339
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I wasn't disagreeing. I was saying I have no idea why he thinks this won't piss off the judge even more beyond plain stupidity (which might be all it is) and it's not a jury trial. The company has already been found liable. The more he pisses off the judge, the more likely the judge will end his business empire.

So maybe he's an idiot and thinks he'll get away with it this time, but he already hasn't gotten away with it. He's already past that point in this trial.

[-] Catma@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I hate giving Trump credit for anything but I think this may be calculated to some extent. He knows his business is toast in NY and knows he was already found liable. His constant back and forth with the court is to get the fine as high as possible. His followers will see it as the courts going after their guy. They will not care he was found liable already because the evidence was so overwhelming the judge even in the most favourable terms saw no chance for him to win the case. All they will see is the judge extracting a huge fine because he is a a NY judge. They will blame Biden or liberals or the deep state. Never the one person that is truely at fault.

This is the same play as Alex Jones, Steve Bannon, and Roger Stone.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but he's still lost his main source of income. Possibly even Mar-a-Lago.

[-] JunkMilesDavis@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I would guess it's about as calculated as a fish swimming. The guy has simply always done this in all situations, and it has never not worked, so why would he stop. It's like the world-record run of playing "Do you know who I am?" with the police officer.

this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
339 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
5338 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