General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJudge dismisses Trump lawsuit against Clinton over 2016 Russia allegations
This is the long lawsuit filed by two shopping center lawyers representing TFG against Hillary Clinton and large number of other people such as Comey, Perter Struck and others. No top tier law firm would touch this lawsuit. One of of the defenses to the statute of limitations defense was that TFG was too busy being POTUS to file this lawsuit
Link to tweet
https://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisses-trump-lawsuit-against-124420268.html
In throwing out Trump's lawsuit Thursday night, Judge Donald Middlebrooks of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida said the lawsuit was not seeking "redress for any legal harm" and that the court was "not the appropriate forum" for the former president's complaints.
"He is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him," Middlebrooks said in his ruling.
Trump in March had sued Clinton, who was the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, and several other Democrats alleging "racketeering," a "conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood" and other claims in a 108-page lawsuit that echoed the long list of grievances he repeatedly aired during his four years in the White House after beating Clinton.
He had sought compensatory and punitive damages, saying he had incurred more than $24 million in "defense costs, legal fees, and related expenses."
In his ruling, Middlebrooks said Trump had waited too long to file his complaint by exceeding the legal statute of limitations for his claims and that he failed to make his case that he was harmed by any falsehoods, noting that many of the statements made by the defendants were "plainly protected by the First Amendment" of the U.S. Constitution.
The opinion is 65 pages but is a fun read. The judge had fun telling TFG's shopping center lawyes that they re idiots
Bev54
(10,037 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)This makes me smile
Link to tweet
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/09/politics/judge-throws-out-trumps-rico-lawsuit-against-hillary-clinton-and-democrats/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_content=2022-09-09T13%3A55%3A04&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNNp
US District Judge Donald Middlebrooks dismissed the lawsuit Thursday, saying "most of Plaintiff's claims are not only unsupported by any legal authority but plainly foreclosed by binding precedent."
Trump filed his sprawling lawsuit in March, naming a wide cast of characters that Trump has accused for years of orchestrating a "deep state" conspiracy against him -- including former FBI Director James Comey and other FBI officials, the retired British spy Christopher Steele and his associates, and a handful of Clinton campaign advisers.
CNN has reached out to Trump attorney Alina Habba for comment.
This is a breaking story and will be updated.
Ocelot II
(115,576 posts)in every law school in the country. I believe one of TFG's Lawyer Barbies, Alina Habba, was responsible for the dog's breakfast of a complaint, and she was righteously whacked upside the head. Even TFG's other incompetent lawyers think Habba is incompetent. https://www.thedailybeast.com/alina-habba-the-trump-lawyer-the-rest-of-trumps-legal-team-loathes
A few gems from the opinion:
of briefing on Plaintiffs original Complaint. But despite this briefing, Plaintiffs Amended Complaint failed to cure any of the deficiencies. Instead, Plaintiff added eighty new pages of largely irrelevant allegations that did nothing to salvage the legal sufficiency of his claims. The inadequacies with Plaintiffs Amended Complaint are not merely issues of technical pleading, as Plaintiff contends, but fatal substantive defects that preclude Plaintiff from proceeding under any of the theories he
has presented. At its core, the problem with Plaintiffs Amended Complaint is that Plaintiff is not attempting to seek redress for any legal harm; instead, he is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him, and this Court is not the appropriate forum.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.610157/gov.uscourts.flsd.610157.267.0.pdf
If any lawyer ever deserved crushing Rule 11 sanctions it's Alina Habba. Wadda maroon.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and it is moot, since he defeated Hillary in the election.
TFG thinks the courts will support his narcissistic injuries and he is wrong.
Ocelot II
(115,576 posts)And the judge correctly understood that he was using his legal claims as an airing of grievances.
treestar
(82,383 posts)TFG doesn't realize that undermines his claim to be the toughest and smartest, too. If he can have an economic injury from the other side in a political campaign. But he's got to play victim. It's what he does.
