That’d be a bold move, Cotton. Trump isn’t playing four dimensional chess here. He’s very reactive, running things by the seat of his very smelly pants. Given his penchant for throwing his allies under the bus, I wouldn’t rule out Trump turning on Habba in an attempt to argue ineffective counsel. He’s already done that with Joe Tacopino publically though not in court. At this point, I suspect Habba has enough dirt on Trump that he can’t afford to turn against her. On the other hand, Trump’s narcissicism might get the better of him and he might think he doens’t need her.
Of course…she’s from “central casting”, whatever the fuck that means.
Trump is just focused on his cult and she’s not only pretty, but is good at raging the MAGA audience*
And honestly, I don’t think of Trump as rational, of course, but you could make an argument that throwing everything at stirring the base is better than trying to win the cases, which are all objectively horrible for him. The only one he has a chance with is getting his name on the ballot in Colorado and Maine.
(Obviously this is only rational for a person with no conscience or concern for American democracy or rule of law, but that’s a given)
* Chris Hayes did a good piece today, comparing the efforts of people like Ted Cruz to MTG in their ability to speak to the MAGA base. It’s not enough to be ignorant, craven and repeat the talking points. There’s a degree of speaking without thinking and showmanship required.
Oooo! I’ll totally co-sign on that one.
I have to admit that I’m not exactly comfortable with the heavy focus on her looks here, despite her own statements on them. Her problem isn’t how she looks, but that she’s more morally bankrupt and rather incompetent. There’s a danger this is straying into generic misogyny.
OTOH this is the Pit, so…
Agreed. I think criticism of her being superficial and being valued for superficial reasons (such as looking the part as a talking head for Trump on TV) is valid, but criticizing her for superficial reasons is just playing down to her level.
I will write something that seems evident to me so you can correct me should it be false, IANAL: Ms Alina Habba is a lawyer and that means she has studied law in a university. This takes a long time and is expensive. Risking this by behaving inmorally, pitching that immorality to Donald J. Trump, who is not known for his discretion, and venting it on TV to make sure everybody knows it is deeply stupid: she risks disbarment and she will not be able to work as a lawyer afterwards. She is doing this for a person who is not famous for paying his lawyers, and then the stream of revenue stops, possibly forever.
Even in case she is not disabarred: what future client will ever trust her after she betrayed that other client to gain Trump as a client?
If that is her idea of faking smart, she is a moron.
trump’s successor, duh!
Dan
It’s valid up to a point, though. It’s almost certainly a factor (how significant a factor is open to debate) in Trump’s decision to hire her in the first place
That said, yeah, many of the posts here are moving into (or already inhabit) creepy territory on the topic
It’s possible she’s a true believer and disregards the risk because her dear leader will ultimately prevail and prevent or reverse any bad outcomes.
It’s possible she’s not a true believer in good faith but believes she can manipulate the system and Trump to make the bad outcomes impossible.
Either way, if you believe you can’t lose, there is no risk.
It’s also pretty common in Trumpism is that the rules don’t apply to them, so obviously the penalties can’t apply either. The fact it’s happening to the earlier cohort of Trump acolytes is irrelevant, because this belief is personal, not corporate. “The rules don’t apply to me. Who cares about those losers? Certainly, Trump doesn’t, and I don’t either.”
The client who expects (possibly incorrectly) that they will be the one she acts unethically for rather than acting unethically to (i.e. that they will be Trump rather than Biaco in the exchange)
I actually disagree with those who say she isn’t doing a pretty good job of pretending to be smart. I think that they thinking that pretending to be smart means doing smart things, but if you are doing smart things you are actually being smart not just pretending. Pretending to be smart means taking advantage of Dunning-Kruger and the fact that people who aren’t smart themselves can’t tell the difference between a smart person and a dumb person. She uses big legal sounding words and speaks confidently about law stuff, and has successfully convinced Trump and his followers think she is smart. She just can’t convince actually smart people (i.e. judges) that she is smart because that would require actually being smart.
Northern Pikes song:
At worst she will have a very lucrative career on FOX or other right wing media. At best she’ll also have a position in government prior to that.
I don’t want to sound like I’m defending her, but, absent morals, defending Trump is a very shrewd decision.
It’s relevant though – it’s relevant to why Trump hired her and why she accepted the job. As I said in my above paragraph, she has a lucrative off ramp at the end of this, and that ramp wouldn’t exist, or wouldn’t be as lucrative, were she older or more plain.
And far from criticizing her looks, I think she’s really pretty. Middle eastern eyes, lovely.
This has nothing to do with what I think of her as a person or lawyer.
Also, I don’t think talking about looks is inherently misogynistic, despite the OP also seeing it that way. e.g. I remember threads about Madison Cawthorn where I talked about how his good looks had enabled his ascendency…was I being misandrist?
(And we also had the same issue then, where some could not separate out his looks from his personality…that supposedly acknowledging that he’s a good looking dude somehow entailed that you were excusing his politics)
Habba Booey.
My paternal grandparents were immigrants (or is it emigrants?) from Germany. We called grandma “Bubba”. The names “Bubba” or “Bubbe” are Yiddish and come from the word “Babushka”, a triangular head scarf that older women wore. Now you know…
Habba getting on the judge’s last nerve. Sad!
Habba bad day…?
Try a Snickers…!
Multiply this times several hundred and you’ll have the entire next Trump administration, should there be one. His mistake the first time around was to hire some honorable people who wouldn’t act on his every whim. He won’t make that mistake the second time around.
As for this Habba creature, I’m assuming that this is what you get for an attorney when you are scraping the bottom of barrel. When nobody else will work for you because you don’t pay your bills and won’t follow their advice, you end up with a graduate of Troy McClure’s Pretty Good Law School.
Now I’m wondering how he punctuated that.
Troy McClure’s Pretty; Good! Law School?
Another thought: since she appears to be worse than stupid, I’m wondering if Trump’s long game will be to claim ineffective representation to get any conviction thrown out.