Trump backs out testifying tomorrow

[Jim H - VA USA]

Maybe Trump thinks this is a PR campaign.

Well, for sure, since he's running for POTUS, he has to manage the PR of issues like indictments and court cases.

I am okay with his message, although I would have written it without all caps and ego.

I know you don't agree, but I think it is a witch hunt and election interference. Dems have said that "Trump is a threat to Democracy," at the same time they Try to prevent the American people from voting for him. The inflated property valuation charges are pathetic and transparently political.

Regards,
Jim

 

[Arlette]

Well, for sure, since he's running for POTUS, he has to manage the PR of issues like indictments and court cases.

I am okay with his message, although I would have written it without all caps and ego.

I know you don't agree, but I think it is a witch hunt and election interference. Dems have said that "Trump is a threat to Democracy," at the same time they Try to prevent the American people from voting for him. The inflated property valuation charges are pathetic and transparently political.

Regards,
Jim

What you or me think of Trump has no bearing on any of his cases. Only provable facts matter. He's still ranting about the worth of Mar A Lago like he's fucking retarded. He was found guilty of systemic fraud in running the Trump Organization.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

He was found guilty of systemic fraud in running the Trump Organization.

There were no charges even brought against Trump, much less a guilty verdict against him. Do you think they gave him a "pass?"

 

[Arlette]

There were no charges even brought against Trump, much less a guilty verdict against him. Do you think they gave him a "pass?"

You are uninformed. L. James brought charges and he was found guilty in a summary judgment.

 

[The Duke]

This NY think is a huge blemish on the justice system. The sooner they fix whatever went wrong to allow

garbage like that to happen, the better. Personally I think there should be criminal charges filed for misusing

the judicial system.

 

[The Duke]

You are uninformed. L. James brought charges and he was found guilty in a summary judgment.

Before any evidence was presented.

That is ultimate kangaroo court BS right there.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Hunter has 9 indictments and the money trail is now established to Papa Joe. But keep denying and distracting yourself, by all means.

Trump isn't guilty because Hunter Biden is??? There's no logic in that.

 

[okfine]

Trump is a Schlappschwanz

Trump and Matt?

 

[kyzr]

Letitia James has a crooked judge, not the law on her side.

The Curious Fraud Case Against Trump Just Got ‘Curiouser’

Below is my column in The Messenger on the recent testimony of bankers in the Trump fraud trial. The testimony put the controversial demands of New York Attorney General James into sharp relief. Th…

jonathanturley.org

James is known for her embrace of nuclear options when it comes to political opponents or groups. She previously sought to persuade a court to force the dissolution of the National Rifle Association. The question is, what happens if she finally has found an enabling judge in Engoron?

 

[kyzr]

This NY think is a huge blemish on the justice system. The sooner they fix whatever went wrong to allow

garbage like that to happen, the better. Personally I think there should be criminal charges filed for misusing

the judicial system.

Yep, a malicious prosecution:

malicious prosecution

noun​

1. A common law intentional tort which arises from a party (1) intentionally and maliciously instituting or pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the other party.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

A few days ago his lawyer said:

“He will take that stand on Monday. He will open himself up to whatever they want because he’s not afraid. People who are afraid cower. Trump doesn’t cower.”

I guess he decided to cower. No surprise.

He's already testified, so your accusation is meaningless. The last thing I'm going to do is defend Tiny, but if you're going to attack someone, come correct.

 

[Arlette]

Before any evidence was presented.

That is ultimate kangaroo court BS right there.

Overwhelming evidence of fraud. Systemic

 

[Crepitus]

Hunter has 9 indictments and the money trail is now established to Papa Joe. But keep denying and distracting yourself, by all means.

Nine?

Fucking amature.

 

[Crepitus]

A few days ago his lawyer said:

“He will take that stand on Monday. He will open himself up to whatever they want because he’s not afraid. People who are afraid cower. Trump doesn’t cower.”

I guess he decided to cower. No surprise.

dOnald tRump is a high-yield perjury bomb with a hair trigger.

I knew he would never testify.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Before any evidence was presented.

That is ultimate kangaroo court BS right there.

No, it's called summary judgment. Summary judgment is normal part of the practice of law. A party to a case may move for summary judgment, on the basis that there are no material facts in dispute between the parties. Where no facts are in dispute, the parties are entitled to have the case resolved as a matter of law. There is, therefore, no need to try the case before a trier of fact, and the judge will decide the case based on legal arguments alone, upon the facts which both sides agree on.

A motion for summary judgment is easily defeated when the responding party successfully presents even a single matter of relevant fact over which the parties have some dispute. Even less than that, if one of the parties so much as implies that a factual matter might be in dispute, then a motion for summary judgment cannot succeed.

So the reason summary judgment was granted in this case is because Donald and his legal team agreed with all of the facts alleged by the AG.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

dOnald tRump is a high-yield perjury bomb with a hair trigger.

I knew he would never testify.

Again, he already has testified. Do keep up with the facts.

 

[The Duke]

No, it's called summary judgment. Summary judgment is normal part of the practice of law. A party to a case may move for summary judgment, on the basis that there are no material facts in dispute between the parties. Where no facts are in dispute, the parties are entitled to have the case resolved as a matter of law. There is, therefore, no need to try the case before a trier of fact, and the judge will decide the case based on legal arguments alone, upon the facts which both sides agree on.

A motion for summary judgment is easily defeated when the responding party successfully presents even a single matter of relevant fact over which the parties have some dispute. Even less than that, if one of the parties so much as implies that a factual matter might be in dispute, then a motion for summary judgment cannot succeed.

So the reason summary judgment was granted in this case is because Donald and his legal team agreed with all of the facts alleged by the AG.

So you're telling me Trump and his lawyers allowed this one on purpose without disputing anything?

Maybe it was to flush out some corruption, if so. Wow.

I should be doing some pushups, and I'm not.

 

[BackAgain]

But but but you give Trump a pass.

Nah. I just note (correctly) that Potato is actually quite demented.

Trump has his faults. That much is obvious even to his supporters.

The difference is, Trump supporters can and do admit it. You Potato puffers won’t acknowledge that Brandon belongs in a different home. And old age home.

 

[Arlette]

Again, he already has testified. Do keep up with the facts.

But his team announced that he would do so again. That he wouldn't cower. Trump is a sniveling coward.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

So you're telling me Trump and his lawyers allowed this one on purpose without disputing anything?

I don't think it's accurate to say they allowed it on purpose. But when the AG moved for summary judgement (more specifically partial summary judgment) Donald and his lawyers failed to present even a single question of fact that was in dispute.