Just another lie from the rapist.

Now he'll claim he wasn't allowed to.

The lies and crimes keep coming.

He doesn’t know what TRUTH means!

Sure has been quiet from the usual Trumpateers lately……And no, orange jesus isn’t going to testify.

At any given time he says what he thinks will serve his own interests best. That’s his only motivation and aim.

That's how I knew he wouldn't.

If that son-of-a-bitch tells you it's sunny outside open your umbrella.

If none of it is true as he has repeatedly stated, get up on the stand, take an oath and say so.

He knows that he would get ripped up on cross-examination. No place to hide, no bullshit or prevarications or lies. Just questions and a judge telling him to answer them.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
If none of it is true as he has repeatedly stated, get up on the stand, take an oath and say so.

He knows that he would get ripped up on cross-examination. No place to hide, no bullshit or prevarications or lies. Just questions and a judge telling him to answer them.

It would have been hugely embarrassing for the Prosecutors if the defense had said "The Defense calls Donald J. Trump."

Ejaculating in your pants is considered poor courtroom decorum...

Just another orange jesus promise broken.What else is new? Now it’s time for the Texas Trumpateers to ‘splain it to us lesser mortals…

The “Texas Trumpateers” know very well who Trump is. They know that he is a liar, but character doesn’t matter if Trump advances their perceived cause.

It’s understandable why so many support Trump: They are fucking dumb people, but it’s baffling where seemingly intelligent people would support him. Oh, sure it’s understandable why political lackeys in Washington DC grovel and some billionaires are more concerned about tax advantages, but the educated person who claims to be a red-blooded American? Just baffling.

trump couldn't testify because he developed "tongue spurs".

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
trump couldn't testify because he developed "tongue spurs".

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
trump couldn't testify because he developed "tongue spurs".

Not bad.

Why on earth would he take the stand? The prosecution totally failed to prove its case. Second, this biased judge chastised everyone who even looked at him cross-eyed when he mad a dubious ruling. Nothing to be gained by Trump taking the stand.

If by some miracle, the prosecution can get 12 idiots to vote for conviction, which only happens if they are true morons or as corrupt as the prosecutor and the judge, it couldn't stand on appeal.

And I'm not a Trumper. I wish the Republican party could have found a better candidate, but they didn't and Trump was a good president, much better than Biden was or could ever be.

“Why would he take the stand?”, you asked.

First, he has called the claims against him as fake and repeatedly promise to respond to them by testifying. Beacause we know that he is a bald-faced liar, most of us knew that the piece of dog shit was never going to testify

2. Well, you suggest that jury may be made up of morons. If that possibility exists, wouldn’t it be wise for Trump to get up there, spill out the truth and convince these morons?

I love it, you who haven’t heard or seen a minute of the testimony have already classified the jury as morons if they convict. You, my little dweeb, are the moron. Unbelievable that you are a lawyer as you claim. I’ve seen a bunch of dumb lawyers, but you, my little dweeb, take the cake.

If he was a trial lawyer, he'd know better than to say things like that without seeing and listening to all the evidence himself.

What sort of law do you think he practices? Wills? Trusts? Bonds?

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
If he was a trial lawyer, he'd know better than to say things like that without seeing and listening to all the evidence himself.

What sort of law do you think he practices? Wills? Trusts? Bonds?

Probably Alina Habba's partner in Parking Garage litigation.

Insurance Defense Lawyer.

The number one tactic is to get legislatures to change the law giving insulation to protect his clients from juries.

Well, I’ve got a lot of lawyers in my family.

The universal comment is avoid trials. You never know what a jury will do.

Remember that the average person has an IQ of 100, and likely half of your jury pool will be below that.

Admittedly, none of them practice criminal law.

And yes, they often tell me I don’t get the law. It often doesn’t mean what the plain English means, and quite regularly doesn’t do what it was supposed to by legislative and popular intent. That’s why you need lawyers… to navigate what should be sensible and logical but isn’t because of a morass of interpretation and precedent.

Add politics into the law and it’s just a plain mess.

Nothing is guaranteed. However, there are cases civil included that you need trial as leverage.

If you are afraid to try a case, you cannot maximize results for your client. Nor can you bring a criminal defendant to heel.

Discovery is meant to make the other side uncomfortable w trial.

If you are afraid to try a case, you should not bring it in the first place. That is the rule taught to me both civilly and criminally.

There is no disputing insurance, medical providers, businesses number one play is get the legislature to remove from us liability in the first place.

See the Senate hearing on the Social Media Firns who were given immunity from suit by Congress.

Yapping dogs. Alone, a mere annoyance, but if there are enough of them, they can tree a leopard. Cowardly way to hunt, but successful for some. Too many yapping dogs in this country.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Yapping dogs. Alone, a mere annoyance, but if there are enough of them, they can tree a leopard. Cowardly way to hunt, but successful for some. Too many yapping dogs in this country.

Hunting leopard begins dogs is much more dangerous than hunting for a bait blind.

Ask the Boddingtons.

Am analogy that fails.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Yapping dogs. Alone, a mere annoyance, but if there are enough of them, they can tree a leopard. Cowardly way to hunt, but successful for some. Too many yapping dogs in this country.

Hunting leopard begins dugs is Mitch more dangerous then hunting for a bait blind.

Ask the Boddingtons.

Am analogy that fails.

WOW!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by lavaca:
Yapping dogs. Alone, a mere annoyance, but if there are enough of them, they can tree a leopard. Cowardly way to hunt, but successful for some. Too many yapping dogs in this country.[/QUOT

Absolute total, unequivocal bullshit. Snipe from a blind or face a close range charge…. Trump prefers to snipe, delay, bitch and moan instead of facing charges straight up head on. Fucking coward….