top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 200 points 2 years ago (53 children)

He’s already lost, this trial is only to determine how much it will cost him. I think it’s more that he’s realized how bad his attorneys are, and that he’s going to lose everything.

  • source
  • hideshow 53 child comments
  • [–] 141 points 2 years ago* (24 children)

    And to think, all he had to do was not run for president of the United States (among many other things) and this probably never would have happened to him.

    I mean, I’ve never run for president of the United States, it’s a very easy thing to not do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    Seriously. Had he not ran, or dropped out early, he could have probably started his own fringe news channel and lived a relatively unchanged, trouble free life and probably made some money doing it.

    I personally think he expected to lose and wasn’t expecting the Russians to barely tip the scales to eek out an electoral college victory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (17 replies)
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago* (22 children)

    He’s almost certainly going to appeal whatever verdict he gets, claiming that he had ineffective legal council and that the judge was biased against him. Because the only effective reason you can appeal is if you don’t believe your trial was fair. So he’s basically stacking the “this trial was unfair” deck in his favor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 94 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    I hate to be that guy, but you can't appeal on ineffective assistance of counsel in a civil proceeding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] 79 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago

    I don't know, I just feel like correcting people on the internet often comes off as being pedantic even if that isn't the intention. That is why I included the disclaimer I suppose. Thanks for the kind words though, I appreciate it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 128 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I will never get tired of all this losing.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 2 years ago

    I would be happy with just one loss that actually sticks.

    I feel like all I read is, "Trump is really in trouble this time!" - but all I actually hear is Waylon Jennings saying, "Boy that Donald sure is in a heap ah trouble."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 107 points 2 years ago

    Trump knows he can't win in a court of law, so he wants to win in the court of public opinion, where a con-man like him actually has some leverage over the gullible.

  • source
  • [–] 78 points 2 years ago (20 children)

    Even if he loses, he will suffer no significant consequences, nor will the lawless movement that supports him.

    He could lose all of these cases tomorrow, and it still wouldn't mean a thing. He could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone, and there still would be no significant consequences.

    The GOP are a lawless terrorist movement, but everyone else wants to "take the high road."

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Convicted Sex Offender Treason Trump has already suffered huge consequences of losing his business license in NY and having his business go into receivership. In addition to the expected $250 million fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    True. This is literally the corporate death penalty. His corporate assets may have to be sold to pay the debts. They will not get much, as the brand name will have to be changed. It's the worst thing that could happen to a business owner.

    He will not be poor, but may end up with his name on worse buildings. Houston TX vs. Manhattan. And you know he doesn't want to leave NYC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 72 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Let’s everyone take a moment and collectively laugh at the sad little coward that’s downvoting all the comments for making fun of their beloved hero.

    No rebuttals. No arguments in defense- just butt-hurt worthless downvotes.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 57 points 2 years ago
    [–] 55 points 2 years ago
    [–] 49 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    John Yoo?

    "I think that Trump has already decided he's going to lose on the law," John Yoo, a Berkeley Law professor and former Justice Department official in the George W. Bush administration, told Fox News on Monday. "Last week, the judge already made all the key findings against him. So what I think President Trump has done is turn this all into a political strategy."

    Yeah... THAT John Yoo:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos

    "a March 13, 2003, legal opinion written by John Yoo of the Office of Legal Counsel, DoJ, and issued to the General Counsel of Defense five days before the U.S. invasion of Iraq started, concluding that federal laws related to use of torture and other abuse did not apply to agents interrogating foreigners overseas;[3] and other DoD internal memos authorizing techniques for specific military interrogations of certain individual detainees."

    and:

    "You have asked for this advice in the course of conducting interrogations of Abu Zubaydah."[6] The memo's author, John Yoo, acknowledged the memo authorized the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used by the CIA in Zubaydah's interrogation.[7] Yoo told an interviewer in 2007, "there was an urgency to decide so that valuable intelligence could be acquired from Abu Zubaydah, before further attacks could occur."[7]

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 71 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    John Yoo, a Berkeley Law professor and former Justice Department official in the George W. Bush administration

    It's insane that a guy like this who tried to get government torture legalized in the United States has now had a long, well-paying, distinguished career and is being referred to as "a Berkeley Law professor and former Justice Department official" instead of "torture guy."

    I guess having zero morals and ethics really does pay off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago

    It's ridiculous how much John Yoo's name comes up in media interviews. It's as infuriating as seeing Newt Gingrich or Grover Norquist's name crop up in every other article in the Washington Post, who scrambles to get their opinions on all things political. It's all one big circle-jerk of mainstream media, greedy politicians, and billionaires.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 49 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Look, you are allowed as a defendant in a criminal case or a civil case," he continued. "You're allowed to criticize the prosecutor, you're allowed to criticize the other party. You're allowed to criticize the judge."

    Are you allowed to criticize the judge like this, though? My understanding is that judges can nail people for contempt for far less. I know Trump is trying to score a political point here and a contempt of court ruling would play into that... but I wish one of these judges would go "idgaf" and bring down the hammer.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I mean, you're "allowed" to do many things if you don't care about the consequences. Trump right now can criticize the judge as much as he wants - so long as he's willing to suffer contempt of court rulings.

    You're right, though. Judges are being lenient on Trump with regard to his outside courtroom behavior due to his being a political figure. If you or I did what he has been doing, we'd be found in contempt of court ASAP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 47 points 2 years ago

    Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

  • source
  • [–] 46 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    I really just wanna see the judge eviscerate this “no victims” defense BS. We do NOT wait for someone to be hurt to enforce the law. Can you imagine how many speeding tickets would be pled out of if this was a legitimate defense?

    Even if you scope it down to the case at hand, we’d keep letting people commit financial fraud until the bank is finally harmed. And guess what happens when banks get fucked? The govt uses the common people’s tax dollars to bail them out.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 44 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    "It seems to me Donald Trump's strategy here is essentially damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead,"

    That has ALWAYS been Trump's strategy for everything.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 41 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Looks like the only path of the man is to become a dictator. Can't see any other ways for him to avoid being held to account at this point.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 37 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Already starting the next grift

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 33 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Lost? Well he already lost last week. This is the penalty phase.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 31 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Not that I disagree, but how the hell is a "legal expert" any prerequisite for judging what a person's behavior says about them? That's more of psychologist's job, being a legal expert means as much as "the builder of the best sandcastle in the universe" in this case.

    Not that it's very relevant to Trump, the only qualification required to analyze him is "being at least 5 year old of average intelligence". I just hate shitty titles, is all.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 28 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I love reading good news! like seeing the annoying orange finally tasting karma. I am making fresh popcorn

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 26 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    What are the chances of jail time? White collar crime like this effects way more people than petty theft, but I'm thinking at most it'll be a hefty fine. Again, like on most topics, I'm pretty ignorant of the reality of the situation.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago

    Unfortunately, this case, in a legal sense, is against his corporation, not him.

    It's ruling will likely result in the dissolution of said corporation and the barring of Trump doing business in NYC, just like a similar case did with his charities, from which he stole.

    That's the annoying thing with how corporations are handled in the US.

    What Trump did in the charity and this case is criminal fraud. But because it was all nicely wrapped in the form of some corporate entity, it's a civil case. That shit is fucked up.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Traitor orange is going down!

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Just because I'm guilty of all these crimes, it feels like this person wants to prosecute me for them - it's not fair!"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›