Bigking321
Well-known member
I dunno...
Not having a lawyer seems incredibly risky.
Not having a lawyer seems incredibly risky.
If he's smart, he's got a team of lawyers helping him put together his case behind the scenes. They just won't be there in the courtroom.I dunno...
Not having a lawyer seems incredibly risky.
It's not about winning the lawsuit.It's stupid.
Because if it is a glowie appointed judge it will make it even harder for him to win without lawyers directly there
And if he gets indicted how will that help?It's not about winning the lawsuit.
The Obama birth certificate thing wasn't about proving anything about that, either.
It's about very publicly fighting a fight that will rile up your electoral base.
How would this get him indibted. Trump is suing the government here.And if he gets indicted how will that help?
Thinking it was them trying to indict on the raid.How would this get him indibted. Trump is suing the government here.
That's not how lawsuits work. He's suing them over (alleged) misconduct on their part.And if he gets indicted how will that help?
I gotcha.That's not how lawsuits work. He's suing them over (alleged) misconduct on their part.
EDIT: Ah, ninja'd!
Trump is supposedly going to represent himself in the suit against the DoJ...
What make you think that?So a) he's gonna lose, and b) his case has no merit. Maybe he has lawyers behind the scenes, but I doubt it.
Because having lawyers behind the scenes is quite frankly weird, and possibly against lawyer ethics (IDK about this, but I could see it be a thing).What make you think that?
Why would this be bad ethics from a lawyer's perspective?Because having lawyers behind the scenes is quite frankly weird, and possibly against lawyer ethics (IDK about this, but I could see it be a thing).
Lawyers have ethics they need to follow (for example, they can't lie). By writing something, then not putting your name to it, it could be seen as dodging responsibility. Doesn't seem to be the case here though, as the lawyers names appear to be on the memorandum.Why would this be bad ethics from a lawyer's perspective?
They'd simply be "legal advisors" in this case, which is completely legal. Formally, they'd just... advise. Trump would be 100% responsible for his own statements in court, even if he literally reads out a text written by his team.Lawyers have ethics they need to follow (for example, they can't lie). By writing something, then not putting your name to it, it could be seen as dodging responsibility. Doesn't seem to be the case here though, as the lawyers names appear to be on the memorandum.
There's a possibility he's expecting some shenanigans on the part of the US government. If they're not going to let it reach a courtroom, it doesn't really matter how he'd do in one by himself.It's possible but I'm not sanguine about it.
If your enemy is of choleric temperament, provoke him. -Sun Tzu
A lot of court tactics revolve around trying to irritate the other lawyer into making a mistake. Trump is prone to anger in the first place and can be easily led into saying something stupid if he's not extremely careful. Regardless of how good the advice, if the lawyers aren't there to react to incoming events, they can't really prepare Trump properly for what might happen in the field.
It's like having a green LT fight a seasoned enemy, while also having a seasoned leader giving the LT advice before the battle. The plan's not going to survive first contact with the enemy and the advice just isn't going to cover that.
His goal might just be to make a total spectacle of the whole thing and accuse the Judge of being an Epstein client to his face in front of a bunch of TV cameras.
Cause as much disorder in the court as possible in furtherance of his quest to delegitimize the system.
Which is kinda redundant since everyone mistrusts everything government or global Corp related any way. But whatever boomer moment.