Civil Trial: Trump v E. Jean Carroll (Carroll wins, awarded $5 million, plus 83.3 million)

[LSLGuy]

Just like in your country …

Those things are required only as along as everyone agrees that everyone must play by the rules. Once the rulebook has been thrown out by the executive, and there’s a spineless legislature unwilling to fight back prompt and hard, anything can (and will) happen.

In your country now, and perhaps in ours in a year we’ll be playing Calvinball. Just like the Russians are used to. The law is whatever some bigwig most recently said it was, and his armed henchmen will make sure you understand that point.

[Frodo]

Oh I see, I wish I could say that it’s impossible but…

[Czarcasm]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I know they are playing the victim for the public (MAGAts) but won’t the MAGAts eventually see them as weak little wimps who cry and pout when they are spoken to harshly? I thought MAGAts liked strength, not crying little babies.

They see it as “pwning the libs”, and it is just another tool.

[Chronos]

Or to put it another way, no law gave Emperor Palpatine the power to dissolve the Galactic Senate.

[Q.Q.Switcheroo]

@Buck_Godot

If she wanted to get the judge to upset with her, there are ways to do so that don’t make her look like an idiot.

Now, now. Habba may look like an idiot, and she may talk like an idiot…

[rocking_chair]

I believe mr trump is giving ms habba her first trial appearances.

[Odesio]

@LSLGuy

The only goal here, pure and simple, is to create a propaganda story of persecution by a biased federal judiciary. Which will be a *casus belli cited next Jan to force-retire every federal judge except the a few trumpy ones and immediately replace them with unqualified MAGA toadies. That’s literally about step 4 on their first day of dictatorship checklist.

I’m in agreement. Trump decided a while back that he cannot fight this in court and his only hope of staying out of prison is to win the presidential election. So his basic strategy is to delay and when he’s forced to have a trial use it as a stump to campaign from.

[Superdude]

Pretty sure her appearance is why Trump hired her in the first place.

[LSLGuy]

Quoting myself for context & @Frodo’s reply:

@LSLGuy

Just like in your country …

Those things are required only as along as everyone agrees that everyone must play by the rules. Once the rulebook has been thrown out by the executive, and there’s a spineless legislature unwilling to fight back prompt and hard, anything can (and will) happen.

In your country now, and perhaps in ours in a year we’ll be playing Calvinball. Just like the Russians are used to. The law is whatever some bigwig most recently said it was, and his armed henchmen will make sure you understand that point.

@Frodo

Oh I see, I wish I could say that it’s impossible but…

For a preview of Argentina’s and the USA’s future, here’s the lede from a news item from today Jan 19 out of Poland:

@The Economist

Poland’s constitutional court ruled that an overhaul of state media by Donald Tusk, the prime minister, was unconstitutional. Mr Tusk, who took office in December, has appointed new executives at state media companies and put the firms into liquidation. The culture ministry said the ruling had “no legal significance”. The court is filled with judges appointed by the previous populist administration, the Law and Justice Party.

So the packed court of one administration rules the actions of the subsequent administration to be unconstitutional, and the current administration’s response amounts to “Who asked you? We don’t care what you say.” The rulebook has been thrown out and Calvinball is the new game in town. The only game in town.

But it’s Calvinball played where the most muscular participant wins; there’s no taking turns on which entity sets the ever-shifting rules.

In this particular instance my belief is the current court is right, and it was packed last time only to counter the prior packing by the current administration’s party 2 election cycles ago.

But thus does a nominal democracy lurch from de facto one party rule to de facto other one party rule. Until one side or the other successfully locks out their opponent for good. The professional commentariat’s conventional wisdom about Tusk is that he (like trump) is a wannabe constitutional dictator in the mold of Hungary’s Orbán and Türkiye’s Erdoğan and his party is Reactionary Right Authoritarian to the very core. An assessment with which I agree, for what little my opinion is worth.

[Northern_Piper]

@rocking_chair

within your example, where does the “points to the witness, liar, liar!” waving paper (that maybe blank), happen?

They didn’t teach that part in my Trial Advocacy class. Must be an advanced trial ad. class in Podunck U Law School and similar tiers.

[simster]

You clearly didn’t go to Trump U!

[LSLGuy]

He’s bought very few trump steaks too.

[Dinsdale]

I was really surprised to see Habba play so prominent a role in this case, as she was (is?) playing such a prominent role in the NY fraud case. It is - uh - unusual to see a lawyer simultaneously taking lead in multiple prominent cases. It would take an amazing amount of work by a terribly capable professional to do so well. But she obviously is just providing a fave/mouthpiece, rather than anything substantive.

And don’t be surprised at the claims of judicial bias. It is a very common claim, aimed at appeal/review - as well as aimed at modifying the judge’s behavior. As a general matter, allegations of bias are taken quite seriously - even if they turn out to be entirely without merit. For a conscientious decision-maker, it is unpleasant to have such charges made, and you have no control over their investigation. It requires quite the balancing act to maintain some control over the process without saying anything that could be claimed intemperate.

[Pork_Rind]

@velomont

@Baal_Houtham

It then segues to an outdoor funeral; a gangster pops out of the coffin and guns down about 20 attendees.

My big caveat is that I’m not advocating violence. I just thought that that scene was so ridiculously over the top that it had to be shared

I just watched that at 50% speed. I’m impressed that the gunman got off well over a hundred shots from a 32 round magazine.

[Stratocaster]

@Dinsdale

For a conscientious decision-maker, it is unpleasant to have such charges made, and you have no control over their investigation.

What does such an investigation entail? I assumed that most appeals relied on trial transcripts and arguments before the court, but what do I know.

[Northern_Piper]

@Dinsdale

I was really surprised to see Habba play so prominent a role in this case, as she was (is?) playing such a prominent role in the NY fraud case.

It may be because Joe Tacopina has withdrawn from the hush money case (criminal case brought by NY DA), and from the Carroll civil trials.

Attorney Joe Tacopina withdraws from Trump's legal team

[Riemann]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

That’s a standard cross-examination tactic, trying to get the witness to contradict her/himself, thus proving! that said witness is a liar! and nothing s/he says can be taken as true! ladies and gentlemen of the jury!

The Simpsons - Marge in Chains - I am not wearing a tie at all

[Smapti]

Team Carroll is adding Loser Donald’s latest re-defamations into evidence.

gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.274.0.pdf

[Odesio]

@Smapti

Team Carroll is adding Loser Donald’s latest re-defamations into evidence.

I think we all saw this coming. They did see an opportunity to throw shade Habba’s way.

@Motion

While Defendant has suggested that he would offer testimony relating to common law malice for purposes of the jury’s assessment of punitive damages, ECF 265 at 2, defense counsel has repeatedly made clear that they do not understand the implications of the Court’s collateral estoppel decision on this issue.

[Joey_P]

Well, they found out today that she got rid of a lot of evidence, as you probably
noticed, she got rid of massive amounts of evidence. And in addition to that she had
a rifle or a gun because she said she bought gun bullets or rifle bullets, and it was
the opposite I guess, of her gun. And was it licensed? No, it wasn’t licensed, so I
guess she’s got a difficult problem, that’s going to be her problem, but she has a
gun or a rifle. She didn’t really explain which, she might have both because she
said she bought rifle bullets so—and it’s totally unlicensed, so I assume that’s a
problem. But the judge was protecting her, he didn’t want to go there, ‘we don’t
want to go there, we don’t want to hear’—if that were me, it would be a different
story. But, with her, the judge is totally protective of them. And frankly, anybody
in that court would see it, it’s, frankly it’s a disgrace. That’s probably one of the
reasons our country is going to hell.

If she was the type of person/defendant to respond to statements he makes in press conferences, this, IMO, would be one to latch on to. In fact, every one of his presidential opponents, from both sides, should be spinning this paragraph (and it doesn’t require all that much spinning) to show that this super duper far right republican doesn’t think she should have the right to bear arms.

I’m curious, assuming she does actually own a gun, if she has all the proper licenses/permits that her jurisdiction requires for the way she’s using it, would that also be defamation on his part?

I’m also wondering if this is meant to be a dog whistle to make sure his base knows that she’s armed so they need to be as well if they plan to show up at her residence, or, is he just trying to throw her under the bus as part of his way of lashing out. I assume the latter. It reminds me of when I sued a college roommate over some rent money and after I won he told the judge I was growing pot. I mean, technically I was. About a year earlier I had sprouted a few seeds and then tossed them, but I’m not sure what he expected a small claims judge to do about it. I think he half expected the judge to have me arrested or something. He was mad because he knew he was in the wrong and was just throwing shit against the wall hoping something would stick. This was the last, but not the only time he tried that stunt. And, every time he did, the judge told him to knock it off.

Incidentally, I also notice that this is very typical bully behavior. He’s blaming her for the country going to hell while not mentioning that she’s only reacting to what he’s doing. She got a gun because his followers are threatening her. I suspect if she were to get killed, we’d get a word salad that both throws the killer under the bus while also saying that it’s her fault for forcing his hand (look what you made me do).