General Discussion

treestar

(82,383 posts)

68. People don't get that the legal system

Wed Jun 9, 2021, 11:23 AM

Jun 2021

decides the questions. The government has to take the government's side. The side they support has counsel too. Government lawyers are there to argue the government's side, not to just cave where our side wants a result. And that result would not stand. It's like they are thinking their side is the losing one, so there should be no case risking an adverse ruling.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

To those ranting about AG Garland's decision to oppose a lawsuit against President Trump... [View all] brooklynite Jun 2021 OP

I think Rebl2 Jun 2021 #1

This! mcar Jun 2021 #2

DFT is not in office anymore RainCaster Jun 2021 #3

It is a defamation suit she made against trump when he was president JohnSJ Jun 2021 #5

She's made it against him. NT. SayItLoud Jun 2021 #25

I didn't word it right. Thanks, edited JohnSJ Jun 2021 #41

DFT is also subject to lawsuits now... brooklynite Jun 2021 #6

Sure, up to a point. krkaufman Jun 2021 #55

Exactly. orangecrush Jun 2021 #27

The problem is most in the media have done a terrible job of reporting what this is about JohnSJ Jun 2021 #4

I am confused by your Supreme Court decision Bev54 Jun 2021 #7

Here is a statement of the wikipedia Bev54 Jun 2021 #8

Carroll's defamation suit against trump is for statements he made while in office. Goodheart Jun 2021 #10

It's not "Trump's" defense, it's a defense of the executive branch and the presidency. NYC Liberal Jun 2021 #15

This. StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #18

No he has no immunity to civil lawsuits as president Bev54 Jun 2021 #21

That only works for Democratic presidents Bettie Jun 2021 #51

No StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #54

Your analogy fails because trump is not in office. Goodheart Jun 2021 #9

The analogy hold because the lawsuit was filed when Trump was President. brooklynite Jun 2021 #20

The question isn't can a sitting president be sued while in office Fiendish Thingy Jun 2021 #11

This message was self-deleted by its author Scrivener7 Jun 2021 #12

The Name 'Clinton' Comes To Mind, Sir The Magistrate Jun 2021 #13

This may not make a difference to your aasessment StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #17

THANK YOU SIR orangecrush Jun 2021 #28

Exactly right. n/t Liberal In Texas Jun 2021 #34

Presidents cant be investigated while presidenting Fullduplexxx Jun 2021 #14

The issue isn't whether a sitting president can be sued while in office StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #16

You believe he made the statements cilla4progress Jun 2021 #44

No, I don't believe that StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #45

I misunderstood, then. cilla4progress Jun 2021 #46

I think DOJ's move is a reasonable one StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #53

Well, alot of strong legal minds disagree with you - cilla4progress Jun 2021 #58

Strong legal minds often disagree with each other -;it happens all the time StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #59

Barb McQuade? cilla4progress Jun 2021 #62

Well said nt ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #19

Other than getting the law wrong... dpibel Jun 2021 #30

How do? ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #33

How so? dpibel Jun 2021 #63

Oh ok ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #64

All of you DOJ defenders gab13by13 Jun 2021 #22

She's not a lawyer. She's usually well prepared but on this case she's not, and she's wrong.... George II Jun 2021 #24

No she isn't gab13by13 Jun 2021 #29

There's MUCH more involved than this one case. Not defending trump in this defamation case.... George II Jun 2021 #31

Not true according to the lawyer on Rachel's show. gab13by13 Jun 2021 #35

Were does one draw the line? speak easy Jun 2021 #39

I'm a lawyer. And I think DOJ made a reasonable decision, even if I don't agree with it StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #40

From what I read, there are many cases where government employees are being sued... George II Jun 2021 #65

Your "layman's take" is correct StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #66

.... George II Jun 2021 #67

I agree. This is a weak case, and I hope a judge tosses the DOJ defense. Lonestarblue Jun 2021 #36

We all agree he wasn't performing his normal duties and that's up to a judge to decide for the sake uponit7771 Jun 2021 #70

Exactly. I wish people would read up on the Westfall Act. One attorney said earlier today that.... George II Jun 2021 #23

Thank you sir rpannier Jun 2021 #38

His statement was not that of a President performing their duty. LiberalFighter Jun 2021 #26

Exactly, gab13by13 Jun 2021 #32

+1. dalton99a Jun 2021 #37

What McQuade ignored ... StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #43

True but under Westfall Act the Biden admin SHOULD NOT decide that and it should be left up to ... uponit7771 Jun 2021 #47

Are these the only 2 choices? cilla4progress Jun 2021 #42

All Carrol has to do is speaknow Jun 2021 #48

+1, once a judge declares Putin's Whore's actions weren't in the rhelm of him job then Biden will uponit7771 Jun 2021 #49

today i heard more attacks on hunter/jo biden re china money etc- on rw radio certainot Jun 2021 #50

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for how dflprincess Jun 2021 #52

If you read the brief, you'll see that DOJ is not really making that argument. StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #57

**Breaking News** jalan48 Jun 2021 #56

Fortunately, AG Garland won't respond to a political slam ("act as Trump's personal attorney") brooklynite Jun 2021 #60

Wow. Do you talk regularly? jalan48 Jun 2021 #61

No, but I have 20 years of experience comparing DU and blogosphere demands to the real world brooklynite Jun 2021 #69

People don't get that the legal system treestar Jun 2021 #68