Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Judge dismisses Trump lawsuit against Clinton over 2016 Russia allegations [View all]LetMyPeopleVote
(145,046 posts)14. Donald Trump's failed lawsuit against Hillary Clinton could get his lawyers in trouble
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
Donald Trump lost in his fight against Hillary Clinton. No, this is not the opening scene of an alternative reality show in which the audience steps back in time and Clinton wins the 2016 presidential election. It is the final scene of a fight that ended Thursday when federal Judge Donald Middlebrooks threw out a lawsuit former President Trump filed against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, calling Trumps filing difficult to summarize in a concise and cohesive manner. In fact, that was perhaps the kindest thing one can say about Trumps lawsuit......
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[.]
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[.]
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
17 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Judge dismisses Trump lawsuit against Clinton over 2016 Russia allegations [View all]
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
OP
Judge throws out Trump's RICO lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and Democrats
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
#2
Oh. My. God. This opinion should be required reading in every civil procedure class
Ocelot II
Sep 2022
#3
In this lawsuit TFG was claiming economic injuries, regardless of the fact that he won.
Ocelot II
Sep 2022
#5
There must be scorch marks on that response from the thundering speed of the judge's typing
Hekate
Sep 2022
#16
Gonna take a while to read this, but the teasers posted by Ocelot II, above, are irresistable.
Hermit-The-Prog
Sep 2022
#9
Donald Trump's failed lawsuit against Hillary Clinton could get his lawyers in trouble
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
#14