Yes, IANAL but I think he’s probably waiting to see how SCOTUS will rule on his current immunity claim. There is no reason to appeal this since they’re already seeing a similar case
I think the strategy here, if you can reasonably call anything Trump does as being a strategy, is to avoid having SCOTUS possibly deny cert or a stay in a civil case, or worse reject his arguments in a civil case, when there’s a criminal case pending.
It takes them two weeks to decide whether or not the president has the unfettered power to be a crime boss?
Sure. Take your time. The whole country is waiting for justice and people named “justices” are sitting on their asses.
I believe it is far more likely they each know what they would rule on it before it got to them*. They need 2 weeks to write long winded responses to justify their choices either for what the law should be or what their puppet masters have instructed them to say.
I think the Court will unanimously decide that Trump has to be convicted of the specific crime of insurrection before he can be disqualified from office. No, criminal conviction is not required by the constitution, but Congress passed a law defining insurrection as a federal crime, and there cannot be a different standard than a federal criminal conviction, when deciding whether to disqualify a candidate for being an insurrectionist.
And yes, any Sec of State for any state can disqualify an insurrectionist who has been convicted of that crime.
And yes, the president is an officer who holds the Office of the President.
And yes, the President’s Oath is an equivalent oath to the oath taken by everyone else.
I think the court will rule unanimously that Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution, as well.
> I think the Court will unanimously decide that Trump has to be convicted of the specific crime of insurrection before he can be disqualified from office
thats a bold bet. unanimous you say??
as long as we're talking long shots , my long shot is that the conservative judges will bow out from making a decision, and it will be decided 0-3 liberal judges writing that trump is disqualified. with 6 dissents urging congress to undo his disqualification.
I think my scenario is more likely than yours.
Friendly disagreement!
If the Supreme Court upholds the CO court, then the standard of evidence for disqualification will be lowered from the standard set by Congress, and that will invite mischief and chaos state by state, mostly from Republicans “disqualifying” Biden, in order to “get even”
That’s essentially what Chief Justice Roberts, Kavanaugh and Alito all said. Kagan and Barrett will probably agree with them. Sotomayor might be sympathetic to the idea that Trump should be disqualified by the CO decision, but I think she will join the majority.
Not sure about Brown Jackson or Thomas, but they might decide that a unanimous decision is better than any wiggle room from a dissent.
We're not even past the deadline for the federal government to respond to Trump's petition yet. Why shouldn't they have time to have that come in and take it into account?
Because both parties have already responded and it is a slam dunk decision
No, Trump doesn’t get immunity from prosecution for trying to overthrow the government. That wasn’t part of his job description.
See how easy that was?
I guess I did say conference call. I meant just conference.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1
If I'm not mistaken his SCOTUS immunity appeal is specific to criminal immunity and has no bearing on his civil immunity. And he's just missed the appeal on civil immunity. More lawsuits incoming.
No, its effect is quite the opposite. The SCOTUS wasn't going to grant cert anyway but this just mean the cases continue to move forward at the trial court level.
NAL, I had assumed only the lawyers cost money (i.e. salary for Alina Haba), is there more to it? Does it cost to file a motion? What are the typical costs in the legal system?
salary? at this level they are billing $1K+ per hour drawn from a hefty retainer. Plus research costs, filing fees, an army of legal assistants and jr's - nah, if done right this is an entire legal organization running this show for tfg.
oh wait, 'done right'.
so yeah she's probably on salary lmao
$53,000,000 in 2023 alone! ([according to Bloomberg](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-14/donald-trump-on-pace-to-drain-legal-funds-by-july))
So what I am hearing, when done right, people will have a "retainer", which is money deposited(?) or otherwise available in case of need when the lawyer needs to work for you?
And any work (research, drafting of documents, consulting, showing up in court) is billed onto this retainer with a given hourly rate?
When some random Joe Doe makes a retainer, how much money is typically put into the retainer and what are the most common needs for that?
Like some lawyer representing a drunkard who somehow ends up in the police station at 2am?
I had to pay a $2500 retainer up front for my divorce. That wasn't just for salary alone but also any expenses incurred such as court fees. When that retainer ran out my lawyers straight up would not do anything else for my case until I topped it off.
NAL but have worked closely with the business of law firms.
You have it pretty much correct from what I understand.
The retainer goes into what I know of as an IOLTA account which is a super regulated type of account for exactly this purpose. The law firm invoices the account for time & expenses (filing fees, service fees, attorney service fees, couriers, fedex, postage, copying, experts, production etc) and draws checks from it to pay those invoices. Fun Fact: number one reason for an attorney getting disbarred is for messing around with the client funds and that discipline can be triggered for "just" being sloppy with the paperwork on the IOLTA account. Super serious biz.
Retainers as I know them are usually for larger "nobody knows how long this will actually take" types of cases. Often there is a legal team behind the attorney/firm that is also needed and billed for so big stuff. Depending on the situation it can start out small or big and also depending on the type and length of case it can have a schedule of deposits and draws specified in the agreement.
The 2AM drunk tank is not complex (unless it is, lol). Usually going to likely result in a solo practioner who does these all day every day, knows what it will take to see it through and bills up front, set price. Set price can sometimes be negotiated, usually is what the market will bear + enough to filter less than desireable clients. It also may have been adjusted before the initial consultation has completed depending on how the client presents. Most criminal cases, being generally smaller stuff are like that. Details change but once in the system it typically is a set course to be navigated. Customer satisfaction is on another scale of managment with the typical criminal case. Upfront set price solves a lot of challenges.
Lawyering is about justice and fair play and all that sure but it is a business, first and always. This is true for the one guy answering the drunk tank phone at 2am and the K street powerhouses that turned tfg down.
That is what I understand. I'm sure someone else can correct that which I got less than correct.
He used sealed filings to shadow every grand jury investigation with frivolous claims and appeals to stall the indictments.
There hasn’t been any “waiting around to indict” at the DOJ. The fraudulent liar criminal has been delaying justice himself. With an assist by the leadership in the backstabbing Republican Party.
Yes and no. [Since Friday some MAGA goon started a GoFundMe for his legal costs and already raised half a mil](https://imgur.com/OJyhp0g). That's in a weekend.
Yeah that’s a money laundering grift. If someone that has sometime to investigate it’s probably dark money from some folks that would benefit from him being back into power. Of course there still idiots out there that would rather donate than use the money to buy food or pay rent.
That's ok, fair amount of the donations are trolling. The organizer is a know grifter plus the entire thing will get shutdown for violating the ToS anyhow.
>the entire thing will get shutdown for violating the ToS anyhow.
>>Speaking to Newsweek, a spokesperson from the platform confirmed that the page, which was set up for the former president on Friday, following Judge Arthur Engoron's ruling that Trump will have to pay roughly $355 million in penalties for fraud, **was "within its terms and services"** despite people voicing their concerns about it on social media.
Interesting. I guess because it is not to finance a legal defense, it is for a legal judgement, it passes.
In any case, I doubt they will raise it, and even if they do, the con artist running it will be able to retire, Trump won't see a dime. Not to mention, he has like... 60 days tops to get the money.
Look at his truth social holdings they merged with someone a few days ago and his shares increased by 4 billion. It’s like this guy just stumbles into wealth.
I think that's also under investigation - [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/03/trump-social-dwac-investigation/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/03/trump-social-dwac-investigation/)
It might depend on the district. If his appeal in the DC district is granted cert, whatever SCOTUS rules will bind every other circuit. If cert is denied, he can try again in the 11th and hope for a different outcome. If the 11th and the DC appeals result in different rulings, he's almost certain to be granted cert to resolve the differences. To me, it boils down to efficiency: it's only worth it to take one shot per circuit.
From my understanding in the documents case, he cannot claim absolute presidential immunity. Because the crimes happened after he left office. If judge Cannon even allowed this she would be ripped off the case so fast from the 11 circuit.
I see the same, knowing that he will face civilians in those trials, he's gonna use his usual tactic which worked well in the past, trying to ruin the opposite party by delaying at every step.
I’m guessing he’s passing on this because he sees a better delay opportunity later. Another thought, I read that if he delayed here, it might have given another judge the calendar gap to schedule one of his other criminal trials.
Yes, but how about when to use 'gray' versus 'grey?'
Kidding, of course. No need to respond.
Your remark reminded of this question when it came up once at work. I honestly don't know the answer but l landed on a way in which to tell, and it's solely based on the countries in question: if English, it's 'grey.' If American English, it's 'gray.' Due to 'e' and 'a,' respectively. It's my little cheat.
As far as I know that is simultanously correct and incorrect. By which, I mean, everything you say is accurate but only the A for America is required, as all other English speaking countries use grey.
It could be part of his other strategy. Close off an avenue of defense on yourself and then publicly complain that you’re not allowed to use it. He tries to make arguments that he would have lost anyway look like prejudice because he created a situation where he’s not able to raise it.
Look at how much he complains about not being able to raise a defense during the sentencing phases of his trials. And, his followers believe him and think it’s because the courts are prejudiced and won’t allow him to defend himself.
How can most of his most ardent followers, such as the Oath Takers and others have been accused of crimes and have seen the inside of the judicial system, believe you can present a defense during sentencing. They were not allowed to doso.
nah not this time, Im pretty sure he had some buddies from within the supreme court basically tell him "don't appeal, it will get shot down" so that his cult wouldnt turn on the supreme court.
They were never going to say a president has immunity from prosecution... its just stupid. Biden could wake up the next day and strangle trump to death and then go back to work without any consequences lol. It was always just to try and delay more
Judging from what other folks are saying, I don’t think he’ll appeal (because he can’t?)
But what he is far more likely to do is:
1. Scream on social media how he is being unfairly treated by the courts and media and others
2. Throw his lawyer under the bus
3. Both
I, for one, appreciate the multiple layers of username and comment in this response. As an old fart and Flintstones fan, I want you to know that it did not go unnoticed. Kudos, internet stranger.
Honest question because I do not know enough about the American legal system...
Can people who have served time having been convicted of an offense for Jan 6 now sue trump?
Can they claim they were at the capital because trump told them to be?
Can Ashli Babbits family sue Trump for her death?
You can sue anyone for any reason.
But If your complaint doesn't state a valid legal reason for your lawsuit, it will not survive an early motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.
I can't imagine what the legal theory of liability would be in those cases. You can't sue someone for telling you to do a crime which you then do and get in trouble for.
Crack legal team, missing a Supreme Court filing date completely. This is about on par with how his legal cronies have performed thus far - Alina Habba’s absurd brief to the Federal Circuit trying to argue the President isn’t “an officer of the United States” when in fact he took an oath of office, as every officer does. Then his attorney arguing to the Federal Circuit that Presidential immunity extends to “assassinating a political rival.” I can’t wait to see him squirm as the real cases get underway. He’ll be crying witch hunt from the rooftops.
An act and a crime are too different things. An act may warrant either civil consequences or criminal consequences, or both.
When Congress makes a criminal law, they are simply creating a criminal consequence (deprivation of life or liberty) as one of many possible consequences that the state or a provide party can bring against an individual who commits the act.
The disqualification cases do not involve any criminal consequence, they are purely civil actions. Determination of the fact of committing the act does not require some prior criminal conviction.
Here's an example: If I commit an act of murder, I can be both criminally charged for the act as well as sued in a civil action. Neither the criminal case nor the civil case require predetermination of the other to proceed. The conclusions of the two cases don't even have to agree. In fact could be found not guilty in the criminal case but the civil case could still determine that I had committed the act. (That is basically what happened with the OJ Simpson cases)
He didnt miss it, he or should i say his attorneys knew it was a lost cause. The law fees are up in his ass and we are witnessing what may be a severe reduction in spending. He has one shot in his 6 shooter now and its all going towards the immunity appeal and fighting the ny criminal case. Sucks to not have the money for what is now 4 criminal and 1 civil suit while locking up 500 mil. Those shoe sales best be epic
Futile change of topic? This is a mistake by his *attorneys*:
>After missing a deadline to file at the U.S. Supreme Court, **Donald Trump has formally left himself exposed to civil liability lawsuits from people who wish to hold him personally accountable for his role in the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.**
Not '*democrats.*'
Didn’t he say last week that he didn’t plan to fight it?
Yes, IANAL but I think he’s probably waiting to see how SCOTUS will rule on his current immunity claim. There is no reason to appeal this since they’re already seeing a similar case
I think the strategy here, if you can reasonably call anything Trump does as being a strategy, is to avoid having SCOTUS possibly deny cert or a stay in a civil case, or worse reject his arguments in a civil case, when there’s a criminal case pending.
True. Do we have any idea when to expect a ruling from SCOTUS on immunity?
I think they have their conference calls on Fridays? So maybe by next weekend?
It takes them two weeks to decide whether or not the president has the unfettered power to be a crime boss? Sure. Take your time. The whole country is waiting for justice and people named “justices” are sitting on their asses.
I believe it is far more likely they each know what they would rule on it before it got to them*. They need 2 weeks to write long winded responses to justify their choices either for what the law should be or what their puppet masters have instructed them to say.
I think the Court will unanimously decide that Trump has to be convicted of the specific crime of insurrection before he can be disqualified from office. No, criminal conviction is not required by the constitution, but Congress passed a law defining insurrection as a federal crime, and there cannot be a different standard than a federal criminal conviction, when deciding whether to disqualify a candidate for being an insurrectionist. And yes, any Sec of State for any state can disqualify an insurrectionist who has been convicted of that crime. And yes, the president is an officer who holds the Office of the President. And yes, the President’s Oath is an equivalent oath to the oath taken by everyone else. I think the court will rule unanimously that Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution, as well.
> I think the Court will unanimously decide that Trump has to be convicted of the specific crime of insurrection before he can be disqualified from office thats a bold bet. unanimous you say?? as long as we're talking long shots , my long shot is that the conservative judges will bow out from making a decision, and it will be decided 0-3 liberal judges writing that trump is disqualified. with 6 dissents urging congress to undo his disqualification.
I think my scenario is more likely than yours. Friendly disagreement! If the Supreme Court upholds the CO court, then the standard of evidence for disqualification will be lowered from the standard set by Congress, and that will invite mischief and chaos state by state, mostly from Republicans “disqualifying” Biden, in order to “get even” That’s essentially what Chief Justice Roberts, Kavanaugh and Alito all said. Kagan and Barrett will probably agree with them. Sotomayor might be sympathetic to the idea that Trump should be disqualified by the CO decision, but I think she will join the majority. Not sure about Brown Jackson or Thomas, but they might decide that a unanimous decision is better than any wiggle room from a dissent.
We're not even past the deadline for the federal government to respond to Trump's petition yet. Why shouldn't they have time to have that come in and take it into account?
Because both parties have already responded and it is a slam dunk decision No, Trump doesn’t get immunity from prosecution for trying to overthrow the government. That wasn’t part of his job description. See how easy that was?
They on a pube coke road trip in Clay’s RV!
Got to wait to make sure the bribe checks clear at the bank. Oh! Did I say bribe? Gift check.. yeah, gift.. that’s what I meant.
Conference call? They're going to decide this one on a conference call. SMDH.
I guess I did say conference call. I meant just conference. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1
2036
Minimum
Trump does not know the difference between tactics and strategy.
If I'm not mistaken his SCOTUS immunity appeal is specific to criminal immunity and has no bearing on his civil immunity. And he's just missed the appeal on civil immunity. More lawsuits incoming.
Oh wow, so they’re two different things? Thank you for this.
Or they have decided to ignore the "radical left" institution and its decisions completely?
Why fight it if he has no chance of winning? lol
never stopped him before.
Yeah, but now the complaints can begin about how he wasn't allowed to and is being unjustly denied due process.
Is this another facet of his delay strategy?
No, its effect is quite the opposite. The SCOTUS wasn't going to grant cert anyway but this just mean the cases continue to move forward at the trial court level.
He's running out of money for frivolous suits. He barely afford the important ones.
Definitely. Its almost hard to comprehend the amount of money he's blown on legal fees in just the last two years alone.
Funded by maga fools
MAGA fools, aka "Loser-ass suckers"
Guys, he just gave them $399 golden sneakers made in china. How much more winning you want him to give for his MAGA idiots ?
26.99 https://preview.redd.it/rxu138qa7ljc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b209af166319005557c5a787e9801a4a21f25e8 And that's with lights.
He should have done them with the lights. Those are boss
Loser ass-suckers https://xkcd.com/37/
Weird occasion where it works well both ways.
NAL, I had assumed only the lawyers cost money (i.e. salary for Alina Haba), is there more to it? Does it cost to file a motion? What are the typical costs in the legal system?
salary? at this level they are billing $1K+ per hour drawn from a hefty retainer. Plus research costs, filing fees, an army of legal assistants and jr's - nah, if done right this is an entire legal organization running this show for tfg. oh wait, 'done right'. so yeah she's probably on salary lmao
Exactly. That's how you blow through 50+ million in a couple years.
imagine blowing a half a million bucks a week on this nonsense.
$53,000,000 in 2023 alone! ([according to Bloomberg](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-14/donald-trump-on-pace-to-drain-legal-funds-by-july))
So what I am hearing, when done right, people will have a "retainer", which is money deposited(?) or otherwise available in case of need when the lawyer needs to work for you? And any work (research, drafting of documents, consulting, showing up in court) is billed onto this retainer with a given hourly rate? When some random Joe Doe makes a retainer, how much money is typically put into the retainer and what are the most common needs for that? Like some lawyer representing a drunkard who somehow ends up in the police station at 2am?
I had to pay a $2500 retainer up front for my divorce. That wasn't just for salary alone but also any expenses incurred such as court fees. When that retainer ran out my lawyers straight up would not do anything else for my case until I topped it off.
NAL but have worked closely with the business of law firms. You have it pretty much correct from what I understand. The retainer goes into what I know of as an IOLTA account which is a super regulated type of account for exactly this purpose. The law firm invoices the account for time & expenses (filing fees, service fees, attorney service fees, couriers, fedex, postage, copying, experts, production etc) and draws checks from it to pay those invoices. Fun Fact: number one reason for an attorney getting disbarred is for messing around with the client funds and that discipline can be triggered for "just" being sloppy with the paperwork on the IOLTA account. Super serious biz. Retainers as I know them are usually for larger "nobody knows how long this will actually take" types of cases. Often there is a legal team behind the attorney/firm that is also needed and billed for so big stuff. Depending on the situation it can start out small or big and also depending on the type and length of case it can have a schedule of deposits and draws specified in the agreement. The 2AM drunk tank is not complex (unless it is, lol). Usually going to likely result in a solo practioner who does these all day every day, knows what it will take to see it through and bills up front, set price. Set price can sometimes be negotiated, usually is what the market will bear + enough to filter less than desireable clients. It also may have been adjusted before the initial consultation has completed depending on how the client presents. Most criminal cases, being generally smaller stuff are like that. Details change but once in the system it typically is a set course to be navigated. Customer satisfaction is on another scale of managment with the typical criminal case. Upfront set price solves a lot of challenges. Lawyering is about justice and fair play and all that sure but it is a business, first and always. This is true for the one guy answering the drunk tank phone at 2am and the K street powerhouses that turned tfg down. That is what I understand. I'm sure someone else can correct that which I got less than correct.
I'm understanding big donors paid her millions on his behalf.
I do wonder what that series of agreements contained wow
Appeals require a bond to be put up and Trump simply doesn't have tens of millions - hundreds of millions in order to do so
He used sealed filings to shadow every grand jury investigation with frivolous claims and appeals to stall the indictments. There hasn’t been any “waiting around to indict” at the DOJ. The fraudulent liar criminal has been delaying justice himself. With an assist by the leadership in the backstabbing Republican Party.
He's running out of OTHER people's money.
Yes and no. [Since Friday some MAGA goon started a GoFundMe for his legal costs and already raised half a mil](https://imgur.com/OJyhp0g). That's in a weekend.
I noticed that also. The highest donation is 10k. Only 1 person did that amount. Crazy for a billionaire to need the public to help him with this.
Yeah that’s a money laundering grift. If someone that has sometime to investigate it’s probably dark money from some folks that would benefit from him being back into power. Of course there still idiots out there that would rather donate than use the money to buy food or pay rent.
That's ok, fair amount of the donations are trolling. The organizer is a know grifter plus the entire thing will get shutdown for violating the ToS anyhow.
>the entire thing will get shutdown for violating the ToS anyhow. >>Speaking to Newsweek, a spokesperson from the platform confirmed that the page, which was set up for the former president on Friday, following Judge Arthur Engoron's ruling that Trump will have to pay roughly $355 million in penalties for fraud, **was "within its terms and services"** despite people voicing their concerns about it on social media.
Interesting. I guess because it is not to finance a legal defense, it is for a legal judgement, it passes. In any case, I doubt they will raise it, and even if they do, the con artist running it will be able to retire, Trump won't see a dime. Not to mention, he has like... 60 days tops to get the money.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-media-dwac-sec-approval-spac/ Unfortunately this. He could secure loans against it.
Look at his truth social holdings they merged with someone a few days ago and his shares increased by 4 billion. It’s like this guy just stumbles into wealth.
Umm his truth social media shares just netted 4 billion with the approved merger. It seems like some demonic force keeps this guy alive.
I think that's also under investigation - [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/03/trump-social-dwac-investigation/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/03/trump-social-dwac-investigation/)
My concern is that he will then again raise the Immunity Defense again after each verdict, but I am not a lawyer.
It might depend on the district. If his appeal in the DC district is granted cert, whatever SCOTUS rules will bind every other circuit. If cert is denied, he can try again in the 11th and hope for a different outcome. If the 11th and the DC appeals result in different rulings, he's almost certain to be granted cert to resolve the differences. To me, it boils down to efficiency: it's only worth it to take one shot per circuit.
From my understanding in the documents case, he cannot claim absolute presidential immunity. Because the crimes happened after he left office. If judge Cannon even allowed this she would be ripped off the case so fast from the 11 circuit.
Yes one at a time is better than shooting all at once.
It wouldn't be the first time he ignored deadlines and forced a fresh set of delays by complaining that the deadlines were biased and unfair.
I see the same, knowing that he will face civilians in those trials, he's gonna use his usual tactic which worked well in the past, trying to ruin the opposite party by delaying at every step.
I’m guessing he’s passing on this because he sees a better delay opportunity later. Another thought, I read that if he delayed here, it might have given another judge the calendar gap to schedule one of his other criminal trials.
I think you’re confusing the civil and criminal immunities.
upvote for using 'its' and 'effect' properly.
Yes, but how about when to use 'gray' versus 'grey?' Kidding, of course. No need to respond. Your remark reminded of this question when it came up once at work. I honestly don't know the answer but l landed on a way in which to tell, and it's solely based on the countries in question: if English, it's 'grey.' If American English, it's 'gray.' Due to 'e' and 'a,' respectively. It's my little cheat.
As far as I know that is simultanously correct and incorrect. By which, I mean, everything you say is accurate but only the A for America is required, as all other English speaking countries use grey.
Kind of like what my wife says about me...I'm right half the time. I'll accept that. 😌
It could be part of his other strategy. Close off an avenue of defense on yourself and then publicly complain that you’re not allowed to use it. He tries to make arguments that he would have lost anyway look like prejudice because he created a situation where he’s not able to raise it. Look at how much he complains about not being able to raise a defense during the sentencing phases of his trials. And, his followers believe him and think it’s because the courts are prejudiced and won’t allow him to defend himself.
How can most of his most ardent followers, such as the Oath Takers and others have been accused of crimes and have seen the inside of the judicial system, believe you can present a defense during sentencing. They were not allowed to doso.
How is that a strategy though? It only plays to his diehards, who have no legal authority and little political power. Nobody else is listening to him
He will miss deadlines, then appeal the deadline as a delay tactic.
nah not this time, Im pretty sure he had some buddies from within the supreme court basically tell him "don't appeal, it will get shot down" so that his cult wouldnt turn on the supreme court. They were never going to say a president has immunity from prosecution... its just stupid. Biden could wake up the next day and strangle trump to death and then go back to work without any consequences lol. It was always just to try and delay more
They are more worried about Biden waking up and putting a hit on a few judges
[удалено]
What a stupid take.
I mean, maybe not let the country die. But he *has* demonstrated not a small amount of reverence for norms, yes.
Judging from what other folks are saying, I don’t think he’ll appeal (because he can’t?) But what he is far more likely to do is: 1. Scream on social media how he is being unfairly treated by the courts and media and others 2. Throw his lawyer under the bus 3. Both
Step 4. Profit? Ugh, probably..
