Trump raided by the FBI! Mar-a-Lago search warrant!!

[squeezer]

The Republican Party, the party the supports law enforcment

 

[Valcazar]

The former guy tried desperately for years to be accepted by the establishment without success. He is not part of the establishment but not for want of trying. Much of his rhetoric is directed at the establishment because they rejected him. It is like the guy who continually bad mouths the woman who has rejected him.

Much like his relationship with Hollywood. Before announcing his run he loved to be surrounded by Hollywood types. Afterward the best he could do was Scott Baio and he now continually bashes Hollywood.

He was never accepted fully in the New York old money establishment, or in Hollywood establishment circles.

But again, this has a lot to do with what you mean by "the Establishment".
If it is just "people who have it good in the current status quo in this group" then sure, some of the political establishment thought he could be used but that he is awful.

However, Trump is his own Establishment now. You want to get ahead in the MAGA/GOP, you need to be in good with The Establishment - Trump and his inner circle of cronies.

That a lot of people who were already involved with politics didn't like Trump is not some deep secret.
The idea that he can't get good lawyers because of "The Establishment" is just a weird thing to say when "He doesn't pay his lawyers" is one of his best known traits.

 

[Valcazar]

But they're not "the" establishment.

They're a meritocracy that likely despises his lack of intelligence and crudeness. As would you and I. There are many other factions that would accept him.

The idea that CEOs are a meritocracy seems far fetched. (Maybe in the original, negative sense of the term.)

Actually, danmad can clarify some here if he wants.
Surely all CEOs can't be "The Establishment" so maybe he can clarify who actually counts as this mysterious entity.

 

[Leimonis]

He was never accepted fully in the New York old money establishment, or in Hollywood establishment circles.

But again, this has a lot to do with what you mean by "the Establishment".
If it is just "people who have it good in the current status quo in this group" then sure, some of the political establishment thought he could be used but that he is awful.

However, Trump is his own Establishment now. You want to get ahead in the MAGA/GOP, you need to be in good with The Establishment - Trump and his inner circle of cronies.

That a lot of people who were already involved with politics didn't like Trump is not some deep secret.
The idea that he can't get good lawyers because of "The Establishment" is just a weird thing to say when "He doesn't pay his lawyers" is one of his best known traits.

Then again, why waste money on good lawyers when you have no case?

 

[squeezer]

White House officials express concern about classified docs taken to Mar-a-Lago

 

[Valcazar]

Then again, why waste money on good lawyers when you have no case?

I am pretty sure good lawyers help even in a case where you have clearly broken the law.
There is a lot of difference in what happens to you based on intent, technicalities, and how you frame what actually happened and which parts are admissible.

Pretty sure the difference between 30 days probation and a fine and five years in jail or worse is often good lawyering.

 

[toguy5252]

Then again, why waste money on good lawyers when you have no case?

Good lawyers are more likely to insist upon getting paid up front.

 

[Leimonis]

Good lawyers are more likely to insist upon getting paid up front.

which is exactly the problem lol

 

[danmand]

I am pretty sure good lawyers help even in a case where you have clearly broken the law.
There is a lot of difference in what happens to you based on intent, technicalities, and how you frame what actually happened and which parts are admissible.

Pretty sure the difference between 30 days probation and a fine and five years in jail or worse is often good lawyering.

In other words, your treatment by the law depends on your status in society. The legal system is fundamentally corrupt.

Lawyers should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Leimonis]

In other words, your treatment by the law depends on your status in society. The legal system is fundamentally corrupt.

Lawyers should be ashamed of themselves.

name a society that resolved this issue (except Soviet Union in 1937) or forever hold your peace

 

[Valcazar]

In other words, your treatment by the law depends on your status in society.

Yes.
This is well known.
Some societies have mitigated this better than others, but none have eliminated it.

The legal system is fundamentally corrupt.

And what do you support instead of a legal system?

 

[danmand]

Yes.
This is well known.
Some societies have mitigated this better than others, but none have eliminated it.

I just find it offensive when lawyers are openly rejoicing about the fact that you get better results when you have more expensive lawyers. Lawyers, as officers of the court, should be ashamed of that fact instead of being smug about it.

Of course, it is not only a problem for the legal system. It is the same for the tax system, where you pay less tax if you employ expensive accountants.

 

[danmand]

name a society that resolved this issue (except Soviet Union in 1937) or forever hold your peace

Not going to happen.

 

[Leimonis]

I just find it offensive when lawyers are openly rejoicing about the fact that you get better results when you have more expensive lawyers. Lawyers, as officers of the court, should be ashamed of that fact instead of being smug about it.

Of course, it is not only a problem for the legal system. It is the same for the tax system, where you pay less tax if you employ expensive accountants.

how about carpenters? Can some of them be better than others or all officers of lumber are supposed to be the same?

 

[danmand]

how about carpenters? Can some of them be better than others or all officers of lumber are supposed to be the same?

You need to go to joke training.

 

[Valcazar]

I just find it offensive when lawyers are openly rejoicing about the fact that you get better results when you have more expensive lawyers. Lawyers, as officers of the court, should be ashamed of that fact instead of being smug about it.

Of course, it is not only a problem for the legal system. It is the same for the tax system, where you pay less tax if you employ expensive accountants.

No argument there, although I doubt Trump would stand for a public defender, no matter how qualified they were.

 

[Leimonis]

You need to go to joke training.

lol what a rude way to avoid answering a question

 

[mandrill]

Humiliating: Lawyer who rejected Trump job offer recounts decision | Watch (msn.com)

 

[mandrill]

I just find it offensive when lawyers are openly rejoicing about the fact that you get better results when you have more expensive lawyers. Lawyers, as officers of the court, should be ashamed of that fact instead of being smug about it.

Of course, it is not only a problem for the legal system. It is the same for the tax system, where you pay less tax if you employ expensive accountants.

That's not really true btw.

Except perhaps in your mind.

 

[danmand]

lol what a rude way to avoid answering a question

What is it they say: you ask a stupid question, them you get a stupid answer.