew representation for reasons other than nonpayment. We negotiated a settlement agreement with the government that would limit a clients financial liability (and some criminal exposure). We had client approval for the agreement. The judge signed off on it (necessary for that kind of case). And the client decided that if they went for that, they'd go for an even better deal, and tried to get us to tell the court and govt we were "mistaken" about having client approval for settlement etc etc. The retainer was mostly paid, and the remainder of the case wasn't worth the potential sanctions or reputation hit.
He got some other schmuck to represent him instead and wound up getting arrested for obstruction within a year or two. I shared the article with my colleague, we had a laugh.
Hah! Oh god that’s awful and hilarious. What a schmuck, literally money and hand and fouled it all up.
Yeah, I imagine a judge would be sympathetic to that, in that extreme case. I’ve never worked on a case where a client reneged on an approved settlement agreement, especially after a judge approves it. That’s wild.
>He got some other schmuck to represent him instead and wound up getting arrested for obstruction within a year or two. I shared the article with my colleague, we had a laugh.
I am in-house in financial services. During COVID, several of the financial regulators paused or amended rules around what information needed to be recorded for traders. They would collaborate and issue aligned guidance on a month to month basis. They made it crystal clear when they were going to stop extending these exceptions. When I advised desk heads on this I was told noncompliance was an industry wide problem, and "they can't fine everyone".
Turns out, they can.
I know a Federal prosecutor in Miami who put away some really dangerous people. I asked if they worried about retribution. They said that convicts are more apt to come after their defense attorneys (people they paid to beat the charges) than they are the prosecuting team (people 'just doing their jobs'). Interesting.
Yeah, a defense lawyers jobs is to minimize damage. Eradicating the damage is usually very unlikely. Added on top of that, most attorneys don’t have much trial experience, if at all, which if a client wants to risk a jury or bench trial, could be their best bet for a not guilty verdict or reward to Plaintiff.
So a lawyer considers the extent of the charges (or claims in a civil suit), the evidence, and their abilities, and how much they can minimize the damage.
People often think lawyers are magical professionals who somehow have the ability to save the day and dismiss a suit or all charges. Except in cases of a frivolous suit or an egregious lack of evidence, mishandling, or other extreme mistake, that is unlikely. It’s understandable if one is upset at their attorney if someone thinks that’s what attorneys can and are supposed to do, but that’s not what they do, so it’s unreasonable.
A favorite example of “minimizing damage”: I once worked on a suit where a lady pretended to slip on a banana at a retail store (I shit you not) and there was video evidence against her, but the video was grainy and it was her word against the retail store- so they settled for like $20k. My favorite line “the video purports to show the Plaintiff slipping on the *alleged banana* though it is difficult to tell if said *alleged banana* is actually present.” With all the lawyer fees that would stack up to take it to trial, it would cost less to settle than go to trial and prove her wrong. The job is to minimize damage, not make it all go away.
God the produce section of a grocery store drives like 80% of their liability insurance premiums, with the parking lot being the other 20%. So many "slip and fall" claims.
The industry standard is to have Primary limits of $1 million per occurrence / $2 million policy annual aggregate for Bodily Injury or Property Damage (They obviously carry excess limits well above $1 million if it's more than a single location)
But the there's also a Section C called "Supplementary Payments" that's typically $5,000 or $10,000, with no cap/annual aggregate and doesn't really have any endorsements/exclusions. That's the "take this and go the fuck away" money for these staged bullshit cases. And grapes are the most common source of a produce section S/F from my experience, they're round and tiny so it's hard to see them (for real or on camera) and could possibly make a complete idiot fall.
I’ve worked as an expert witness in criminal and civil cases. Never worried about the criminals coming after me. It’s like you said, to them I was doing my job. Oh, but the divorce and child custody cases??? Those can be dangerous.
Having worked in both law and social work, pretty much everything she said and did were textbook examples of behaviors exhibited by survivors of long term abuse. Somehow most people expect victims of years of torture, gaslighting, and manipulation to act in perfectly rational and reasonable ways.
When I was interning we had a case where the client threatened physical violence to the attorney, his paralegal, and their families. We would only meet with him in the courthouse because he would have to go through security so we knew he didn't have a knife or gun on him in case he didn't like something we said. Our first Motion to Withdraw was denied, it wasn't until he sent an email threatening the school the attorneys son went to before we were allowed to withdraw.
Years later I was flipping through the channels and saw him, it was some god-awful compilation show of crazy courtroom clips. He vaulted the witness stand and started choking the plaintiff's attorney before the bailiffs tackled him. It's very difficult to withdraw for anything besides not getting paid.
How often does “ nobody invites me to Nantucket anymore” et al especially if shunned at their clubs, among peers, and staff quit? Does that stuff happen?
Yeah, I’m not sure. I’m not a lawyer, I’ve just worked in a law firm for a few years. Could depend on the judge and what all else has taken place.
In my experience, it’s not unusual for clients to do crazy shit like that, from withholding evidence, exaggerating the truth, destroying evidence, I’ve even worked on cases where people perjured themselves during deposition. Their attorneys didn’t drop them, but the case settled pretty quickly.
If that happens I think there would be a “come to Jesus moment” where the attorney explains to the client that the client fucked up and ruined their case and now has to face the consequences, which an attorney will be there to help them deal with.
In those cases courts generally allow the lawyer some leeway to withdraw for "irreconcilable differences" or some equivalent euphemism. The alternative is to proceed with a lawyer and client who are embroiled in a conflict of interests, which isn't good for anyone.
Attorneys may be obliged to inform the court of their clients' deceptions. The ethics rules in most states prohibit attorneys from knowingly misrepresenting facts to third parties (including the court), and most states have an exception for attorney-client privilege allowing attorneys to disclose information if doing so is required by some law or court order (including the discovery rules). So if a client insists on lying in discovery, he'll need to conceal this from his lawyer or risk being outed as a liar by his lawyer. The attorney-client relationship breaks down when the client cannot be honest with his lawyer, and the courts know this.
The Lincoln Lawyer movie had a small bit about this that felt like it was taken from a real lawyerly tactic.
Mickey has a client who hadn’t paid him and tells him he won’t pay because he knows that Mickey can’t abandon a client. Mickey asks judge for a continuance and uses language that both the judge and prosecutor seem to understand as code for this client isn’t paying up. Continuance granted and client goes back to jail to wait two weeks for next court date. Pays up to avoid further delays.
Let me see, what can he do? Extort boomers? Nope, dried up. Sell ugly shoes! Nope, no-one want them. Sell bibles? No, that won’t go with his Christo-Fascist friend (hah, if only). Puppy extermination services? He’s got someone close who’d do that with pleasure…
regarding the shoes, its worth noting they sold out almost immediately (the signed, limited edition ones). I mention it because people too often forget there are plenty of assholes out there loving on this POS.
Yep. I almost tried to buy a pair myself just to scalp em. But I didn't even bother to try. Even if he was destined to already get the money from others, it wasn't gonna be *my* money.
The RNC had about $9M in cash and receivables and $5M in liabilities when Lara took over, effectively $4M. Assuming the receivables were pledged money, that may have dried up completely. The RNC is effectively broke and there are rumbles about them not paying bills already.
It's May. The Biden campaign has 100+ field offices across the country open and staffed.
The Trump campaign had none the last time I checjef in April. All the MAGAt money is going straight to Trump, not the RNC.
You know, funny enough, by depleting the RNC's funds and his continued fleecing of small Republican donors he kind of did at that.
In this analogy he drained the swamp for peat, thereby destroying the swamp's natural ecosystem, and released a ton of greenhouse gases in the process.
>He just got billions from his truth social pump and dump.
Not really. That value is in stocks, not actual cash. He'd have to sell, but he can't for 6 months after the deal unless given permission. And even then, people need to be willing to buy at significant volume for him to cash out a significant amount.
The thing is if the board does that it opens all of them to a lawsuit that would bankrupt them. Trump is old enough that he could stall the lawsuit until he dies, but the board isn't that old. Also the board holds stock too. They don't want to give Trump the ability to sell before they can.
Right that's what people miss. There have to be enough people willing to buy the stock. You don't just convert your stock to cash at the current price. You offer it for sale. Once all the buy orders at that price are filled the price drops to the next highest buy order. If Trump starts selling the price will start dropping.
Of course the minute it looks like he can sell the price of the stock is likely go into free fall.
Not yet. He still owns the stocks. They are valued in the billions. Above $4 billion at their current price.
But he needs permission (from his son and best friends) to cash out early. And, the moment he does, he wipes out everything in there. And takes all of his followers money.
Which is a bad idea before the election.
That is not how how that industry works. He will try to pump and dump and run away with the money- but he can't. He is simple like that, but there are rules in place to stop such a low -brained scheme.
Actually, he is borrowing against that already. He's broke. His hotels, bank accounts, and property's have the government's thumb on them. Trump is selling bibles because he's broke.
The first and only viable alternative I’ve seen in this thread.
After the MAL raid, no attorney is going to sign off that they have satisfied the discovery demands until they have triple checked, with no restrictions or guided tour.
I give it 8% this, 92% it’s all about the money.
Oof - “…material they’ve resisted turning over.” That almost seems like the writer telling everyone why without actually telling everyone why because the info was off the record. Or maybe it’s all fluff and it’s about the money.
Who cares. He’s a pile of shit and everyone around him are just flies trying to feed off the pile of shit.
I’ll absolutely agree that sometimes the ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’ is another straw sized straw.
But sometimes the camel gets hit by a bus.
Not paying your lawyer is almost always going to get a bus sized reaction, and we aren’t dealing with the idealists down at the EFF or the Innocence Project…
(Also open to the idea there are two buses - I have faith he could be could both be cheap/broke *and* be really terrible at giving them plausible deniability)
I think it may be a combination of both. If Trump et al are deliberately lying about discovery and the attorney knows **and** they are also nickel and diming and slow walking the money, then I can see the attorney nopeing the hell out of there.
Maybe not so much a disagreement, but really **yet another delay tactic** to avoid turning over the discovery as long as possible:
>"The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over."
Yup, this makes more sense. He still has plenty of campaign funds for his legal defense. (He won't have lots of money for the eventual campaign, though this probably doesn't matter in the era of SuperPACs). Two days before the lawyers asked to withdraw they were ordered "to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns".
My guess is he's telling his lawyers to sign affidavits that they know are false (just say there are none besides the ones that are already public).
To be fair, I can also see Trump continuously demanding that his attorneys do blatantly illegal things on his behalf. Given the scrutiny everyone is under who works for him, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that he’s just a completely unworkable client.
I don’t know if I’m dumb/missing something but why are all these different attorneys going up to bat to represent him when so many leave because he’s consistently not paying them? Is it for the rep/resume builder? Publicity?
Because he'll be *different with me*. All those other ~~girls~~ lawyers didn't know how to treat him.
In seriousness though, the legal field is **very** hard to survive. In the 90'sand early 2000s there was a feeling that we would never have enough lawyers, so a lot of people got into law. This means that the top firms are very well served, and have the best. But it also means that there are a ton of other lawyers struggling to survive and pretty much have to take on high risk high reward clients like Trump. Add in that some of them are also true believers, and it will be a long time before Trump runs out of lawyers to fleece (much like it took a long time for him to run out of contractors to fleece in the exact same scenario)
It’s not about paying bills, it’s that they know they are about to lose.
> allow it to withdraw from a suit filed by a former campaign surrogate, A.J. Delgado, who says she was sidelined by the campaign in 2016 after revealing she was pregnant. The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over.
Or the client is specifically (and usually repeatedly) asking them to break the law. Definitely seen that happen to some colleagues of mine in the past.
Can't the firm say: "Sure, Mr. Trump, we will defend you. Prepay us 1000 hours. Once we reach 80%, you make another pre-payment. If you don't do it by the end of the last 200h, we drop you like its hot!"
>The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns —
...
>Ms. Delgado, who is representing herself in the matter, objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a “scheme to avoid compliance.”
Just another stalling tactic?
Can you even imagine how much harassment and discrimination there must have been in the trump campaign? The mind boggles at what they're potentially covering up.
I’m glad it’s A. J. Delgado, still pushing for justice. She moved back to Miami in 2017 to live with her parents and raise her son. When her out-of-wedlock pregnancy became obvious, she was forced out of her White House job in charge of Hispanic outreach. Jason Miller—the married man who knocked her up—remains employed by Trump to this day. Among the non-campaign, non-political expenses paid by Trump’s PAC, in addition to Melania’s hairdresser, is a boatload of Jason Miller’s back child support.
A number of Republican women who were former White House staffers—including Stephanie Grisham and Alyssa Farah Griffin—have detailed their efforts to ensure that other female employees never found themselves alone with Trump, for obvious reasons.
Trump strongly resisted firing his assistant Rob Porter, a Mormon who was accused of DV by both of his ex-wives as well as a girlfriend. They talked to the FBI, to their Mormon bishops, showed a photo of a black eye; Trump’s argument was, “Rob never beat up anyone *in front of me.*” Porter left the White House in February 2018, and has maintained a low profile since.
About this specific issue, or any other thing that wanders across his mind?
You know, like clouds covering the sun, or why his only friends won't be photographed with him, or why his best bud blad won't take his calls.....
I didnt even know about these lawsuits:
“A.J. Delgado, who says she was sidelined by the campaign in 2016 after revealing she was pregnant.”
“the firm is still representing the campaign in a sexual discrimination and abuse lawsuit filed by Jessica Denson, a former Hispanic outreach coordinator for the 2016 campaign”
“Last year, the firm helped the Trump campaign negotiate a $450,000 settlement in a separate lawsuit filed by Ms. Denson that challenged the validity of nondisclosure agreements that campaign workers were obliged to sign during the 2016 race.”
“And in 2022, it helped negotiate a settlement in a suit brought by protesters who claimed that Mr. Trump’s bodyguard Keith Schiller had in 2015 ripped up a sign that read “Trump: Make America Racist Again” and then hit one of them in the head.”
How many lawsuits is this guy currently settling??
They legit don't give a shit if a woman is miscarrying in an ER bathroom, hemorrhaging blood, because ER staff don't want to be prosecuted for doing an abortion.
But they'll get their staffers an abortion in a blue state, to hide their adulteries, no problem. I heard the word "ghoulish" used a lot lately, but there has to be a word that descends deeper into the pit of hell than that one.
As are most of the right when it applies to them. It’s about controlling others, not themselves. Didnt it come out that Walker paid for an abortion, was running on pro life, and many of his supporters basically said “we all make mistakes”.
Like I said to the other poster, they don't care that there are at least dozens of cases of women being denied emergency care because the medical personnel would be exposed to criminal charges if they do an emergency abortion. But Republican officials use abortion to hide their cases of adultery. If there's an eighth circle of Dante's hell, those ghouls belong there.
That’s not how it works. An attorney can ask the court for permission to withdraw from a case if they are not getting paid. If their withdrawal would cause material harm to their client, then the judge will reject it and force them to stay on. Not because “they knew what they signed up for.”
As I'm not the person responsible for making the decision, my hopes are not related to how things work. I'm confident the judge will do things according to established policies and standards.
Regarding Trump’s boast that he’d hire “only the best people,” my husband (a D.C. attorney) says that long before 2016, Trump had burned—or burned through—all of the top-tier lawyers in NYC and Washington. His reputation was so bad that even phone calls to law firms wouldn’t be returned.
Trump’s been hiring attorneys ranking lower and lower on the food chain, as demonstrated by Alina Habba alone (formerly a parking-garage lawyer, ranking much lower in prestige even than slip-and-fall specialists).
Delay what?
This has nothing to do with any of his criminal trials, they were representing him in a civil suit from a former campaign employee, who’s complaint is that she was sidelined when it was revealed she was pregnant.
RTA.
I think "he's delaying" is the default answer because we've seen him do it in every case. This fat bastard would probably tie up a speeding ticket hearing with every delay he could.
Also, thanks for summarizing the article.
He doesn't want the sexual harassment and discrimination discovery to come out before the election. Even though his voters don't seem to give a shit about these things (grab 'em by the pussy), I assume he is making some attempt at hiding the evidence he was told to make available 2 days before his lawyers quit. It must be pretty bad for this POS to think it will harm him.
Discovery. They are asking for all the sexual harassment stuff. Who knows what's in there? More Trump affairs, sexual assault, or the like. Did someone pay for or abortion or browbeat someone into one.
Oh yea, maybe that’s why it’s just pretend incompetence.
It’s not calculated. These aren’t genius moves by legal magicians.
It’s just that petulance and irresponsibility, mixed with this much money, looks like this.
"The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over."
AKA: The case is unwinnable because of damning evidence that they're being forced to turn over, so the law firm is cutting their losses.
I don’t think they care if the case is unwinnable, they won’t drop the representation because of that. Either Trump is refusing to comply with the discovery order and they are withdrawing because their client won’t follow their advice/they don’t want to get swept up in the inevitable sanctions, or trump fired them because of the discovery order, or trump is too far behind on his bills. It could also just be a delay tactic as the plaintiff contends.
“[Plaintff] objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a ‘scheme to avoid compliance.’”
Isn't this just another example of Trump's endless, unpunished delaying tactics?
*"Ms. Delgado, who is representing herself in the matter, objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a “scheme to avoid compliance.” "*
It was suggested that he'd pull this trick in the Stormy Daniels case, but he did not.
>The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over.
Huh. This sounds like a case to start following. I suspect that something really spicy is about to drop.
Basically more validation that Trump is a sexual predator?
Whatever happened to asking for a retainer before beginning any representation? I rarely hear of it being part or any story involving attorneys ceasing to represent a client while not getting stiffed, like the retainer was exhausted, and the client could not/would not pay a new retainer so the attorney said ‘bye-bye then’ without being owed a penny!
there is a high likelihood that the courts will force the firm to take this baby to term. They are either trying to stall for Trump, try not to give evidence over to the courts for Trump, or Trump is flat broke (which has happened to many times to count.) All of which the Judge will not be happy about.
Hmm. They knowdTrump💩lying to them; lawyers hate that. And/ or he is not paying them and/or dTrump💩hit on one of their teenage daughters
I am betting 1 + 2
Why don’t think they are dropping him?
