I'd hate anyone to think I had a scintilla of sympathy for Rudy... but his lawyer does make a decent argument that a political appointee (the judge) trying a case turning on political biases is problematic. Not that I think the lawyer's arguments would fly, but it does argue for a popularly elected non-partisan judiciary. ... the very thing we're installing here in Mexico, and hearing from both US Democrats and Republicans that it's "undemocratic" (to democratically elect judges?)
"No matter what anyone says, the truth and fact is that Plaintiffs are represented by those who believe in liberal democracy, and you have a defendant whose beliefs are the antithesis of the Plaintiffs’ counsel."
This is the point in the plot where the middle school teacher calls out the student for using big words because they lack confidence in the point they're making.
"We also think a smarter lawyer would not suggest the judge in the case is too biased to rule fairly. If you want to do that, just file a motion requesting his recusal!" Exactly.
I fucking loathe these people. It's always a race to the bottom in the their very best soap opera way.
"Hopefully, the Honor [sic] Judge will be able to be unbiased against Defendant. However, even subconsciously, a human being can have a political bias and the rapid rocket docket approach by this Court and entertaining so many of Plaintiffs’ motions and letters from the Plaintiffs’ counsel and ruling against the Defendant nearly 100% of the time is troubling."
And there it is. Because, you know, the legal system is rigged against Trump and his supporters. 🤬 More than likely, Ghouliani is still trying to offer himself to Trump supporters as a martyr in order to get himself a little of that GoFundMe type of donation to pay his lawyers (or make some money on the side). Shockingly, afaik, they still haven't.
No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not...
It reads like a shitty crime-movie-straight-to-DVD script. It's as if the lawyer is trying to position Giuliani as a former Eliot Ness type G-man who's fighting the good fight, rooting out corruption in our elections, but those paid-off or biased judges are against him because of Trump. Or, he's trying to appeal to the judge's subconscious biases by reminding him when Giuliani was actually worth a shit as an officer of the law. And doing it very publicly, because a little bit of public pressure couldn't hurt, right?
The worst possibility is, he's trying to rile up the Trumpers to go after the judge in the same way they went after Freeman and Moss.
"worth a shit as an officer of the law" not in evidence. Most of the work was done by his staff and still they got lots of the goombahs and let all of the Vladimyrs off the hook.
This sentence is a masterpiece of near-incomprehensibility:
"However, even subconsciously, a human being can have a political bias and the rapid rocket docket approach by this Court and entertaining so many of Plaintiffs’ motions and letters from the Plaintiffs’ counsel and ruling against the Defendant nearly 100% of the time is troubling."
What’s the problem? The subject of the first independent clause is human being and the subject nouns of the second independent clause are approach and entertaining. Admittedly, there is a lack of parallelism of the latter two, which could cause a reader to jump the track.
Yeah, it’s troubling. It’s troubling how Defendant has defied the court so many times that Plaintiffs found it necessary to file so many motions and letters.
He deserves everything he’s getting !
Staten Island meatheads are pretty much in the same class as South Florida jerk-off lawyers.
Sounds like a musical work. Cammarata and Fugue in F-U Major.
“Down to Staten Island Divorce Lawyer” LOLOLOL!
I'd hate anyone to think I had a scintilla of sympathy for Rudy... but his lawyer does make a decent argument that a political appointee (the judge) trying a case turning on political biases is problematic. Not that I think the lawyer's arguments would fly, but it does argue for a popularly elected non-partisan judiciary. ... the very thing we're installing here in Mexico, and hearing from both US Democrats and Republicans that it's "undemocratic" (to democratically elect judges?)
"No matter what anyone says, the truth and fact is that Plaintiffs are represented by those who believe in liberal democracy, and you have a defendant whose beliefs are the antithesis of the Plaintiffs’ counsel."
This is the point in the plot where the middle school teacher calls out the student for using big words because they lack confidence in the point they're making.
"We also think a smarter lawyer would not suggest the judge in the case is too biased to rule fairly. If you want to do that, just file a motion requesting his recusal!" Exactly.
I fucking loathe these people. It's always a race to the bottom in the their very best soap opera way.
"Hopefully, the Honor [sic] Judge will be able to be unbiased against Defendant. However, even subconsciously, a human being can have a political bias and the rapid rocket docket approach by this Court and entertaining so many of Plaintiffs’ motions and letters from the Plaintiffs’ counsel and ruling against the Defendant nearly 100% of the time is troubling."
And there it is. Because, you know, the legal system is rigged against Trump and his supporters. 🤬 More than likely, Ghouliani is still trying to offer himself to Trump supporters as a martyr in order to get himself a little of that GoFundMe type of donation to pay his lawyers (or make some money on the side). Shockingly, afaik, they still haven't.
Rudy, you need Bob Loblaw.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/5cac2a0e-103d-489a-8199-f363c612809f/gif
No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not. No, you're not...
Oh, the child-like joy you've found in Rudy's disbarment brings a tear to my eye.
As has been ever true, "Justice delayed is Justice denied." Lock him up,
Apparently you have not been made aware of the wealthy celebrity clause in the constitution.
👏
To be fair, every once in a blue moon they sacrifice of of their own to satisfy the unwashed masses lest we rise up Luigi-style.
And Roodles is neither at this point. All he's got is "white man".
But he's an I-tye and at one time that wouldn't have qualified him for the white man dispensation.
Rudy needs to go live in a box on 5th Avenue. Pay the ladies, asshole
This Cammarata fella is stunningly bad at writing. His motions read like a remedial middle-school essay. Jeez.
Aw-right, aw-ready!
It reads like a shitty crime-movie-straight-to-DVD script. It's as if the lawyer is trying to position Giuliani as a former Eliot Ness type G-man who's fighting the good fight, rooting out corruption in our elections, but those paid-off or biased judges are against him because of Trump. Or, he's trying to appeal to the judge's subconscious biases by reminding him when Giuliani was actually worth a shit as an officer of the law. And doing it very publicly, because a little bit of public pressure couldn't hurt, right?
The worst possibility is, he's trying to rile up the Trumpers to go after the judge in the same way they went after Freeman and Moss.
It’s the last thing.
Probably all of the above.
"worth a shit as an officer of the law" not in evidence. Most of the work was done by his staff and still they got lots of the goombahs and let all of the Vladimyrs off the hook.
Very true. Also very true, "worth a shit" is a low bar.
LOL - is he chasing ambulances yet?
You mean Rudy? He is, and biting their tires, also, too.
LMAO
This sentence is a masterpiece of near-incomprehensibility:
"However, even subconsciously, a human being can have a political bias and the rapid rocket docket approach by this Court and entertaining so many of Plaintiffs’ motions and letters from the Plaintiffs’ counsel and ruling against the Defendant nearly 100% of the time is troubling."
What’s the problem? The subject of the first independent clause is human being and the subject nouns of the second independent clause are approach and entertaining. Admittedly, there is a lack of parallelism of the latter two, which could cause a reader to jump the track.
Yeah, it’s troubling. It’s troubling how Defendant has defied the court so many times that Plaintiffs found it necessary to file so many motions and letters.
Gary, do you have any direct knowledge that this isn't how it's done in Staten Island divorce cases?
Lock that crooked son-of abitch up.
and Giuliani, too.