Ocelot II
(115,576 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)I tried to read the original petition when this lawsuit was filed and gave up. Again, TFG could only find two lawyers whose office are in shopping centers to file this lawsuit. When you use crappy lawyers, you get crappy work.
I was glad to see that the Judge left open the issue of sanctions against these attorneys and TFG
Hekate
(90,537 posts)Hekate
(90,537 posts)So I imagine.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)What would be the appropriate forum? I'm thinking "after school by the monkey bars."
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,711 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(33,239 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)TFG has been pushing the bizarre theory that Russia never tried to influence the 2016 election. This theory has no basis in reality, but TFG cannot accept the concept that he did not win 2016 on his own merits. It is clear that in the real world, Putin got TFG elected and TFG cannot accept reality
The lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the Clinton campaign and 30+ defendants was so bad that it was impossible to read. Again, this lawsuit was drafted by two lawyers whose offices are in shopping centers and these idiots just put down TFG's craze ravings as facts. i loved the opinion that came down today that rejected TFG's crazed beliefs about Russian and the 2016 election.
Link to tweet
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/09/trump-2016-russia-clinton/
And then, earlier this year, a change. Trump proudly removed his Russia theory from its home and presented it to the court, like a kid digging up a dandelion hed been watching in his yard and offering it as a horticulture contender at the state fair. The verdict, offered in a filing on Thursday, was probably not what Trump would have hoped.
Suffice it to say, he did not earn a blue ribbon.
The background here is interesting, by the way. Trump presented his grand Russia hoax conspiracy in the form of a lawsuit, alleging that Hillary Clinton and others FBI officials, attorneys, IT guys had conspired against him in violation of racketeering statutes (a.k.a. RICO). The suit was filed in a specific courthouse in the Southern District of Florida, apparently with the hope that it would be heard by a particular judge that Trump himself had appointed......
In short, the theory that flourished in Trumps friendly ecosystem was that the Russia probe was a function of explicit dishonesty on the part of Clinton: that her allies sought to create a dossier of false reports about Trump and Russia and that they used stolen data to suggest a link between Trumps business and a Russian bank......
The judge made very clear that he understood Trumps suit for what it obviously is.
At its core, the problem with Plaintiffs Amended Complaint is that Plaintiff is not attempting to seek redress for any legal harm, he wrote. instead, he is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him, and this Court is not the appropriate forum.
TFG's had no facts to support his claims and the court had no problem rejecting TFG's rants. Now it is time to sanction TFG and his shopping center lawyers for wasting the court's time on TFG's bizarre theory
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)TFG can not get top tier firms to take his cases. This lawsuit was filed by two lawyers who office in shopping centers. I read the original petition and it was dreck. This lawsuit was so bad that the attorneys who filed it are looking at sanctions
Link to tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/how-do-donald-trump-s-lawsuits-keep-getting-crazier-n1298841?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
Middlebrooks damning assessment of the filing is the federal judicial equivalent of a teacher grading a students paper with the remark, I dont even know what youre saying and I cant believe you made me read it.
In lieu of winning legal arguments, Trump likes to make political arguments in court. He must believe it gives his preposterous lies the veneer of legitimacy to make them there. But just like his post-election litigation strategy, Trumps suit against Clinton was always doomed to fail because it was supported by neither law nor facts. Middlebrooks correctly noted that Trumps suit read as a political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him, rather than a proper court filing......
Possessing neither a coherent legal theory nor facts to support such a theory is fatal to a legal case. Trump must have known this. And yet he brought the case anyway. Because shouting on a website or a faux campaign rally is one thing, but shouting in a courtroom can still give the imprimatur of legitimacy. Judge Middlebrooks, luckily, was having none of this nonsense. And neither should we.
The only people who should potentially face legal repercussions from his suit are the ones who filed it. Attorneys are bound by rules of professional conduct which prohibit them from filing frivolous suits, including political manifestos. Judge Middlebrooks appeared to find as much when he noted that lawyers must certify to the court that, to the best of their knowledge, the claims they are making are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument to change the law and that the factual contentions have evidentiary support[.]