259
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] aew360@lemm.ee 91 points 10 months ago

Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, did not directly address Mr. Tacopina’s departure, saying only that Mr. Trump “has the most experienced, qualified, disciplined, and overall strongest legal team ever assembled”

Oh yeah, his legal team is fucked

[-] Chemical@lemmy.world 47 points 10 months ago

Sounds like a statement from North Korea.

[-] st3ph3n@midwest.social 17 points 10 months ago
[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 4 points 10 months ago

Good old Baghdad Bob!

Last I heard, he was the spokesman for a Turning Point USA chapter. Didn't even have to change his communication style or anything!

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Fkn lol, dude was hilarious.

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago
[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 22 points 10 months ago

He's not wrong. I've never seen so many lawyers receive so many punishments from so few judges. They are indeed getting disciplined.

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Fun #LIFEHACK!

Remember to just always add the words "does not" or "is not" into these statements if you want the actual truth.

"DOES NOT have the most..."

"IS NOT the most..."

[-] Jackcooper@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

They'll be immediately saying it was a bad team that couldn't win an obviously innocent case when he loses

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 72 points 10 months ago

It was not clear why Mr. Tacopina decided to withdraw, and he declined to comment.

Hahahaha! AhhhhhhhhHahahahahahaha! Does anyone think it’s NOT because Trump’s check bounced and he refused to pay what they agreed?

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 26 points 10 months ago

More likely he realized that Donnie is likely to do something that will get him disbarred.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 19 points 10 months ago

I think it's because Joe thinks sanctions or worse are an imminent possibility, and he doesn't want to throw away his career (any more than he has) on Trump's bullshit.

[-] youngGoku@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Probably because trump went off on a rant during closing arguments after his lawyers and the judge toldbhin not to.

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago

Yeah having a client who can't keep his fucking mouth shut in the courtroom, and has their fan-club threaten members of the judicial, etc isn't a great thing

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

It could also be because he has basic pattern recognition and saw how many of Trumps former lawyers are being convicted of serious crimes.

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

It could be that he finally found a lawyer who wouldn't break the law for him?

[-] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Based on the actual article it sounds like they disagreed in whether Trump should make the closing arguments.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 41 points 10 months ago

This is why Trump basically has multiple teams of freshman lawyers.

The few experienced lawyers brave enough to take him on quickly find out that he's a giant man-baby who's unable to be controlled or reasoned with (or their hubris makes them think they are one who can), and the greenhorns are too naive to know it's a trap and that they're just fodder for the Trump Grift Machine.

Either way, get fucked Joe. You should have left long ago and kept whatever shred of decency you used to have, instead of letting this rapist continue to abuse his victim.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 30 points 10 months ago

I suspect it's more about realizing that he won't get paid than anything else. Plenty of lawyers willing to defend the guilty when they're paid to do it

[-] zurohki@aussie.zone 2 points 10 months ago

I suspect quite a few would represent a former president for free just to have that on their resume, it's being disbarred or named in future lawsuits that's the deal-breaker.

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

When they think they have a chance to win, and even they can control their client

[-] silverbax@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

These idiots always work until they try to get paid.

[-] DocMcStuffin@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

Tacopina declined to say why he was leaving. If he's a competent lawyer then he'd require cash up front. My money is on Trump being stupid with his lawyers again, or he refused to add more funds to his account.

[-] ThePantser@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

They really should be demanding payment up front. I have always had to pay up front when talk with a lawyer how is he not paying them?

[-] Countess425@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

You only pay a certain amount up front. Once that amount is used up, they bill hourly sending invoices once or twice a month. When he doesn't pay that, the attorney quits, and trump has to hire a new (sometimes team of) lawyer who needs time to get up to speed on the case and it can be a delaying tactic as much as lowlife-ness.

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

Chris Kise did just that, got his $3M up front.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

I think Trump makes his lawyers miserable on purpose, and counts on them to leave now and then. One of his key tactics is delay. And asking for a delay because your old lawyer bailed on you and you have to bring on someone new is reasonable.... Until it's done one too many times.

[-] ThePantser@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

They should be forced to disclose why they quit and if it's because of non payment then the court should not allow them to delay they should proceed as scheduled.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 11 points 10 months ago

They have to disclose it to the judge, but I agree that this shouldn't be allowed to delay the trial if the defendant has a history of intentional delay.

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Not necessarily. If they withdraw by motion, then certainly, but if successor counsel is in place they usually don't need to.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 2 points 10 months ago

Ah, that's interesting. Thanks!

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Or appoint a public defender

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

Mr. O'Brien, one and a trombone to beam up.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

No cash, no work.

[-] EnderLaw@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Any lawyer who represents Trump should have their head examined. He lies to them, blames them when the lies don't work, and then stiffs them on the bill.   It's just stupid to represent him. The really good lawyers already know this and decline representation. The ones who stupidly take his cases get what they deserve.

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

lol get rekt bitches

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Mr. Tacopina also withdrew on Monday from another case in which he was still legally representing Mr. Trump: an appeal of the verdict in a lawsuit brought by the writer E. Jean Carroll.

The trial in Manhattan, in which he is accused of falsifying business records to hide hush-money payments to a porn star during the 2016 election, could begin as early as March.

He has represented high-profile clients ranging from the Fox News host Sean Hannity, who on his show called Mr. Tacopina one of the “greatest defense attorneys of all time,” to the former Yankees star Alex Rodriguez and the rapper A$AP Rocky.

The withdrawals came a day before jury selection is set to begin in a second trial stemming from the allegations brought by Ms. Carroll, who accused Mr. Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

Mr. Trump last week delivered part of his own closing remarks in the New York attorney general’s civil case, and was rebuked by the judge for going outside the confines of what he was allowed to talk about.

Mr. Rodriguez, in a brief interview, said he could not speak to Mr. Tacopina’s involvement with Mr. Trump, but described his own experience being represented by him as he battled a suspension from Major League Baseball related to steroid use.


The original article contains 767 words, the summary contains 223 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
259 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19103 readers
3040 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS