OV9

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:14 am**

I mean, would that be remotely surprising?

Anywhere else, it would be one of the most important days of that countries history.

In America under Trump, it's just 'Thursday'.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:16 am**

Trump threatened them and got a freebie $40m of legal work for rescinding his sanction - does that amount to blackmail? Here's the executive order which he rescinded: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... aul-weiss/

Basically US lawyers who stand up for the rule of law are going to be threatened with similar diktats. He is dismantling protection of constitutional rights.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:29 am**

Funnily enough, this is the sort of tyranny that a well regulated Militia should stand up to...

Can't see this happening...

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:36 am**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:16 am Trump threatened them and got a freebie $40m of legal work for rescinding his sanction - does that amount to blackmail? Here's the executive order which he rescinded: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... aul-weiss/

Basically US lawyers who stand up for the rule of law are going to be threatened with similar diktats. He is dismantling protection of constitutional rights.

I really don't think my brain can handle all this and the potential ramifications

And I'm not sure how the US can come back from this

With no sense of shame/guilt, as a reasonably affluent, middle class, straight, white male (in the sense I've never had to deal with any form of discrimination or threat simply based on who I am), I dread to think how the minorities and marginalised are feeling in the US right now

It must be terrifying

I was reading about the renditions of alleged gang members the other day (to a private, hard labour prison in El Salvador) in breach of constitutional rights, due process etc

The Trump adminstration just gives no fucks about the law

It's genuinely mind blowing

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:55 am**

It is mind blowing. One of the reasons the US has such a solid worldwide reputation is that it has been a solid, trustworthy country which does not behave capriciously. Their power will be diluted forever after this.

Personally, I really like the US and wish I'd started visiting sooner. But I won't be holidaying there any time soon.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:59 am**

dinny_g wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:29 am Funnily enough, this is the sort of tyranny that a well regulated Militia should stand up to...

Can't see this happening...

The well regulated militia will be in the headlines being shocked, shocked I say when they realise that they also are not 'one of the good ones' and are put in jail. "This isn't what I voted for" they sob as they are lined up against a wall to be summarily executed for sedition, despite a racist, violent thug who's respect for the law is nil, and knowledge of it only being enough to break it carefully - something they wish they could do - being exactly what they voted for.

You know, the same treatment most Trump supporting groups have been on the end of (although obviously they can't summarily execute brown people and get away with it - but for a militia, they'd get an exception I'm sure)

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:03 am**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 10:16 am Basically US lawyers who stand up for the rule of law are going to be threatened with similar diktats. He is dismantling protection of constitutional rights.

Getting rid of "undesirable" lawyers ? This is literal straight-up Nazi stuff.

In March of 1933, just two months after he became chancellor, Hitler and his cronies began issuing decrees barring Jewish lawyers and judges from German courts.

https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploa ... -pdf-1.pdf

And there's a lot of other stuff in there that is sounding VERY familiar right now.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:30 am**

Sundayjumper wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:03 am
In March of 1933, just two months after he became chancellor, Hitler and his cronies began issuing decrees barring Jewish lawyers and judges from German courts.
https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploa ... -pdf-1.pdf

And there's a lot of other stuff in there that is sounding VERY familiar right now.

Jeez. “You’re not going to agree with I’m about to do so I’ll remove that problem now”

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:49 am**

Sundayjumper wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:03 am
Getting rid of "undesirable" lawyers ? This is literal straight-up Nazi stuff.

Plus the "activist judges" noted on the previous page.....

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:57 am**

Nuremberg Laws next..

I was in New York for St. Paddy’s Day and ended up drinking with some Canadian Firefighters - them singing “Fvck Trump” seemed to be well received by the Americans.. not sure he still has majority support, but there are countless examples of minority groups controlling countries (especially mega wealthy minority groups)

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 12:11 pm**

mik wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:49 am
Sundayjumper wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:03 am
Getting rid of "undesirable" lawyers ? This is literal straight-up Nazi stuff.

Plus the "activist judges" noted on the previous page.....

If no attorneys are able to bring cases, the judges become irrelevant. He's not just taking out one link in the chain. It's a bit of a scorched earth shitshow.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:53 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 9:38 am Trump's been going after US law firms. Hope GG isn't having too much trouble; my reach mercifully doesn't extent across the pond.

Trump rescinds executive order after law firm agrees to provide $40m in free services:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... paul-weiss

Is it a good idea to have your legal work done by a law firm with a gun to their head?

I guess it doesn't really matter if you're simply going to ignore any unfavourable decisions, but it seems that there's a lot of scope for malicious compliance on the part of compelled lawyers, and the sort of malicious compliance that doesn't come to light until contracts are tested.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:57 pm**

Nefarious wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:53 pm Is it a good idea to have your legal work done by a law firm with a gun to their head?

I don't think so, but from that firm's point of view they were effectively going to have their business closed down by Trump so this at least allows them to carry on.

Idi Amin's regime in Uganda comes to mind: the president simply taking for himself and utterly ruining the economy and the country.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:02 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 12:11 pm If no attorneys are able to bring cases, the judges become irrelevant.

Are citizens allowed to represent themselves ? You'd still need the "right kind" of judges in place to deal with those cases.

Unless you get rid of "that kind" of litigant in advance of course.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:04 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:57 pm Idi Amin's regime in Uganda comes to mind...

I'm on the same page as you wrt the banana republic. Page 69 of this very thread:

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:58 am People keep comparing him to Hitler. I’m thinking Mugabe. He’ll get rid of everyone in government who actually knows what they’re doing and replace them with lackeys. He’ll steal everything he possibly can. A successful functional country will collapse into financial & social chaos. He’ll refuse to leave.

America a banana republic in 5 years’ time.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:09 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:57 pm
Nefarious wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 1:53 pm Is it a good idea to have your legal work done by a law firm with a gun to their head?
I don't think so, but from that firm's point of view they were effectively going to have their business closed down by Trump so this at least allows them to carry on.

Oh, for sure. I was more questioning the true value of the $40m in free services they offered in return.

Personally, I want my representation in pretty much any legal matter to be genuinely on my side, rather than worrying about what information they might accidently share with the other side, what they might leak to the press, or what important omissions they might accidentally make. But then I don't also control the judges and the majority of the press, so maybe its less of an issue when you're a literal Don.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:40 pm**

Reminds me of Alex Jones' case where his counsel """"accidentally"""" let the other side have access to all of his text messages rather than just a few, due to an apparent error, which they then failed to clean up.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tion-trial

“You did get my text messages?” Jones asked Bankston, while on the witness stand. Chuckling sarcastically, Jones added: “You said you didn’t. Nice trick.”

Bankston replied: “Do you know where I got this? Your attorneys messed up and sent me a digital copy of your entire cellphone, with every text message you’ve sent for the past two years.”

Bankston said he told Jones’s lawyers about the mistake, but they did not take “any steps” to label the texts as privileged, and thereby keep them out of court.

“That is how I know you lied when you said you didn’t have text messages about Sandy Hook,” said Bankston, whose clients are Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, the father and mother of Jesse Lewis, who died in the shooting

The multiquotes around the 'accidentally' is because I don't think it was ever (or will be) really clarified as to whether that was quietly deliberate because his counsel fucking hated his guts, or just plain incompetence because no credible legal firm wanted to defend him due to the risk to their own reputation (even though that's not how it's meant to work, it's how the public often view it).

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 3:13 pm**

Beany wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 2:40 pm Reminds me of Alex Jones' case where his counsel """"accidentally"""" let the other side have access to all of his text messages rather than just a few, due to an apparent error, which they then failed to clean up.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tion-trial

“You did get my text messages?” Jones asked Bankston, while on the witness stand. Chuckling sarcastically, Jones added: “You said you didn’t. Nice trick.”

Bankston replied: “Do you know where I got this? Your attorneys messed up and sent me a digital copy of your entire cellphone, with every text message you’ve sent for the past two years.”

Bankston said he told Jones’s lawyers about the mistake, but they did not take “any steps” to label the texts as privileged, and thereby keep them out of court.

“That is how I know you lied when you said you didn’t have text messages about Sandy Hook,” said Bankston, whose clients are Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, the father and mother of Jesse Lewis, who died in the shooting
The multiquotes around the 'accidentally' is because I don't think it was ever (or will be) really clarified as to whether that was quietly deliberate because his counsel fucking hated his guts, or just plain incompetence because no credible legal firm wanted to defend him due to the risk to their own reputation (even though that's not how it's meant to work, it's how the public often view it).

I think in the UK courts disclosure rules would have required all of those texts to be provided to the other party. Not every text in his phone, just the ones which harmed his case (I accept that may still be every text in his phone).

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 3:30 pm**

Why does Trump need any legal council when he just ignores the law?

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2025 3:44 pm**

DaveE wrote: Fri Mar 21, 2025 3:30 pm Why does Trump need any legal council when he just ignores the law?

It's not just for defending himself - it's for threatening & attacking others.

OV9

Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump