I know I said "facts matter," but you do have to have some law to stand on, and I'm pretty sure this suit doesn't.Donald Trump has filed a sprawling RICO case against Hillary Clinton and others, alleging a conspiracy to make him look compromised by Russia.
— Jan Wolfe (@JanNWolfe) March 24, 2022
(Fact check: A GOP-led Senate panel found Russia used Manafort and WikiLeaks to try to help Trump's campaign)https://t.co/GzMjDpMT3C pic.twitter.com/vBEEuPJWjz
That would be one problem. The other would be complete failure to state a cause of action (i.e., grounds upon which the court could grant relief). Like Bradley Moss, and for the same reasons, I haven't read the actual complaint:Dear Former President Trump:
— RacistAFBabiesHat (@Popehat) March 24, 2022
Next time, hire lawyers smart enough not to concede repeatedly in your lolsuit that Russia was a hostile foreign sovereignty.
But this is simply gibberish:You couldn’t even pay me to read this garbage https://t.co/3bpKdZWrAr
— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) March 24, 2022
"Under the guise of ‘opposition research,’ ‘data analytics,’ and other political stratagems, the Defendants nefariously sought to sway the public’s trust," the lawsuit states. "They worked together with a single, self-serving purpose: to vilify Donald J. Trump. Indeed, their far-reaching conspiracy was designed to cripple Trump’s bid for presidency by fabricating a scandal that would be used to trigger an unfounded federal investigation and ignite a media frenzy."
That's called "life in the big city." Or in the public eye. Or just in politics. Considering what Trump did to Obama, this is simply laughable (and no, what Trump did to Obama is not a legal defense here. I just mean to point out Trump needs to put on his big boy pants. This suit is embarrassing, and I don't even like the guy.).
This is prompting no small amount of rejoinder on factual grounds, but that's effort wasted here. I expect the defendants to respond (once they are served; this will take a while in Twitter time) with a Motion to Dismiss, mostly for failure to state a cause of action. Which will be followed by an amended complaint, trying to come up with a cause of action; but if they finally can't (and they can't amend forever promising to come up with one), it gets tossed. It should result in charging Trump for all defendant's attorneys fees for a frivolous lawsuit, but a) that probably won't happen (it seldom does); b) Trump would never pay it; and c), the defendants would be well off just to get rid of this farce instanter. Or as soon as the court will, whichever comes first.
In the meantime, Trump may decide he has to join Biden in this lolsuit:
Especially since Trump is the reason Biden decided to run in 2020. I'm sure somehow that's Hillary's fault. In the meantime, we can be entertained:"The next election I'd be very fortunate if I had that same man running against me," says President Joe Biden at NATO, essentially mocking Trump.pic.twitter.com/6ueQmsCvrY
— David Badash (@davidbadash) March 24, 2022
— DanLS (@lauerschu) March 24, 2022It occurs to me there are two ways to get rid of this litigation: 1) move to dismiss based on failure to state a cause of action; 2) ask to take Trump's deposition. And this is a take:
Another reason never to go to Twitter for legal advice.Trump's ridiculous, insane lawsuit was enabled by the complete and utter failure of cowards like Merrick Garland and Alvin Bragg, who have let Trump run out the clock on multiple felonies.
— Rob needs more sci-fi 🚀🛸 (@daltonator) March 24, 2022
No comments:
Post a Comment