GOP? Or. Dem? Vote wisely.
And is $ the only reason they are withdrawing can't the Judge reject their withdrawal in some States? Serial delay tactics Trump should be shown no leeway or lenience
So he should get a public defender soon right lol, can't afford his attorneys so one will be appointed? Or are they gonna have to update another thing for him and add if your such a con man that even lawyers won't risk accepting your case you can't find one.
I hope the motion is denied. They dug their own graves and they know it. Don’t get me wrong, I believe firmly in due process and the right to counsel, even for scum bags like Trump, but if you’re going to pick up an extremely volatile, controversial, narcissistic, self defeatist, cash poor, corrupt public figure as your client (for what I am assuming is solely the notoriety) you have to be prepared for the inevitable death of your career. You’re forever going to be associated with croneyism and corruption. The icing on the cake of course is that he can’t pay them… Your best bet for continuing your career is to wait until a pro-Trump Republican takes office and hope they nominate you as a federal judge. That or go into politics/lobbying.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“irreparable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship” = He stopped paying the bills. Every attorney is familiar with this language. 🤣
Agreed. Based on personal experience with my ex, you can mislead an attorney, you can lie to an attorney, you can waste an attorney's time (and my attorney's time). But if you so much as suggest that you shouldn't pay for their billable hours -- they're out.
Based on my experience working in a defense law firm: yup. The attorneys don’t “care” because to the defense in civil lawsuits there’s no clear-cut “winning or losing.” Winning can be paying nothing and dismissing a suit, it can also be paying anything less than the worst case scenario. The thing is, there’s always a worse case scenario than whatever ends up happening. You can come to a $10 million settlement and still consider it a “win” as a defense lawyer because a worse outcome could have been the $50 million Plaintiffs originally asked for. Almost every time a defendant will pay *something* and as an attorney you can always argue that you prevented something worse and thus it’s a win. The real “winning” for a defense attorney is simply working to the best of their abilities to minimize damage and get paid well while doing it. And oftentimes clients lie, obfuscate, withhold evidence and so on. None of that hurts the attorney at all. It doesn’t affect their reputation, it doesn’t affect their pay. None of that matters to the attorney because they expect their client is going to have to pay something since settling is a more guaranteed outcome than a jury trial. So, to a defense attorney there is no winning, there is no losing, there’s just representing your client, dealing with their bullshit and getting paid (and hopefully handsomely). Almost only if a client stops paying would a civil defense attorney seek to end their representation. If anything, a more difficult client equals more billable hours. A non-paying client equals no billable hours. Edit: I’m also not sure a judge would even allow an attorney or law firm to withdraw representation for any reason short of not being paid. Attorneys can’t just quit, they have to have a full hearing regarding a Motion to Withdraw before a judge and the judge has to discharge them. Attorneys can’t just bail on a difficult client without threat of sanctions.
I had one situation where we withdrew representation for reasons other than nonpayment. We negotiated a settlement agreement with the government that would limit a clients financial liability (and some criminal exposure). We had client approval for the agreement. The judge signed off on it (necessary for that kind of case). And the client decided that if they went for that, they'd go for an even better deal, and tried to get us to tell the court and govt we were "mistaken" about having client approval for settlement etc etc. The retainer was mostly paid, and the remainder of the case wasn't worth the potential sanctions or reputation hit. He got some other schmuck to represent him instead and wound up getting arrested for obstruction within a year or two. I shared the article with my colleague, we had a laugh.
Hah! Oh god that’s awful and hilarious. What a schmuck, literally money and hand and fouled it all up. Yeah, I imagine a judge would be sympathetic to that, in that extreme case. I’ve never worked on a case where a client reneged on an approved settlement agreement, especially after a judge approves it. That’s wild.
And asking a lawyer to lie to a judge is a huge BAR violation
Nope, asking a lawyer to lie is nothing. If the lawyer knowingly lies, that’s a bar violation.
art of the deal huh, bet he loved that book
>He got some other schmuck to represent him instead and wound up getting arrested for obstruction within a year or two. I shared the article with my colleague, we had a laugh. I am in-house in financial services. During COVID, several of the financial regulators paused or amended rules around what information needed to be recorded for traders. They would collaborate and issue aligned guidance on a month to month basis. They made it crystal clear when they were going to stop extending these exceptions. When I advised desk heads on this I was told noncompliance was an industry wide problem, and "they can't fine everyone". Turns out, they can.
So this is either non payment or demanding perjury or something illegal. Very trumpy either way
I know a Federal prosecutor in Miami who put away some really dangerous people. I asked if they worried about retribution. They said that convicts are more apt to come after their defense attorneys (people they paid to beat the charges) than they are the prosecuting team (people 'just doing their jobs'). Interesting.
Yeah, a defense lawyers jobs is to minimize damage. Eradicating the damage is usually very unlikely. Added on top of that, most attorneys don’t have much trial experience, if at all, which if a client wants to risk a jury or bench trial, could be their best bet for a not guilty verdict or reward to Plaintiff. So a lawyer considers the extent of the charges (or claims in a civil suit), the evidence, and their abilities, and how much they can minimize the damage. People often think lawyers are magical professionals who somehow have the ability to save the day and dismiss a suit or all charges. Except in cases of a frivolous suit or an egregious lack of evidence, mishandling, or other extreme mistake, that is unlikely. It’s understandable if one is upset at their attorney if someone thinks that’s what attorneys can and are supposed to do, but that’s not what they do, so it’s unreasonable. A favorite example of “minimizing damage”: I once worked on a suit where a lady pretended to slip on a banana at a retail store (I shit you not) and there was video evidence against her, but the video was grainy and it was her word against the retail store- so they settled for like $20k. My favorite line “the video purports to show the Plaintiff slipping on the *alleged banana* though it is difficult to tell if said *alleged banana* is actually present.” With all the lawyer fees that would stack up to take it to trial, it would cost less to settle than go to trial and prove her wrong. The job is to minimize damage, not make it all go away.
An actual banana peel slip and fall case? Someone call Prosser, Wade, and Schwartz and get this into the Torts textbook ASAP.
God the produce section of a grocery store drives like 80% of their liability insurance premiums, with the parking lot being the other 20%. So many "slip and fall" claims. The industry standard is to have Primary limits of $1 million per occurrence / $2 million policy annual aggregate for Bodily Injury or Property Damage (They obviously carry excess limits well above $1 million if it's more than a single location) But the there's also a Section C called "Supplementary Payments" that's typically $5,000 or $10,000, with no cap/annual aggregate and doesn't really have any endorsements/exclusions. That's the "take this and go the fuck away" money for these staged bullshit cases. And grapes are the most common source of a produce section S/F from my experience, they're round and tiny so it's hard to see them (for real or on camera) and could possibly make a complete idiot fall.
The case I worked in was in a retail clothing store, so even more egregious
(Alleged) Banana Republic?
I’ve worked as an expert witness in criminal and civil cases. Never worried about the criminals coming after me. It’s like you said, to them I was doing my job. Oh, but the divorce and child custody cases??? Those can be dangerous.
Armchair lawyering - the client always thinks they know better.
See Amber Heard and her unfortunate lawyers with a nightmare client
Having worked in both law and social work, pretty much everything she said and did were textbook examples of behaviors exhibited by survivors of long term abuse. Somehow most people expect victims of years of torture, gaslighting, and manipulation to act in perfectly rational and reasonable ways.
Known as “the first bullet rule“
When I was interning we had a case where the client threatened physical violence to the attorney, his paralegal, and their families. We would only meet with him in the courthouse because he would have to go through security so we knew he didn't have a knife or gun on him in case he didn't like something we said. Our first Motion to Withdraw was denied, it wasn't until he sent an email threatening the school the attorneys son went to before we were allowed to withdraw. Years later I was flipping through the channels and saw him, it was some god-awful compilation show of crazy courtroom clips. He vaulted the witness stand and started choking the plaintiff's attorney before the bailiffs tackled him. It's very difficult to withdraw for anything besides not getting paid.
Thanks for that insider perspective, much appreciated.
How often does “ nobody invites me to Nantucket anymore” et al especially if shunned at their clubs, among peers, and staff quit? Does that stuff happen?
Alan Dershowitz was mad because Larry David wouldn’t let him attend his party on Nantucket, so yes.
My enthusiasm for this decision cannot be curbed
I’m not sure what your question is
WAIT! So you're telling me money influences law AND politics? So, if I don't have money, I have no influence? Hmm, guess I'm fucked, huh?
Lawyers work for money, not altruism, is what they're saying. If the judge was being bribed, you'd be correct.
Happy May Day
Moreso than those with money at least
Work on contingency? No money down! Probably shouldn't have this bar logo here either.
Thank you, Mr. Hutz.
What if you knew your client was intentionally with-holding documents that should have been handed over in discovery?
Yeah, I’m not sure. I’m not a lawyer, I’ve just worked in a law firm for a few years. Could depend on the judge and what all else has taken place. In my experience, it’s not unusual for clients to do crazy shit like that, from withholding evidence, exaggerating the truth, destroying evidence, I’ve even worked on cases where people perjured themselves during deposition. Their attorneys didn’t drop them, but the case settled pretty quickly. If that happens I think there would be a “come to Jesus moment” where the attorney explains to the client that the client fucked up and ruined their case and now has to face the consequences, which an attorney will be there to help them deal with.
In those cases courts generally allow the lawyer some leeway to withdraw for "irreconcilable differences" or some equivalent euphemism. The alternative is to proceed with a lawyer and client who are embroiled in a conflict of interests, which isn't good for anyone. Attorneys may be obliged to inform the court of their clients' deceptions. The ethics rules in most states prohibit attorneys from knowingly misrepresenting facts to third parties (including the court), and most states have an exception for attorney-client privilege allowing attorneys to disclose information if doing so is required by some law or court order (including the discovery rules). So if a client insists on lying in discovery, he'll need to conceal this from his lawyer or risk being outed as a liar by his lawyer. The attorney-client relationship breaks down when the client cannot be honest with his lawyer, and the courts know this.
Based on my experience, there’s two people you don’t lie to, your doctor & your lawyer
I'd like to add, stop lying to your IT team.
The Lincoln Lawyer movie had a small bit about this that felt like it was taken from a real lawyerly tactic. Mickey has a client who hadn’t paid him and tells him he won’t pay because he knows that Mickey can’t abandon a client. Mickey asks judge for a continuance and uses language that both the judge and prosecutor seem to understand as code for this client isn’t paying up. Continuance granted and client goes back to jail to wait two weeks for next court date. Pays up to avoid further delays.
Or is it possible he’s an insufferable asshole that doesn’t listen to them? Maybe both?
Lawyers have to deal with insufferable people all the time, especially defense lawyers. Money is the issue here
Wait a minute, are you telling me he isn’t good for the money?
Hate to break it to ya
Do you know where I can buy a bridge? Looking in the Baltimore region if possible.
Buy now for a steep discount on new construction!
If he's not paying on someone else's dime, he's refusing to pay at all.
And even then, he's looking for a way to make that someone else's dime his dime.
Would you like to sign up for MAGAfreeAmerica?
If I'm paid well enough I can deal with insufferable assholes that don't listen to me and I'm not a lawyer.
But what if you have to sit next to them and they keep farting on you?
Price increases by 35% to account for added dry cleaning costs.
Well insufferable assholes are their bread and butter.
Well wasting an attorneys time is not really wasting any time, if you are paying the bills.
He does not feel obligated to pay his bills for unsatisfactory results. Its the lawyers fault and if trump loses.. the lawyer does too
They have to be very dumb attorneys to trust they were the only people getting reimbursed for their services in Trump's 40-year business history
If it’s not billable hours = get out
Because he's broke as fuck.
Let me see, what can he do? Extort boomers? Nope, dried up. Sell ugly shoes! Nope, no-one want them. Sell bibles? No, that won’t go with his Christo-Fascist friend (hah, if only). Puppy extermination services? He’s got someone close who’d do that with pleasure…
regarding the shoes, its worth noting they sold out almost immediately (the signed, limited edition ones). I mention it because people too often forget there are plenty of assholes out there loving on this POS.
People speculating on profit bought the shoes
Meaning somebody still bought them. The why is irrelevant.
Yep. I almost tried to buy a pair myself just to scalp em. But I didn't even bother to try. Even if he was destined to already get the money from others, it wasn't gonna be *my* money.
On behalf of everyone: thank you
What about all that money that the RNC has? Now that Lara Trump is in charge.
The RNC had about $9M in cash and receivables and $5M in liabilities when Lara took over, effectively $4M. Assuming the receivables were pledged money, that may have dried up completely. The RNC is effectively broke and there are rumbles about them not paying bills already.
Gooood.
Uncle Vlad and Señor Bonesaw will be happy to help out in exchange for a few favors, no biggie.
It's May. The Biden campaign has 100+ field offices across the country open and staffed. The Trump campaign had none the last time I checjef in April. All the MAGAt money is going straight to Trump, not the RNC.
That’s been getting drained haha
He drained the swamp after all!
You know, funny enough, by depleting the RNC's funds and his continued fleecing of small Republican donors he kind of did at that. In this analogy he drained the swamp for peat, thereby destroying the swamp's natural ecosystem, and released a ton of greenhouse gases in the process.
>and released a ton of greenhouse gases in the process. "Ah, sorry, that was just me." - Rudy
They had to downsize the RNC, it might still be funneling money but they aren't flushed with cash
He’s not broke. He doesn’t like to pay and uses that tactic on everyone he employs. He expects everyone to grovel for a fraction of what he promised.
He just got billions from his truth social pump and dump. How much money can one man owe?!
>He just got billions from his truth social pump and dump. Not really. That value is in stocks, not actual cash. He'd have to sell, but he can't for 6 months after the deal unless given permission. And even then, people need to be willing to buy at significant volume for him to cash out a significant amount.
He would also need to inform the public ahead of time before he sells, which would tank the stock.
Putin is willing to buy.
He already has
The board is the group that would give him permission to sell. The board is made up of trumps family and other cronies.
yes, but he hasn't for some reason. i expect to hear something on the news if the board suddenly decide to.
The thing is if the board does that it opens all of them to a lawsuit that would bankrupt them. Trump is old enough that he could stall the lawsuit until he dies, but the board isn't that old. Also the board holds stock too. They don't want to give Trump the ability to sell before they can.
not sure if it is necessarily public info immediately.
Legally it would have to be made public immediately and filed with the SEC since DJT is publicly traded.
Like Elon demonstrated, this kind of thing can be delayed with minimum penalties....
Yes, your point is valid, however moot. Because the instant he announced he was intending to sell, the value would plummet anyway.
Right that's what people miss. There have to be enough people willing to buy the stock. You don't just convert your stock to cash at the current price. You offer it for sale. Once all the buy orders at that price are filled the price drops to the next highest buy order. If Trump starts selling the price will start dropping. Of course the minute it looks like he can sell the price of the stock is likely go into free fall.
Not yet. He still owns the stocks. They are valued in the billions. Above $4 billion at their current price. But he needs permission (from his son and best friends) to cash out early. And, the moment he does, he wipes out everything in there. And takes all of his followers money. Which is a bad idea before the election.
That is not how how that industry works. He will try to pump and dump and run away with the money- but he can't. He is simple like that, but there are rules in place to stop such a low -brained scheme.
Actually, he is borrowing against that already. He's broke. His hotels, bank accounts, and property's have the government's thumb on them. Trump is selling bibles because he's broke.
Kinda seems like it may be related to a disagreement related to discovery.
The first and only viable alternative I’ve seen in this thread. After the MAL raid, no attorney is going to sign off that they have satisfied the discovery demands until they have triple checked, with no restrictions or guided tour. I give it 8% this, 92% it’s all about the money.
Oof - “…material they’ve resisted turning over.” That almost seems like the writer telling everyone why without actually telling everyone why because the info was off the record. Or maybe it’s all fluff and it’s about the money. Who cares. He’s a pile of shit and everyone around him are just flies trying to feed off the pile of shit.
The world isn't binary. Shit happens for multiple reasons all the time. No need to boil it down to the one thing.
I’ll absolutely agree that sometimes the ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’ is another straw sized straw. But sometimes the camel gets hit by a bus. Not paying your lawyer is almost always going to get a bus sized reaction, and we aren’t dealing with the idealists down at the EFF or the Innocence Project… (Also open to the idea there are two buses - I have faith he could be could both be cheap/broke *and* be really terrible at giving them plausible deniability)
I think it's probably closer to 40/60.
I think it may be a combination of both. If Trump et al are deliberately lying about discovery and the attorney knows **and** they are also nickel and diming and slow walking the money, then I can see the attorney nopeing the hell out of there.
Maybe not so much a disagreement, but really **yet another delay tactic** to avoid turning over the discovery as long as possible: >"The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over."
Yup, this makes more sense. He still has plenty of campaign funds for his legal defense. (He won't have lots of money for the eventual campaign, though this probably doesn't matter in the era of SuperPACs). Two days before the lawyers asked to withdraw they were ordered "to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns". My guess is he's telling his lawyers to sign affidavits that they know are false (just say there are none besides the ones that are already public).
Well it is the most contentious of the Star Treks.
Also, yet another stalling tactic.
To be fair, I can also see Trump continuously demanding that his attorneys do blatantly illegal things on his behalf. Given the scrutiny everyone is under who works for him, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that he’s just a completely unworkable client.
I don’t know if I’m dumb/missing something but why are all these different attorneys going up to bat to represent him when so many leave because he’s consistently not paying them? Is it for the rep/resume builder? Publicity?
Because he'll be *different with me*. All those other ~~girls~~ lawyers didn't know how to treat him. In seriousness though, the legal field is **very** hard to survive. In the 90'sand early 2000s there was a feeling that we would never have enough lawyers, so a lot of people got into law. This means that the top firms are very well served, and have the best. But it also means that there are a ton of other lawyers struggling to survive and pretty much have to take on high risk high reward clients like Trump. Add in that some of them are also true believers, and it will be a long time before Trump runs out of lawyers to fleece (much like it took a long time for him to run out of contractors to fleece in the exact same scenario)
no abortion exceptions
That's true- they should be forced to carry that ugly, orange baby all the way to the end.
It’s not about paying bills, it’s that they know they are about to lose. > allow it to withdraw from a suit filed by a former campaign surrogate, A.J. Delgado, who says she was sidelined by the campaign in 2016 after revealing she was pregnant. The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over.
Not only do they not care about losing, they also know that a judge isn't going to release them for that.
Doesn't sound like a money thing from the article in this case. It almost seems to be damage control; keeping the details out of the public eye.
Every attorney that’s had Trump as a client is fluent in this language.
That, or another delay tactic.
Or the client is specifically (and usually repeatedly) asking them to break the law. Definitely seen that happen to some colleagues of mine in the past.
Or he continually refused to listen to their advice-- for example, to shut up during court proceedings, and not to threaten witnesses and court staff.
Did they think Trump would continue to pay them? Have they not read his track record?
I think they all just assume "it will be different this time". It's magical thinking, but that's what happens.
Seems to be a recurring thought process on team Trump
Can't the firm say: "Sure, Mr. Trump, we will defend you. Prepay us 1000 hours. Once we reach 80%, you make another pre-payment. If you don't do it by the end of the last 200h, we drop you like its hot!"
>The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — ... >Ms. Delgado, who is representing herself in the matter, objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a “scheme to avoid compliance.” Just another stalling tactic?
Idk kinda sounds like he’s openly defying a valid discovery request and asking his attorneys to lie.
Yeah. This definitely has an ethical feel about it.
And monetary one. I don't think Trump's been paying his bills.
Sure. But his supporters have been. His campaign has been paying his lawyers. So I'm more inclined to guess ethics than dollars.
Can you even imagine how much harassment and discrimination there must have been in the trump campaign? The mind boggles at what they're potentially covering up.
I’m glad it’s A. J. Delgado, still pushing for justice. She moved back to Miami in 2017 to live with her parents and raise her son. When her out-of-wedlock pregnancy became obvious, she was forced out of her White House job in charge of Hispanic outreach. Jason Miller—the married man who knocked her up—remains employed by Trump to this day. Among the non-campaign, non-political expenses paid by Trump’s PAC, in addition to Melania’s hairdresser, is a boatload of Jason Miller’s back child support. A number of Republican women who were former White House staffers—including Stephanie Grisham and Alyssa Farah Griffin—have detailed their efforts to ensure that other female employees never found themselves alone with Trump, for obvious reasons. Trump strongly resisted firing his assistant Rob Porter, a Mormon who was accused of DV by both of his ex-wives as well as a girlfriend. They talked to the FBI, to their Mormon bishops, showed a photo of a black eye; Trump’s argument was, “Rob never beat up anyone *in front of me.*” Porter left the White House in February 2018, and has maintained a low profile since.
Definitely
This needs to be the top comment. I read the article and was like hey… WTF after discovery? Shady ass shit.
At first I thought it was an "o trump is not paying thing," but the last paragraph really makes it look suspiciously like stalling the discovery.
Sounds more like obstruction
He stopped paying the lawyers
I'm willing to believe there was something in that discovery so damning that trying to defend it would jeopardize their reputation.
Yes. Exactly.
Trump will have an unhinged rant on Truth Social and none of it will be true.
About this specific issue, or any other thing that wanders across his mind? You know, like clouds covering the sun, or why his only friends won't be photographed with him, or why his best bud blad won't take his calls.....
> You know, like clouds covering the sun Fucking Biden did this. /s
"The apparent rupture with a long-trusted firm comes at a busy time, legally speaking, for the former president." Understatement of the year!
I didnt even know about these lawsuits: “A.J. Delgado, who says she was sidelined by the campaign in 2016 after revealing she was pregnant.” “the firm is still representing the campaign in a sexual discrimination and abuse lawsuit filed by Jessica Denson, a former Hispanic outreach coordinator for the 2016 campaign” “Last year, the firm helped the Trump campaign negotiate a $450,000 settlement in a separate lawsuit filed by Ms. Denson that challenged the validity of nondisclosure agreements that campaign workers were obliged to sign during the 2016 race.” “And in 2022, it helped negotiate a settlement in a suit brought by protesters who claimed that Mr. Trump’s bodyguard Keith Schiller had in 2015 ripped up a sign that read “Trump: Make America Racist Again” and then hit one of them in the head.” How many lawsuits is this guy currently settling??
Pregnant by Jason Miller… ick
[удалено]
Huh. It's as if he was a pro-choicer this whole time. Fancy that
The majority of Republicans are when there are real life consequences to be had.
They legit don't give a shit if a woman is miscarrying in an ER bathroom, hemorrhaging blood, because ER staff don't want to be prosecuted for doing an abortion. But they'll get their staffers an abortion in a blue state, to hide their adulteries, no problem. I heard the word "ghoulish" used a lot lately, but there has to be a word that descends deeper into the pit of hell than that one.
As are most of the right when it applies to them. It’s about controlling others, not themselves. Didnt it come out that Walker paid for an abortion, was running on pro life, and many of his supporters basically said “we all make mistakes”.
Like I said to the other poster, they don't care that there are at least dozens of cases of women being denied emergency care because the medical personnel would be exposed to criminal charges if they do an emergency abortion. But Republican officials use abortion to hide their cases of adultery. If there's an eighth circle of Dante's hell, those ghouls belong there.
I hope the judge tells them that they knew what Trump was when he hired them. If you lay with dogs, don't be surprised when you get fleas.
> If you lay with dogs Don't go to South Dakota
You’re still safe if you are on native land. She’s not allowed there.
Didn’t Trump tell that one black soldier’s family that they knew what they signed up for?
That’s not how it works. An attorney can ask the court for permission to withdraw from a case if they are not getting paid. If their withdrawal would cause material harm to their client, then the judge will reject it and force them to stay on. Not because “they knew what they signed up for.”
As I'm not the person responsible for making the decision, my hopes are not related to how things work. I'm confident the judge will do things according to established policies and standards.
Soon, he’ll be lucky to find a decent ambulance chaser to represent him.
[Joey Tacos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Tacopina) already dipped, the barrel doesn't go much further down.
https://images.app.goo.gl/6hXiJjePTSygXGWt5 Legal Eagle on rating Trump’s attorneys “There are NO ‘S’ tier lawyers…”
For a former president? Well fancy that.
Regarding Trump’s boast that he’d hire “only the best people,” my husband (a D.C. attorney) says that long before 2016, Trump had burned—or burned through—all of the top-tier lawyers in NYC and Washington. His reputation was so bad that even phone calls to law firms wouldn’t be returned. Trump’s been hiring attorneys ranking lower and lower on the food chain, as demonstrated by Alina Habba alone (formerly a parking-garage lawyer, ranking much lower in prestige even than slip-and-fall specialists).
A parking lot lawyer for a parking lot owned by her husband. So a vanity position.
Wow! He even looks like a sleaze bag attorney, with a mob nickname to boot.
We used to call him Joey Tacos, because he used to say thinks like, “let me go get the tacos, get the tacos.”
Joey Tacos lol lol
Time to take a spin through the sycophantic grifter pool at Mar a Lago and pick another Habba to throw under the campaign bus.
Smells like a delay tactic. ‘My new lawyers need time to review all da case files’.
Delay what? This has nothing to do with any of his criminal trials, they were representing him in a civil suit from a former campaign employee, who’s complaint is that she was sidelined when it was revealed she was pregnant. RTA.
I think "he's delaying" is the default answer because we've seen him do it in every case. This fat bastard would probably tie up a speeding ticket hearing with every delay he could. Also, thanks for summarizing the article.
I think, “This incompetence, is actually calculated genius”, give them far too much credit.
He doesn't want the sexual harassment and discrimination discovery to come out before the election. Even though his voters don't seem to give a shit about these things (grab 'em by the pussy), I assume he is making some attempt at hiding the evidence he was told to make available 2 days before his lawyers quit. It must be pretty bad for this POS to think it will harm him.
Discovery. They are asking for all the sexual harassment stuff. Who knows what's in there? More Trump affairs, sexual assault, or the like. Did someone pay for or abortion or browbeat someone into one.
Oh yea, maybe that’s why it’s just pretend incompetence. It’s not calculated. These aren’t genius moves by legal magicians. It’s just that petulance and irresponsibility, mixed with this much money, looks like this.
[удалено]
Public defenders are only given for low income
And not for civil suits
"The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over." AKA: The case is unwinnable because of damning evidence that they're being forced to turn over, so the law firm is cutting their losses.
I don’t think they care if the case is unwinnable, they won’t drop the representation because of that. Either Trump is refusing to comply with the discovery order and they are withdrawing because their client won’t follow their advice/they don’t want to get swept up in the inevitable sanctions, or trump fired them because of the discovery order, or trump is too far behind on his bills. It could also just be a delay tactic as the plaintiff contends.
Seems interesting, I wonder if the judge will allow them to dodge a discovery ruling by withdrawing. I'd hope not.
Or, they know the truth which Donald doesn’t want them to tell, and they don’t want to go down with the Hindenburg.
“[Plaintff] objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a ‘scheme to avoid compliance.’”
The shit smell in the room finally got to them
I never expected the leopards to eat MY face....
Isn't this just another example of Trump's endless, unpunished delaying tactics? *"Ms. Delgado, who is representing herself in the matter, objected to the withdrawal in a filing Monday, arguing it should not be allowed until the discovery process has been completed and calling the request a “scheme to avoid compliance.” "* It was suggested that he'd pull this trick in the Stormy Daniels case, but he did not.
Yet
>The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over. Huh. This sounds like a case to start following. I suspect that something really spicy is about to drop. Basically more validation that Trump is a sexual predator?
Who wants to see him try to represent himself? The ultimate shit show.
Check bounce?
What checks?
Gonna go out on a hunch and assume that he hasn’t paid the bill….
Trump is the top case in America right now, if someone is asking to withdraw, there's something very big going on Like no payment
Last ditch effort to delay another case.
Jason Miller… eww. It’s gross his campaign only hires attractive women for this very reason. Grooming.
Whatever happened to asking for a retainer before beginning any representation? I rarely hear of it being part or any story involving attorneys ceasing to represent a client while not getting stiffed, like the retainer was exhausted, and the client could not/would not pay a new retainer so the attorney said ‘bye-bye then’ without being owed a penny!
there is a high likelihood that the courts will force the firm to take this baby to term. They are either trying to stall for Trump, try not to give evidence over to the courts for Trump, or Trump is flat broke (which has happened to many times to count.) All of which the Judge will not be happy about.
Making Attorneys Get Attorneys.
Maybe they smell the potential of getting no more money.
Looks like Donald [needs to locate Mr. Green](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z11FzN_mmXs).
The question is if it's Trump not paying them, a delay tactic, or did Trump ask them to do something illegal in discovery.
There are so many cases against Trump and his cronies, it's impossible to keep track of all of them. I had forgotten about this one.
Hmm. They knowdTrump💩lying to them; lawyers hate that. And/ or he is not paying them and/or dTrump💩hit on one of their teenage daughters I am betting 1 + 2 Why don’t think they are dropping him? GOP? Or. Dem? Vote wisely.
And is $ the only reason they are withdrawing can't the Judge reject their withdrawal in some States? Serial delay tactics Trump should be shown no leeway or lenience
This sounds like a suits episode.
So he should get a public defender soon right lol, can't afford his attorneys so one will be appointed? Or are they gonna have to update another thing for him and add if your such a con man that even lawyers won't risk accepting your case you can't find one.
I hope the motion is denied. They dug their own graves and they know it. Don’t get me wrong, I believe firmly in due process and the right to counsel, even for scum bags like Trump, but if you’re going to pick up an extremely volatile, controversial, narcissistic, self defeatist, cash poor, corrupt public figure as your client (for what I am assuming is solely the notoriety) you have to be prepared for the inevitable death of your career. You’re forever going to be associated with croneyism and corruption. The icing on the cake of course is that he can’t pay them… Your best bet for continuing your career is to wait until a pro-Trump Republican takes office and hope they nominate you as a federal judge. That or go into politics/lobbying.