These actions against law firms by Trump are being defended by many Republicans. If the tables were turned w a Dem prez doing this, these Republicans' hair would be on fire. Such inane, reflexive partisanship is leading this country down an autocratic path.
Just recently viewed a World Values Survey. Ppl's attitudes are divided into 4 quadrants based on classical liberal attitudes on a horizontal scale & int'l cooperation on a vertical scale. The right lower quadrant is where the illberal & little to no interest in int'l cooperation hand out. In the far lower and right reaches of this quadrant hang out Russia & Turkey, along w the American Right.
So, nobody should be surprised at Trump actions and his many supporters. It's what this country's right wants.
Whether or not it's a coincidence, Putin looking at the results would have a huuuge smile, knowing the result was money well-spent and lies & flattery well well-said.
I love the comment by President Trump announcing they are going after more law firms because they were very dishonest people. That is the most laughable and saddest statement ever. He probably would have been able to retain premier law firms if he didn't have the reputation of not paying the bills of his legal representation.
“…We have a lot of law firms that we’re going to be going after because they were very dishonest people….” Yeah, not like good honest respected lawyers like Roy Cohn was!!!
It is imperative that Trumps authoritarian, Stalinesque moves get rejected at every judicial level, including and most especially by SCOTUS. That is the only hope we have for reining Trump and his MAGA henchmen in.
1)Trumps EO’s against law firms who made his life difficult by doing their jobs better than his lawyers did (note to Trump—maybe actually pay your lawyers if you want to keep the good ones), was nothing but petty vindictiveness and thus a violation of his oath of office, and
2) Judge Beryl Howell needs to be our next SCOTUS nominee. That judge gets it right Every. Single. Time.
Gee, I wonder where he got that idea? Perhaps we could ask Professor John Eastman? Or Rudy Giuliani? Or Jenna Ellis? Or the founders of the organization set up specifically to have any lawyers who represented Trump in the election cases disbarred? Sir, your lack of self-awareness is exceeded only by your lack of very recent history! With all due respect, of course.
As if. Spare us the bullshit. This case? They're criminals. Aspiring, failed treasonists.Jimmy champions America's worst. Pathetic, failed "what about."
Eastman, Giuliani and Ellis all conspired to overturn the presidential election. And engaged in all sorts of other morally repugnant and criminal activities.
I am new to this site but I can already see there are either no rules of civility or if there are they are just ignored. M----f---? You certaily live up to your name, Mr. (Ms? Zir? Zem? They? Other?) Radical.
We have a comments policy and I have already removed some abusive comments that were personal in nature. I don't love the use of "m...f...." but it is directed at public figures and not personally in response to someone here so we've let that slide.
With respect, many of these lawyers were members of very small firms, much like the one my wife and I ran for many years. If they were public offiials, then we were public officals and I can asure you that's one thing we never were. It is to me the very height of incivility to use this particular phrase, one of the most repugnant in the English language, about lawyers who were doing their job according to the oath they took when they were swron in. It is doubly offensive to have such language sanctioned as OK under your stated pretext. Somewhat emblematic of what has happened to our society after so many years of, if I may be excused for the reference, "unPopulist" governance. One can only hope that will start changine now that we have a President who atually knows where he is all the time and signs his own documents with his own hand (on camera!), not with an auto pen.
One of the most repugnant in the English language? Listen to Dear Leader's October MSG freak show for half a dozen vulgar epithets hurled by his minions at his opponent.
I had to really search to find the word magoid but there it was on, of course, Daily Kos. I assume this is what liberals call "reasoned dialogue" which explains a whole lot of recent history-especially November 5, 2024! As to "my spew", actually I'm feeling just fine, thank you. Thanks for asking.
From Merriam Webster dictionary:
spew
1 of 2
verb
ˈspyü
spewed; spewing; spews
Synonyms of spew
intransitive verb
1
: vomit
2
: to come forth in a flood or gush
3
: to ooze out as if under pressure : exude
transitive verb
1
: vomit
2
: to send or cast forth with vigor or violence or in great quantity
Your loss as you will no longer be able to enjoy my creative and witty repartee and I on the other hand will certainly miss your brand of genteel, elevated intellectualism. But as the great novelist said, so it goes.
Is this the "Lawfare" about which he so bitterly complained? Authoritarian playbook rules being followed once again. Even his executive order from February 18, 2025 qualifies -
Presidential Actions
Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies
The White House. February 18, 2025
Sec. 7. Rules of Conduct Guiding Federal Employees’ Interpretation of the Law. The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch.
In other words, the law is exclusively interpreted by the president and no other opinion will be tolerated. Once the authoritarian empties the courts of capable representation and assumes absolute authority over what the law says, there will be no need for a legal system. Just like the legislative branch.
There is no easy way to combat this if you are a big law firm, unless you can find another big firm that has not been targeted to strike down these EO’s as unconstitutional. Unless….maybe having a big firm like Perkins hire a sole practitioner, with big law working quietly in the background, to file all of these before judge Howell or judge Chutkin as they roll out? Heck, a law student with special certification can probably file it, which would look pretty good on one’s resume after graduation, especially if they won.
As long as the request included granting a stay of any enforcement pending appeal by the WH, this could keep all these firms humming along, as long as Trump’s people obeyed the order. While Trump may have presidential immunity (though likely not for this, I believe, as there is no policy reason for this petty, vindictive behavior—he;s just exacting retribution on his enemies), those working for him or on his behalf do not enjoy such immunity, and would risk contempt, monetary penalties and imprisonment for failure to comply with any order.
The good thing about big law is that it can be pretty nimble, creative and fast when it needs to be. Associates are more like soldiers than anything else, and are willing to work 20 hour days to crank out first class product for as long as it takes to win. Most government employees don’t do this—and with the DOJ gutted, the ones who are left will be mediocre, overwhelmed or both.
This is the result of electing a low-IQ piece of human detritus President. You don't think that the Mango Mussolini is remotely smart enough to come up with these bits of revenge on his own, do you?
The Perkins and Covington cases will undoubtedly end up in the Supreme Court and it should be interesting to see if they revisit US v Trump, the case that gave him unlimited leeway in matters under Article II.
The issuance of security clearances fits that bill and hopefully some of the Justices (I have no hope for Alito and Thomas) will re-think the issue of the President's intent when exercising that authority.
You’re right. In military terms, it would be like Generals, who know they can’t win on the battlefield, bombing their enemy’s energy infrastructure, food supply, and water supply to starve them out. Dirty politics are reaching their ugliest under Donald Trump, who is doing politically what a mob boss would be doing gangland style.
I lived in a city where the largest non government employer would hire many of the local law firms for various assignments and with the end result that there were few firms in town that would take cases against them.
These actions against law firms by Trump are being defended by many Republicans. If the tables were turned w a Dem prez doing this, these Republicans' hair would be on fire. Such inane, reflexive partisanship is leading this country down an autocratic path.
Just recently viewed a World Values Survey. Ppl's attitudes are divided into 4 quadrants based on classical liberal attitudes on a horizontal scale & int'l cooperation on a vertical scale. The right lower quadrant is where the illberal & little to no interest in int'l cooperation hand out. In the far lower and right reaches of this quadrant hang out Russia & Turkey, along w the American Right.
So, nobody should be surprised at Trump actions and his many supporters. It's what this country's right wants.
On that chart, the Right of Russia and the that of the US are in a dead heat for second to Turkey. Coincidence?
Whether or not it's a coincidence, Putin looking at the results would have a huuuge smile, knowing the result was money well-spent and lies & flattery well well-said.
I love the comment by President Trump announcing they are going after more law firms because they were very dishonest people. That is the most laughable and saddest statement ever. He probably would have been able to retain premier law firms if he didn't have the reputation of not paying the bills of his legal representation.
“…We have a lot of law firms that we’re going to be going after because they were very dishonest people….” Yeah, not like good honest respected lawyers like Roy Cohn was!!!
It is imperative that Trumps authoritarian, Stalinesque moves get rejected at every judicial level, including and most especially by SCOTUS. That is the only hope we have for reining Trump and his MAGA henchmen in.
Two things here are pretty clear:
1)Trumps EO’s against law firms who made his life difficult by doing their jobs better than his lawyers did (note to Trump—maybe actually pay your lawyers if you want to keep the good ones), was nothing but petty vindictiveness and thus a violation of his oath of office, and
2) Judge Beryl Howell needs to be our next SCOTUS nominee. That judge gets it right Every. Single. Time.
DJT is a despicable excuse for a human being.
Gee, I wonder where he got that idea? Perhaps we could ask Professor John Eastman? Or Rudy Giuliani? Or Jenna Ellis? Or the founders of the organization set up specifically to have any lawyers who represented Trump in the election cases disbarred? Sir, your lack of self-awareness is exceeded only by your lack of very recent history! With all due respect, of course.
As if. Spare us the bullshit. This case? They're criminals. Aspiring, failed treasonists.Jimmy champions America's worst. Pathetic, failed "what about."
https://open.substack.com/pub/swarmiest/p/sidney-powell-pleads-guilty?r=2mwtce&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Eastman, Giuliani and Ellis all conspired to overturn the presidential election. And engaged in all sorts of other morally repugnant and criminal activities.
I am new to this site but I can already see there are either no rules of civility or if there are they are just ignored. M----f---? You certaily live up to your name, Mr. (Ms? Zir? Zem? They? Other?) Radical.
We have a comments policy and I have already removed some abusive comments that were personal in nature. I don't love the use of "m...f...." but it is directed at public figures and not personally in response to someone here so we've let that slide.
