ADVERTISEMENT

Habba out

No. She didn’t preserve shit or do things right he’s sol.

Legal malpractice lawsuit after
You know, I could see that happening.

Trump playing 4-D chess.

Hires a dumb, hot lawyer. Builds her up. Brags about her.

Let's her go into the courtroom completely unprepared.

Then he sues her for 85 million and walks away with a smile on him face and an extra two million.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
You know, I could see that happening.

Trump playing 4-D chess.

Hires a dumb, hot lawyer. Builds her up. Brags about her.

Let's her go into the courtroom completely unprepared.

Then he sues her for 85 million and walks away with a smile on him face and an extra two million.
Ha no it doesn’t work like that. If she has coverage at all I bet it’s one mil or less
 
You know, I could see that happening.

Trump playing 4-D chess.

Hires a dumb, hot lawyer. Builds her up. Brags about her.

Let's her go into the courtroom completely unprepared.

Then he sues her for 85 million and walks away with a smile on him face and an extra two million.
Trump’s burning through donor dough to pay all these legal fees. He’s got a long way to go too. An ancillary consequence of all this is he may be light on cash when it comes to ads and all the rest for his campaign. The shit donors actually assumed they were contributing to
 
Your final point is key, you ALWAYS switch to an appelate specialist, so this is no great surprise.
Sometimes, yes. Always? No. I have worked on cases through the sequence of stages of litigation, including SCOTUS - every time with the same co-counsel throughout the process.

Now, when you get your ass handed to you by the trial court, most clients are indeed smart enough to use new counsel for the appeal.
 
Trump’s burning through donor dough to pay all these legal fees. He’s got a long way to go too. An ancillary consequence of all this is he may be light on cash when it comes to ads and all the rest for his campaign. The shit donors actually assumed they were contributing to
Hopefully Habba came cheap. The crazy thing is that she obviously was not the only lawyer working on the case. Yet, she was the one picked to be lead trial counsel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
It was a performance, not a defense.
Absolutely. Supposedly her demeanor was wildly different whenever Trump was in the courtroom. I have seen that before in depositions, meetings, etc., but to do that in court is insane. Judges hate that crap, and even jurors will pick up on it.

In a very slight defense of Habba, I could not imagine trying to represent a client like Trump in court (or anywhere else for that matter). It's possible that she felt she had to act like that whenever Trump was in the courtroom else who knows how he would act or what he would say in open court if he felt she was not being aggressive enough.

Similar to doctors, one of the jobs of a lawyer is to try to make sure your client doesn't dig themselves a deeper hole than they are already in - i.e., protect the client from themselves. Combine that with the normal desire to please your client, and it's a recipe for disaster. There was simply no way Habba was going to stand up to Trump, even when it was for his own good.
 
There’s a scene shot from the elevated vantage of the judge’s bench where you’re looking through the judge’s eyes at hour after hour of jimmy pacing around making arguments on behalf of one appointed case after another that is at once absolutely hysterical and perfect. Man what a great show. I miss it. It’s been a good run of tv

Curb
Sopranos
Breaking bad
Better call Saul
Vanderpump Rules
Game of thrones
Girls

Anyway I’m out for a bit on a work marathon. Try to keep anymore of my team from getting banned. Put in a good word where needed
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: twenty02
You know, I could see that happening.

Trump playing 4-D chess.

Hires a dumb, hot lawyer. Builds her up. Brags about her.

Let's her go into the courtroom completely unprepared.

Then he sues her for 85 million and walks away with a smile on him face and an extra two million.
No reason to think Habba has anything close to $85 million. That kind of chess would surely be a net loss for Trump.

Trump's campaign has already been sued by a large donor for something to do with how Trump's campaign money was being spent (can't remember his exact allegation). I have to think Trump is limited/prohibited by law in some way from using campaign donations to pay personal liabilities.

Hell, I just read that authorities have pinched some televangelist for soliciting offerings to his ministry and then spending the receipts on expensive personal property. I hope politicians are covered by similar laws.
 
Absolutely. Supposedly her demeanor was wildly different whenever Trump was in the courtroom. I have seen that before in depositions, meetings, etc., but to do that in court is insane. Judges hate that crap, and even jurors will pick up on it.

In a very slight defense of Habba, I could not imagine trying to represent a client like Trump in court (or anywhere else for that matter). It's possible that she felt she had to act like that whenever Trump was in the courtroom else who knows how he would act or what he would say in open court if he felt she was not being aggressive enough.

Similar to doctors, one of the jobs of a lawyer is to try to make sure your client doesn't dig themselves a deeper hole than they are already in - i.e., protect the client from themselves. Combine that with the normal desire to please your client, and it's a recipe for disaster. There was simply no way Habba was going to stand up to Trump, even when it was for his own good.
Any good lawyer would know this about Trump at this point, of course.
 
There’s a scene shot from the elevated vantage of the judge’s bench where you’re looking through the judge’s eyes at hour after hour of jimmy pacing around making arguments on behalf of one appointed case after another that is at once absolutely hysterical and perfect. Man what a great show. I miss it. It’s been a good run of tv

Curb
Sopranos
Breaking bad
Better call Saul
Vanderpump Rules
Game of thrones
Girls

Anyway I’m out for a bit on a work marathon. Try to keep anymore of my team from getting banned. Put in a good word where needed
Can’t wait for Curb, coming soon. Girls? That’s surprising. If you liked it, didn’t you like Sex and the City? I loved it. Lots and sex and relationships but even more about their friendships. The new one is trash though.
 
No. She didn’t preserve shit or do things right he’s sol.

Legal malpractice lawsuit after
I've been a trial lawyer for 27 years doing construction and commercial litigation. I've seen a lot of dopey lawyers, but nothing like this. Shocking. My experience is that her behavior at the trial would have likely had her held in contempt before nearly every state court judge, let alone a federal judge. Truly embarrassing personality before a jury.

The other thing is Juries hate incompetence, hate the performative over the top stuff, and one lie before the jury will kill you. There was so much wrong about her performance...so much. And all she had to do to find out what went south was to talk to the jury after the trial--99% of the time they will talk to the attorneys. I doubt very much she tried to do that for obvious reasons.

Judge Kaplan is supposed to be a very good judge-- a buddy and former IU grad is a US attorney in that district and calls him the best trial judge out there. Probably because he was a very accomplished litigator.

You are right--No ineffective assistance of counsel in civil cases--your remedy as an aggrieved client is to sue for malpractice, and that might not be a as strong a case given that this was a trial on damages only because of collateral estoppel
 
Last edited:
Absolutely. Supposedly her demeanor was wildly different whenever Trump was in the courtroom. I have seen that before in depositions, meetings, etc., but to do that in court is insane. Judges hate that crap, and even jurors will pick up on it.
Jurors pick up everything. You might not think they do, but they see everything. They don't like frowns and scowling on lawyers, histrionics, yelling, shouting, bad body language. My first lengthy jury trial was 2 and 1/2 week deal. I was 5 years out. I got a no cause, but my boss said "win or lose, go talk to the jury and learn what they think of you". So I did. They liked my efforts and worked but all 7 jurors pointed out that they didn't like how my leg shaked under the table because it was distracting. Good lesson as to what juries see.

I love the jury system. If you gave me a choice between choosing between a judge and a jury, I'd pick the jury 99% of the time because I think by and large they get it right more than judges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
I've been a trial lawyer for 27 years doing construction and commercial litigation. I've seen a lot of dopey lawyers, but nothing like this. Shocking. My experience is that her behavior at the trial would have likely had her held in contempt before nearly every state court judge, let alone a federal judge. Truly embarrassing personality before a jury.

The other thing is Juries hate incompetence, hate the performative over the top stuff, and one lie before the jury will kill you. There was so much wrong about her performance...so much. And all she had to do to find out what went south was to talk to the jury after the trial--99% of the time they will talk to the attorneys. I doubt very much she tried to do that for obvious reasons.

Judge Carroll is supposed to be a very good judge-- a buddy and former IU grad is a US attorney in that district and calls him the best trial judge out there. Probably because he was a very accomplished litigator.

You are right--No ineffective assistance of counsel in civil cases--your remedy as an aggrieved client is to sue for malpractice, and that might not be a as strong a case given that this was a trial on damages only because of collateral estoppel
She’s horrible but trump has zero shot of winning a legal mal case against her even if she had that kind of money. Prox cause of loss. But for neg would have won underlying or not had damages blah blah.

Should have just hired someone good. No ass is worth 83 mil
 
Last edited:
She’s horrible but trump has zero shot of winning a legal mal case against her even if she had that kind of money. Prox cause of loss. But for neg would have won underlying or not had damages blah blah.

Should have just hired someone good. No ass is worth 83 mil
Oh, I agree, he wouldn't win. But she could've gotten a better result. And you are right, she ain't got a pot to piss in. A judgment would be worthless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Can’t wait for Curb, coming soon. Girls? That’s surprising. If you liked it, didn’t you like Sex and the City? I loved it. Lots and sex and relationships but even more about their friendships. The new one is trash though.
Never watched sex and the city but watched all of girls with my ex stoker. Lena Dunham is horribly woke but very very funny. It was a great show. A coming of age show for my Gen.
 
I've been a trial lawyer for 27 years
I fvcking KNEW it. <sigh>

That said, I sincerely appreciate your recent contributions. Please keep it up.
I've seen a lot of dopey lawyers, but nothing like this.
May I introduce you to dmb?
Judge Carroll is supposed to be a very good judge
I know you meant Kaplan, not Carroll, but don't be surprised when one of the usual shitposters gloms on to this and calls you an idiot.
 
Last edited:
Yup and parlay it into tv or something else like brad said

Greenberg and the rest have to go back to living their lives in six minute increments. She made millions in a year

She's not very attractive and certainly not personable.

Some of you either need to get your eyes checked, or to get laid to wash out the fluid build up, she's not even worthy of a 3am desperation pick up. Well, that probably depends on just how desperate and shit faced drunk you are but still .. ewwwww.
 
She's not very attractive and certainly not personable.

Some of you either need to get your eyes check, or to get laid to wash out the fluid build up.

Ewwwww....
You get nuttier by the day. I’ve never heard her speak, no nothing of her personality, and only seen her pics on the internet and still feel confident to say that she’s probably 40 and in the top 1 percent in that age group and up. I’m not into older women but I would meet her for happy hour and see if I could tolerate whatever her voice and personality are. Hopefully she has vocal fry. I like that
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
Oh, I agree, he wouldn't win. But she could've gotten a better result. And you are right, she ain't got a pot to piss in. A judgment would be worthless.
We can't accurately judge her without knowing what Trump told her to do and what Trump allowed her to do. Trump controls everything

Trump made faces and spoke out loud in reaction to the testimony, stormed out of the courtroom, and even argued with the judge a couple times. Trump wasn't even trying to be likable in front of the jury. His behavior would not have been likable even in 3rd grade.

Enlarge this photo of Trump in the fraud courtroom recently:to be reminded what his scowl looks like:
AP23276544167734.jpg

That's not the way to impress a jury. (I don't think the Carroll trial allowed cameras in the courtroom.)
 
I know you meant Kaplan, not Carroll, but don't be surprised when one of the usual shitposters gloms on to this and calls you an idiot.
Boy what a goof. Speed kills for sure. Thanks for heads up on me being a dummy lol
 
We can't accurately judge her without knowing what Trump told her to do and what Trump allowed her to do. Trump controls everything
We have a very good idea by reading her motions and response briefs; the transcript; her own evidentiary ignorance (which was astounding), and her overall legal acumen. Her line of questioning was baffling.

She was losing the case regardless, but she firmly established that she was well over her skis before the trial began. It only got worse. What astounds me is how in the world was she hired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
We have a very good idea by reading her motions and response briefs; the transcript; her own evidentiary ignorance (which was astounding), and her overall legal acumen. Her line of questioning was baffling.

She was losing the case regardless, but she firmly established that she was well over her skis before the trial began. It only got worse. What astounds me is how in the world was she hired.
When the underlying case is about being a predator, you’ve been accused of being an Epstein partier, and have a history of questionable encounters preying on chicks it defies common sense to have a hot young lawyer for your rep. Bad optics sitting next to her and no sense. But that’s trump
 
When the underlying case is about being a predator, you’ve been accused of being an Epstein partier, and have a history of questionable encounters preying on chicks it defies common sense to have a hot young lawyer for your rep. Bad optics sitting next to her and no sense. But that’s trump
Hes Right GIF by moodman
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mcmurtry66
When the underlying case is about being a predator, you’ve been accused of being an Epstein partier, and have a history of questionable encounters preying on chicks it defies common sense to have a hot young lawyer for your rep. Bad optics sitting next to her and no sense. But that’s trump

Bless your heart.

Alina_Habba-Feet-7144386.jpg
Yep. Pretty easy to figure out.

Maybe he should campaign on putting together the best looking cabinet in US history?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT