Alina Habba Faking Smart Again
Fool me once, can't get fooled again.
“Somebody said to me, 'Alina would you rather be smart or pretty,' and I said, 'Oh easy, pretty. I can fake being smart.'” Presumably she’s got that on her vision board for sometime.
But sometime ain’t today.
Donald Trump’s less-than-ideal lawyer Alina Habba has suddenly found a new reason the verdict in the latest E. Jean Carroll defamation case is so unfair, you guys. They’ve been pretending throughout that this was a case about whether or not Trump has already been found liable for sexually assaulting and defaming Carroll. He has, and this was literally just about damages. The jury decided on $83.3 million.
But you guys, the judge was so mean and kept making fun of Habba and saying she didn’t even know how to get documents into evidence, like as if! And he was hostile to her in other ways also too!
The newest fresh turd Habba is casually tossing at the judicial system is her discovery, based on the intrepid journalism of the New York Post (said no one ever), that Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan were sittin’ in a tree a long time ago, therefore IMPEACH!
But were they really? Did the New York Post find the scoop of the century?
New York Post columnist Charles Gasparino — some idiot — told Habba this weekend that Kaplan the judge was, according to a “source,” once Kaplan the lawyer’s mentor. And Habba didn’t bother to do any checking to see if it was true or not, because she was already firing off a letter to the court full of scream-yelling.
“It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,” Habba said, insisting neither the 79-year-old judge nor Roberta Kaplan, 57, who aren’t related, disclosed the “conflict of interest” and a violation of judicial ethics rules.
That sounds like some really cool due diligence to do, um, like, perhaps sometime before a trial is over and your shitpiss lawyering has helped part your client with $83.3 million of his blood moneys.
But no:
“This is news to us,” she continued. “We are going to include this in our appeal and take appropriate measures. The fact it wasn’t disclosed is an ethics violation.”
Sure.
So she fired off a letter and she is very mad.
But is there a thing here? Not according to Roberta Kaplan’s spox:
“They overlapped for less than two years in the early 1990s at a large law firm when he was a senior partner and she was a junior associate and she never worked for him,” said the spokesperson, who declined to provide further comment.
And also not a thing, according to Roberta Kaplan, who decided she needed to write a mash note back, all “nope” and “nuh uh” and “never happened.”
Indeed, 32 fucking years ago, in 1992, Roberta Kaplan joined the enormous law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In 1994, 30 fucking years ago, Lewis Kaplan was appointed to a judgeship by Bill Clinton.
But Gasparino — some idiot — SWEARS his source is a former partner, who says “Lew was like her mentor.”
And oh, the weeping and gnashing of teeth in Habba’s letter. Did you know that THIS is what explains why the judge was so mean to her? It was not that she is garbage and bad at her job, or that she fucked around the entire trial and wasted the court’s time and, again, seemed clueless or willfully ignorant about how to get a document into evidence.
In the letter, Habba insists on calling Donald Trump not “the defendant” or “that sexually violent sack of shit,” but “President Trump.” And she bellyaches:
"The underlying defamation case tried last year, and the damages trial completed last week, were both litigations in which there were many clashes between Your Honor and defense counsel. We believe, and will argue on appeal, that the Court was overtly hostile towards defense counsel and President Trump, and displayed preferential treatment towards Plaintiff's counsel. Indeed, the rulings, tone, and demeanor of the bench raised significant concerns even before New York Post's investigative journalism unearthed these new facts."
And that is when we closed tab, because of the words “New York Post’s investigative journalism unearthed these new facts.” That is a not a valid sentence.
Joyce Vance with some necessary context:
Vance followed up with receipts, pointing to Habba discussing 14th Amendment cases about disqualifying Trump from ballots for inciting insurrection, and suggesting on Fox News that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh owes Trump:
“I think it should be a slam dunk in the Supreme Court; I have faith in them,” Habba said on Fox News. “You know, people like Kavanaugh who the president fought for, who the president went through hell to get into place, he’ll step up.”
Habba, because she’s so good at faking smart, immediately had to start tripping over herself to pretend she didn’t mean Kavanaugh should be “pro-Trump,” but rather just that he should be “pro-law” and “pro-fairness.”
In summary and in conclusion, Habba posted an Instagram story the other day, quoting a tweet that asked, "Who thinks this country needs a lot more women like Alina Habba, and a lot less like Taylor Swift? 🙋♀️"
It’s a reasonable question if you ask it in the right tone, like the same way you’d ask “Who does that?” or “How the holy fuck did Alina Habba get out of law school?” or something like that.
[New York Post / Habba letter / Kaplan letter / Washington Post]
PREVIOUSLY!
Evan Hurst on Twitter right here.
@evanjosephhurst on Threads!
I have profiles those other places but I think I forgot how to log on.
If you're shopping on Amazon anyway, this portal gives us a small commission.
I got news for her on the "pretty" front. She really ain't all that.
Yeah, that's shallow for me to say. But she's the one that wanted the focus put there.
Not faking it very well. Sort of like Oozy Ghouliani in drag.
OT: Texas secessionist group locks down Facebook page after idiot member asks if secession will result in the end of his Social Security payments. What imbeciles! What ultra-maroons!