With respect, many of these lawyers were members of very small firms, much like the one my wife and I ran for many years. If they were public offiials, then we were public officals and I can asure you that's one thing we never were. It is to me the very height of incivility to use this particular phrase, one of the most repugnant in the English language, about lawyers who were doing their job according to the oath they took when they were swron in. It is doubly offensive to have such language sanctioned as OK under your stated pretext. Somewhat emblematic of what has happened to our society after so many years of, if I may be excused for the reference, "unPopulist" governance. One can only hope that will start changine now that we have a President who atually knows where he is all the time and signs his own documents with his own hand (on camera!), not with an auto pen.
One of the most repugnant in the English language? Listen to Dear Leader's October MSG freak show for half a dozen vulgar epithets hurled by his minions at his opponent.
Your poor sensibilities.
More sanctimony please ...
Yep. Signing with his big phallic marker in his little hand.
Yep. He knows where he is: leading the likes of you to guzzle his kool-aid.
I had to really search to find the word magoid but there it was on, of course, Daily Kos. I assume this is what liberals call "reasoned dialogue" which explains a whole lot of recent history-especially November 5, 2024! As to "my spew", actually I'm feeling just fine, thank you. Thanks for asking.
From Merriam Webster dictionary:
spew
1 of 2
verb
ˈspyü
spewed; spewing; spews
Synonyms of spew
intransitive verb
1
: vomit
2
: to come forth in a flood or gush
3
: to ooze out as if under pressure : exude
transitive verb
1
: vomit
2
: to send or cast forth with vigor or violence or in great quantity
a volcano spewing out ash
—often used with out
spewer noun
spew
2 of 2
noun
1
: matter that is vomited : vomit
2
: material that exudes or is extruded
Your loss as you will no longer be able to enjoy my creative and witty repartee and I on the other hand will certainly miss your brand of genteel, elevated intellectualism. But as the great novelist said, so it goes.
If Doge was serious about saving taxpayers money, simply deport Trump and Musk .
Is this the "Lawfare" about which he so bitterly complained? Authoritarian playbook rules being followed once again. Even his executive order from February 18, 2025 qualifies -
Presidential Actions
Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies
The White House. February 18, 2025
Sec. 7. Rules of Conduct Guiding Federal Employees’ Interpretation of the Law. The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch.
In other words, the law is exclusively interpreted by the president and no other opinion will be tolerated. Once the authoritarian empties the courts of capable representation and assumes absolute authority over what the law says, there will be no need for a legal system. Just like the legislative branch.
Accusing past governments of what you plan to do is also standard-issue authoritarianism.
There is no easy way to combat this if you are a big law firm, unless you can find another big firm that has not been targeted to strike down these EO’s as unconstitutional. Unless….maybe having a big firm like Perkins hire a sole practitioner, with big law working quietly in the background, to file all of these before judge Howell or judge Chutkin as they roll out? Heck, a law student with special certification can probably file it, which would look pretty good on one’s resume after graduation, especially if they won.
As long as the request included granting a stay of any enforcement pending appeal by the WH, this could keep all these firms humming along, as long as Trump’s people obeyed the order. While Trump may have presidential immunity (though likely not for this, I believe, as there is no policy reason for this petty, vindictive behavior—he;s just exacting retribution on his enemies), those working for him or on his behalf do not enjoy such immunity, and would risk contempt, monetary penalties and imprisonment for failure to comply with any order.
The good thing about big law is that it can be pretty nimble, creative and fast when it needs to be. Associates are more like soldiers than anything else, and are willing to work 20 hour days to crank out first class product for as long as it takes to win. Most government employees don’t do this—and with the DOJ gutted, the ones who are left will be mediocre, overwhelmed or both.
This is the result of electing a low-IQ piece of human detritus President. You don't think that the Mango Mussolini is remotely smart enough to come up with these bits of revenge on his own, do you?
The Perkins and Covington cases will undoubtedly end up in the Supreme Court and it should be interesting to see if they revisit US v Trump, the case that gave him unlimited leeway in matters under Article II.
The issuance of security clearances fits that bill and hopefully some of the Justices (I have no hope for Alito and Thomas) will re-think the issue of the President's intent when exercising that authority.
You’re right. In military terms, it would be like Generals, who know they can’t win on the battlefield, bombing their enemy’s energy infrastructure, food supply, and water supply to starve them out. Dirty politics are reaching their ugliest under Donald Trump, who is doing politically what a mob boss would be doing gangland style.
Trump as Putin, Fox as Pravda, America as Russia West.
An interesting sidebar: This move against lawyers smacks up against the business of Chief Justice Roberts wife …
Interesting!
I lived in a city where the largest non government employer would hire many of the local law firms for various assignments and with the end result that there were few firms in town that would take cases against them.