Pffft. I would’ve been glad to lose Trump the election for just $20 million. Service with a smile!
IANAL, I just work for one:
Granted, I work in a small office doing family law and criminal defense. We do have to tailor who we are going to represent by who can pay the retainer. Lawyers don’t get free electricity, and my boss can’t pay me with the Code of Civil Procedure.
The biggest reasons we drop a client is, they can’t pay the fees. The second biggest is when, especially in the FL cases, the client will not listen to the attorney’s recommendations. Yes, the client is in charge, but they needed to trust that we know how to navigate the process. If we don’t have that, we can’t represent them.
This hijack was brought to you by the Oliver Wendell Holmes Foundation for Quit Slapping Lawyers Around. We now return you to our regularly scheduled thread.
QUISLA may not be the optimal nomenclature for this organization.
Oddly enough (or perhaps not) the more conservative guy on the afternoon-drive program I’d listen to on the way home from work during the Obama administration would levy the same accusation at Obama, “He loves the parking space but hates the gig.”
I’ve retired so don’t listen to that program much any more, unless I happened to be tooling around in the afternoon. About six months ago though, the station canned that guy’s less conservative companion and replaced him with a more conservative one. Occasionally I turn them on until one or the other says something stupid, then shut the radio off.
Typically it’s about thirty seconds.
With all of the reports about how, thanks somewhat to population growth but more to a heavier than usual turnout, Trump had the second largest vote for president evah! I was thinking the other day that Trump analogous to Sham, the racehorse.
Sham was an excellent* horse and in his Triple Crown races with Secretariat, he broke the records for the Kentucky Derby and Preakness (Belmont he was eased after fracturing a cannon bone), but still Placed. Nobody in the general public remembers his name.
*This is where the analogy breaks down.
I understand why lawyers defend unpopular clients and I agree that everyone deserves representation. I have a friend that , pre-retirement, defended death penalty cases in Texas, usually for clients that were clearly and unambiguously guilty.
But I see some different issues here. First, I understand that some of the law firms had been involved in challenging the election laws pre-election. While I think that advocating for voter suppression is reprehensible, those aren’t the firms I’m discussing. I’m discussing the post-election lawsuits.
I agree that everyone is entitled to a robust defense. But Donald Trump and the Trump campaign aren’t being accused of anything and have no need to mount a defense. What they are doing is flooding the zone with frivolous lawsuits.
These lawsuits seem to me to be closer to the stuff that the SovCits make up in other to harass civil servants and the legal system - you know, they get a traffic ticket and then sue the police officers and the county clerks and the traffic court judges under some bizarro world alternate theory of law.
IANAL, but I’ve looked at their evidence and even Judge Judy would laugh off these “affidavits” - seriously, a statement from a poll worker saying she heard other unnamed poll workers talking about something other poll workers had done? Then there is the way these accusations are being solicited on social media in about the least credible way possible.
I mentioned the Sovereign Citizen movement because of a similarity - they are making obviously false and very serious accusations against real people in mid-level government jobs - people that are are currently getting death threats, and they also used these legal documents as a way to “dox” these people.
Then there is the part that disturbs me the most, the fact that these lying liars are lying their asses of in a court of law because they believe, due to the robust pardon power we grant to the President of the United States, that the law literally does not apply to them.
I see clear evidence of this in the case of the PA postal worker, who “recanted” the recant of his lie, accused the federal agents who interviewed him of being deep state mind control agents and set up a crowdfund account that’s up to $250,000 the day after his interview with the Feds.
Trump is calling him a “brave whistleblower”
Yeah, and those agents are getting death threats, too.
I don’t get it. It’s obvious these people are making a mockery of our legal system as political performance art. Why are the judges not slapping them with contempt charges?
I didn’t recall the name but, with the SF field growing so large, that is not a surprise. However, when I looked him up on Wiki, it mentioned he was the founder of the Sad Puppies campaign.
That I remembered, and not fondly.
For those who don’t want to click on the link, the SPC was started as a voting bloc to counter what its members thought that “popular works were often unfairly passed over by Hugo voters in favor of more literary works, or stories with progressive political themes.” It managed to get a lot of nominees on Hugo ballots, even sweeping a few categories, but in every case but one (Guardians of the Galaxy) No Award prevailed.
In 2017 the nomination process was changed to weaken the power of bloc voting.
There are a couple legitimate cases/questions about process that I’m interested in seeing resolved, even if it won’t change the results of the election overall.
~Max
The President may not pardon civil contempt of court (where eg: the judge orders you to be incarcerated until such time as you comply with the court orders). See… Ex parte Grossman I think.
~Max
Oh, burn! By Jake Tapper to the gang that couldn’t sue straight:
I agree, but pretty much all the non-frivolous ones I can think of were started before the election, even if they still haven’t been resolved.
One of the complaints in Arizona seemed to be legitimate and it could’ve been an issue if the vote difference was less than 200 votes. It seems to have been an operator instruction error with a tabulation machine and that when the machine registered an error due to an over vote, the operators would press a button that cleared the error and nullified the votes in the over voted race instead of giving the voter a chance to cure.
Of course there’s not much evidence that the over votes were in the Presidential race, they are typically down ballot when the ballot can get a little more confusing. Not to mention, I think if you are a voter capable of calling a phone number posted on Fredo’s Twitter account, you could probably manage not to accidentally vote for both Trump and Biden.
But even with this one, there is no evidence of fraudulent intent or even that voters were treated differently because of their affiliation.
But my problem is with people falsely accusing random mid-level government workers of fraud for the sake of political theatre.
We can both agree about those cases. Trump v Benson (W.D. Mich) is the only one I’m aware of that actually alleges fraud, though.
~Max
“A lawyer’s time and advice are his stock in trade.” - Abraham Lincoln (I’ve used that quotation in more than a few attorney-client fee dispute cases).
That seems kind of toothless though, and I don’t know how it would be applied to people that are swearing to false affidavits.
The case that has me particularly incensed is Richard Hopkins. Hopkins contacted Project Veritas claiming he overheard two coworkers talking about backdating ballots that were received after Election Day. Project Veritas started a GoFundMe in his name, which was locked when GoFundMe figured out what was going on.
Two federal agents interviewed him and his story didn’t hold water. The tape of the interview is out there. I listened to it, the agents knew what they were doing. He recanted the bulk of his statement and signed off on it.
But within hours he had recanted the recant, accused the agents of mind manipulation, released a tape of the interview and set up an account on an alternate crowdfunding site. Yeah, and Trump called him a “brave whistleblower ” on Twitter.
How would the civil contempt laws be applied in this case?
Do you consider anyone in a customer service job a self-seving sycophant, then? That’s the term I was responding to. Saying they need clients in order to get paid, and can rarely decline to represent someone if it won’t cause ethical problems sounds like most people who have a client-based business.
Nice!
Specifically in Arizona you vote for two state reps per district. Instructions on the ballot are “Vote for no more than two of”. There may be four or more candidates to choose from. Also, Corporation Commission was a “Vote for no more than three of” with six candidates listed. Occasionally you might have a non-partisan ballot with even more choices (I think in 2018 there was a vote for Water District which was choosing six from a field of 14.
President is the first thing on the ballot, I can’t see many overvotes there.
I looked at that case. Plaintiff alleged that the State of Michigan counted absentee ballots without observers present, and that early-ballot drop boxes did not have video surveillance. How does that allege fraud? Am I looking at the right case?
Priceless:
(Full title: Trump Tweets ‘Mail-in Elections Are a Sick Joke,’ as Conservative Groups Encourage Mail-in Voting in Georgia Senate Runoffs)
I don’t know if Jones Day is still representing Trump’s side in one of these battles, but they still were last week. Jones Day is in a position to turn down any legal work they damn well please.