this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
323 points (98.2% liked)

politics

25300 readers
2554 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For at least the fifth time, former President Donald Trump on Monday lost an attempt to dismiss his civil fraud case through a maneuver seeking a directed verdict in his favor.

In tossing Trump's latest challenge, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron reminded the former president that "a lie is still a lie."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bizarroland@kbin.social 22 points 2 years ago (2 children)

How many times does he get to try this?

I mean it's like dealing with a toddler. They said no, that means no.

It's not going to change when you ask them again 375,000 times in a row.

If it goes up again the judge needs to grow some balls regardless of their gender and tell the lawyers that if you attempt to bring this action again to my court that you will be sanctioned and possibly disbarred.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

It works on the incompetent rubes. Had an idiot on Facebook saying some shit like "80% of indictments were thrown out". Not a motion to dismiss, but they had already been tossed out. Some quick google-fu only showed they tried to have evidence excluded for like 80% of the indictments due to statutes of limitations. They lost. The evidence was kept in. I might be getting some details wrong, but it was in no way a "win" for trump.

The loser has been radio silent since asking for a source. Usually he's on top of it, posting like a dozen propaganda puff piece articles that are all the exact same article rehashed on different right wing "news" sites.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Frivolous lawsuits are actually rare. Much like most news, we only hear about the crazy shit, because it's crazy shit.

Local AM radio lawyer talks about this a good deal. These lawyers are not bringing stupid shit before these judges, who they know and have to work with. Keep fucking around and they face sanctions and disbarment.

Trump's lawyers do not seem to get this. I'm not saying the state bar should kick their ass for representing the man. But can we get a little more action here?

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago

Any lawyer still with Donnie has given up on a legal career. They are going to be media personalities, either getting paid by the Left to tell anti-Trump stories or by the Right to keep on defending him by maligning the system.