Honestly, if someone told me, “I’m such a good lawyer, I actually got Trump to pay his bill”, that would be a hugely positive recommendation.
If he is any kind of lawyer, there’s a clause in there that guarantees a monthly minimum retainer payment. In the 10s of thousands, at least.
Plus, I’d love to see how he billed Trump for “Analysing batshit insane legal theories and then rejecting them.”
Gotta be at least a few billable hours right there.
Probably just “legal consultation”.
In my role in IT, I consider telling people that they’re trying to do something stupid and/or impossible to be consultation as well.
In my distant past, I spent a year as LAN administrator for a small naval unit. The leading chief constantly asked me why the network was crashing. My usual response: “I’m not responsible for errors in the organic element”. I considered that the most important part of that job.
My last job before retirement was with another state agency, and when the Legislature* was in session one of my duties was to provide estimates for implementing the proposed legislation that affected my area. Since I was the only person maintaining a 20+ year old COBOL system which was due for replacement anyway, I had no problem either saying what they wanted was impossible, or providing an estimate that would have eaten up half the agency’s budget. Fortunately, I had a treasure of a manager who a) knew the score and b) was quite willing to back me up.
* Pronounced “Leg” (as in “ledge”) by state employees. Generally a term of derision.
Or, PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair)
PEBKAC is a classic. I used to call it a “Chair to Keyboard Interface Error”. Just my own personal nickname for that particular phenomenon.
We called it PEBSAK. Problem Exists Between Seat And Keyboard.
Either that, or it’s an ID-10t error.
Pilot error.
Some actual (welcome) Schadenfreude for the 1/6 Terrorists (there, see, I can use the word, happy?)
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/23/politics/richard-barnett-pelosi-office-january-6/index.html
But more importantly
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/23/politics/oath-keepers-seditious-conspiracy-verdict/index.html
Although the crimes of the first asshat are less serious, some of his ‘claims’ threatened to make me have a cartoon-steam-whistle-moment.
After the verdict, Barnett’s lawyer Joseph McBride told reporters outside the courthouse that his client had not received a fair trial, saying that Washington, DC, is “not a state” and made up primarily of “Biden voters.”
“We’re not saying there is something inherently wrong with DC or with the jurors.” McBride said. “We’re saying that we believe politics is the big elephant in the room that nobody wants to speak about here and political considerations about this trial have damaged the jury pool to the extent that we can’t get a fair trial.”
So as I read it (another article had the convict saying “it wasn’t a jury of [his] peers”) they feel he can only get a fair trial from old white republican voters.
When I was a driving instructor, we said there was a nut loose behind the wheel.
Or “A short between the headsets”
Big fat dog-whistle there.
It connotes a political act. Just because this has been normalized doesn’t mean we should just throw in the towel. It also packs an emotional punch that people in this country needs. We have a political party using terrorist tactics to destroy democracy. We should refer to terrorists as “enablers” just because that’s how it’s been accepted? We need to push back on further normalizing the terrorist organization know as the Republican party, We’re at a crisis point in this country. We need to fight back any way we can.
So, yeah, I’ll point out further normalization when I see whether or not a prosecutor sees the post or not.
Found a different article that has the line I remembered, assuming of course all the reporting is accurate.
After the verdict, Barnett told reporters outside the court courthouse, “This is not a jury of my peers. I don’t agree with the decision, but I do appreciate the process and we are surely going to appeal.”
Just wanted to get a correction so we’re using the perps exact words, not my paraphrase.
Oh, and interesting updates on our NM Republican shooting organizer and felon -
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/23/us/solomon-pena-court-detention-hearing/index.html
Albuquerque Police Detective Conrad Griego, citing a confidential witness, said Peña had complained that at least one of the shootings occurred too late at night, with bullets fired too high into the house – decreasing the chances of hitting the target.
I don’t know anything about the witness (one of his stooges that did the actual shooting seeking a plea?) but if born out, that clearly indicates intent to cause harm (up to and including attempted murder) rather than just vandalism.
They find out that the law actually applies to them and cry out - Mommy!
I think he wants a jury consisting entirely of right-wing terrorists. You know, his peers.