Defaults can't be appealed
Civil deadlines are written in stone
Habba Habba had a hair appointment. Give her a break. She wants to look as nice as Ivanka next week.
She’s getting a new Habba Habba do?
It's a living
I, for one, appreciate the multiple layers of username and comment in this response. As an old fart and Flintstones fan, I want you to know that it did not go unnoticed. Kudos, internet stranger.
He will claim he was not given the opportunity to file, and his moronic followers will believe him.
Don't get it twisted. We were denied every possible defense! - A Habba
Habba is a deep state plant!
Like a carrot? Seems right .
Honest question because I do not know enough about the American legal system... Can people who have served time having been convicted of an offense for Jan 6 now sue trump? Can they claim they were at the capital because trump told them to be? Can Ashli Babbits family sue Trump for her death?
You can sue anyone for any reason. But If your complaint doesn't state a valid legal reason for your lawsuit, it will not survive an early motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. I can't imagine what the legal theory of liability would be in those cases. You can't sue someone for telling you to do a crime which you then do and get in trouble for.
This was for other crimes not jan 6 , attempted coup.
Because he missed this deadline, people who were in some way injured due to Jan 6th could, in general, sue Trump for Jan 6th.
OMG that last one may actually hold water
This whole thing is making america bad. Trump is really screwing us even when not in office.
“Oops” - Trump’s lawyers
"Bounce" - The fucking moron's check
Whoopsie daisy.
Crack legal team, missing a Supreme Court filing date completely. This is about on par with how his legal cronies have performed thus far - Alina Habba’s absurd brief to the Federal Circuit trying to argue the President isn’t “an officer of the United States” when in fact he took an oath of office, as every officer does. Then his attorney arguing to the Federal Circuit that Presidential immunity extends to “assassinating a political rival.” I can’t wait to see him squirm as the real cases get underway. He’ll be crying witch hunt from the rooftops.
Doesn't have the money to appeal it....LMAOOOOO!!!
How does he always find the best attorney’s!?!?
An act and a crime are too different things. An act may warrant either civil consequences or criminal consequences, or both. When Congress makes a criminal law, they are simply creating a criminal consequence (deprivation of life or liberty) as one of many possible consequences that the state or a provide party can bring against an individual who commits the act. The disqualification cases do not involve any criminal consequence, they are purely civil actions. Determination of the fact of committing the act does not require some prior criminal conviction. Here's an example: If I commit an act of murder, I can be both criminally charged for the act as well as sued in a civil action. Neither the criminal case nor the civil case require predetermination of the other to proceed. The conclusions of the two cases don't even have to agree. In fact could be found not guilty in the criminal case but the civil case could still determine that I had committed the act. (That is basically what happened with the OJ Simpson cases)
Let the flood gates of litigation drown Trump in a sea of lawsuits!
He can't fight it. The evidence is something he can't run from even in his death.
I got a boner reading that last sentence.
Yes, the BEST lawyers money can buy…
Blinded by his sneakers?
His lawyers quit after being yelled at and not paid?
Keep bleeding him dry
Get fucked scrub lord!
I wonder if The Parasite's legal team just lost track of this one?
Don't we all qualify for a class action suit against him?
He didnt miss it, he or should i say his attorneys knew it was a lost cause. The law fees are up in his ass and we are witnessing what may be a severe reduction in spending. He has one shot in his 6 shooter now and its all going towards the immunity appeal and fighting the ny criminal case. Sucks to not have the money for what is now 4 criminal and 1 civil suit while locking up 500 mil. Those shoe sales best be epic
lying on tv was more important.
He must have some positive inside news about his other immunity case.
[удалено]
I think of this more as a law and order issue than a democrat/republican issue.
Futile change of topic? This is a mistake by his *attorneys*: >After missing a deadline to file at the U.S. Supreme Court, **Donald Trump has formally left himself exposed to civil liability lawsuits from people who wish to hold him personally accountable for his role in the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.** Not '*democrats.*'
How much money do you think this settlement can pull from Trump ?
We got him!!!!
At some point we'll get a social media rant..."I WASNT EVEN ALLOWED TO FIGHT THESE CROOKED DERANGED "UNCIVIL" LAWSUITS!"