this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024

219 points (95.4% liked)

politics

18982 readers

3601 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

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

219

Experts slam Trump's lawyer for letting him testify: "Habba did absolutely no good for her client" (www.salon.com)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by MicroWave to c/politics

58 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"It's clear Trump wanted to avoid the bloodbath of a cross-examination but wanted to say something"

Former President Donald Trump spent just three minutes on the witness stand Thursday in his defamation trial brought by E. Jean Carroll, using his testimony to declare that he backs his prior deposition denying the writer's claims.

…

As Trump left the courtroom, according to The Messenger's Adam Klasfeld, he complained to the press in the gallery, saying, "It's not America. It's not America. This is not America."

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] dhork 70 points 8 months ago (3 children)

This article evaluates her based on her skill as a lawyer, defending her client. That's the job that every other lawyer does. That's not what Trump hired her for, though. Trump knows he will lose this. Her job is to delay the inevitable as much as possible. And she gets a bonus if she manages to get him some platform to air his grievances publically.

This is kind of at odds to the standards of the legal profession, though, and she will probably get disciplined for it. I just hope she was "fake smart" enough to get paid up front.

[–] eran_morad 46 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Bruh. He hired her because she gives his mushroom a funny feeling.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

I believe it's still called a spore at that size.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Back in the day, a lot of authentic cowboys headed to Hollywood to work as stuntmen. She's kind of like those cowboys; an actual lawyer playing the role of a lawyer.

[–] FlyingSquid 23 points 8 months ago (3 children)

You give her way too much credit. I've never taken the bar exam, but, based on having known some very stupid lawyers I am guessing several things:

There are different levels of difficulty in each state since each state has its own bar exam.
If you are stupid but have a decent memory, you can pass it because it doesn't require creative thought.
If you can't even do that, but you've got enough money, you can pay the right people in certain states and "pass" their bar exam.

Habba is just clearly stupid. I don't know why people are suggesting anything else.

She even essentially admitted as much.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

1 and 2 are more likely. It's pretty damn hard to bribe your way past the bar, you'd have to pay a lot of people and trust none of them care about their careers or potentially getting prosecuted.

[–] FlyingSquid 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Maybe, but this is also America, where you can do practically anything you want if you're rich.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

I'm actually curious how you'd even do it logistically. There's like three separate sets of people minimum for the tests, a whole anonymous grading system you'd have to game somehow and for that I'm pretty sure the person grading doesn't know the number of the paper they're grading, and then the actual admissions committee. I guess you could just bribe the admissions committee and have them fake a result but, again, there's a separate national multistate test whose results get factored in. Maybe pay someone to take the test for you but the chances they get caught are...medium.

The more I think about it, it's actually easier to just memorize law and pass the bar.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

As a dear friend of mine likes to say "Someone had to graduate at the bottom of the class."

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Look at Boebert and Sarah Palin. Neither is a scholar, but both won office. If you use what you have to get what you want, you're smart in my book. I wouldn't want her as my lawyer, but she'll probably end up a TV pundit with a six figure salary.

[–] jordanlund 3 points 8 months ago

Bobo and Caribou Barbie aren't lawyers though... which kind of strays from the topic of "dumb lawyers".

I do still wonder how Jack Thompson passed the bar... but Habba, Giuliani, Eastman, Powell and Wood make me think anyone could do it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Bobo and Caribou Barbie

I snorted milk out my nose. Just saying.

Look. These people didn't get the job on their skill but on the light drama they create while doing whatever they've been told to do to further their own success.

Just like another poster noted, that some have to graduate at the bottom of their class, the pool of scummy politicos on their last career option must be deep enough they could pick two with marketability and malleability to be a success as a conservative talking head.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

But this isn't a criminal case, it's a civil case in the state of New York. Even if Trump wins in November, he will still have to pay up, and wont be able to pardon himself or tell his AG to drop the case. All Habba us doing is pissing off the judge

[–] dhork 5 points 8 months ago

He's not paying a damn thing himself, it will come out of some SuperPAC. He doesn't care that it's illegal. He already knows nobody can investigate him if he is President, except for Congress, and he just needs 34 Senators willing to keep him away from any consequences of that.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Habba's mission is not to be a good lawyer within the rules and traditions of the courtroom. Habba's mission is to drag the proceedings as much as possible out of the rules of the courtroom, and into the rules of "I'm the leader, do as I say or I'll have you shot."

A lawyer who's staying within the rules of the courtroom is pretty much doomed to failure, and will interfere with mission #2 while they're failing, which is why Trump hates them. Trump is so generally incompetent that it remains to be seen whether mission #2 will be successful. But Trump and Habba are in no way using bad strategy when they try mission #2, because it's certainly possible to win that game, whereas mission #1 is a lost cause at this point.

[–] aseriesoftubes 20 points 8 months ago

She’s not trying to be his lawyer. She’s auditioning for the role of his next ex-wife.

[–] NounsAndWords 20 points 8 months ago

"And you say that because you personally made him aware of those confines?" Kaplan said before Trump loudly interrupted to tell his lawyer he "never met this woman." Kaplan then instructed Trump to keep his voice down.

Jesus fucking christ....

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Letting him testify

Cute they think that was her decision, let alone her idea to have him rant in the trial. Donnie wanted desperately to speak out in almost every prior case so far, and especially so now we are in primary season to maintain his victim complex

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

She's not a competent lawyer by even the most generous of standards. I agree that this was absolutely his idea, but she also has a fiduciary responsibility to her clients, so the blame is certainly hers. He can't actually take the stand unless called by a lawyer, and no competent lawyer would have done that (and some of his other lawyers even prevented him in other cases).

She's a colossal fuckup, no matter whose hairbrained idea it was initially.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You cannot blame a lawyer for allowing their client to testify, they literally have an ethical obligation to allow a client to testify if the client chooses to (ABA Model Rule 3.3(9) ). You can call her competency into question for other reasons, but she would absolutely be sanctioned if she didn't allow him to testify.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Neat! I learned something! Thanks.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Anytime! I don't respect her decision to advocate for Trump in any way, but she put herself in an extremely difficult situation. Not only are the facts extremely adverse to your side, you have to counsel such an unlikable, egotistical clown. She deserves so much of the criticism that she gets, even if only for being conceited enough to think she could come out of such a public trial without the sort of reputational harm she's receiving.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

He can't actually take the stand unless called by a lawyer

While technically true, his lawyer must call him to the stand if he wants it. Lawyers aren’t ethically allowed to silence their own clients’ testimony, even if it is damaging to the case. The lawyer can argue with the client ahead of time and tell them it’s a horrible idea. But if the client refuses to budge and insists, the lawyer has an ethical obligation to call them to the stand. She could literally be cited by the bar association for refusing to let him testify.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

And I guess that's the reason why two of his lawyers withdrew, one even the day before trial, because they could not convince him to stay silent and did not want to watch him testify and could not hinder him to testify because of the law.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Victim complex yes, but I'm also sure he's convinced he could talk his way out of it. He's been able to do that or pay the right people off his whole life so far, and these cases ending poorly for him surely has him convinced that everyone involved is just "doing it wrong" and he needs to step in and fix it himself.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

It's not America he is used to, for all these years of golfing, being a showman and conman and hanging out with Epstein and Co with no care for the world around. He could do that until he die, the US of A could've let him. But for whatever reason he went all in.

[–] Laughbone 16 points 8 months ago

Your right Donnie it’s not if it was America you would have been held in contempt long ago.

[–] Daft_ish 11 points 8 months ago

"Let him"

You guys would hand Trump a mistrial on a silver platter.

[–] SeabassDan 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Hey, they let Ted Bundy represent himself because he was obviously better than his legal counsel. He just happened to also be guilty.

[–] Madison420 2 points 8 months ago

They have to let you represent yourself so long as you're competent to do so, they can assign you a state ordered attorney so things go smoother with filings but it's quite literally a constitutional right.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but were they slammed from like the top rung or just normal slammed?

[–] SkybreakerEngineer 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Slammed like nineteen ninety eight something something announcer table

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

God, I miss shittymorph.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The only place you'll find a worse lawyer than Habba is a Simpson's episode.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Fridgeratr 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

SLAAAAAAMMMMMM

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

AND WELCOME TO THE JAM

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"Slam"

Find a better word.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Habba argued that her arguments for the case's dismissal were being misunderstood, offering to clarify them for the judge. But Kaplan's response was short. “No,” he replied.

He hired some less than excellent bimbo lawyer and it's working out predictably

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Based on the lawsuit against her by a former client, she's an insane backstabbing snake, not a bimbo.

Her husband was a member at one of Trump's golf courses. She finds out that a waitress at the course was sueing the place and her manager because he had sexually abused her for years and coerced her into it with job threats.

She befriended the woman, convinced her to drop the actually beneficial lawyer she had, got her to sign an NDA and accept a pittance sum under 20k. Then dropped the woman as a client.

Allegedly that's how she got the job with Trump. She turned around and went to him and told him what she did and how she saved him millions of dollars.

However, as I said, the woman is now sueing her and she is facing potentially being disbarred for that evil act.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He's gotta be running out of lawyers willing to take him as a client at this point

[–] GladiusB 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He isn't already?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

There's a point there. Ms habbas appears to be what one gets when one has run out of competent lawyers. Without a friendly judge and a good case, the odds of success arent good.

load more comments