A complete mockery of the US legal system when 2 disgraced lawyers may be the “star witnesses” in a sham trial.
Avenatti says Trump's legal defense team is in touch: 'Happy to testify'
In an interview with the New York Post from prison, suspended attorney Michael Avenatti claimed he'd be willing to testify if the defense calls on him in the Trump hush money trial.www.foxnews.com
I think @lasvegan was probably attacking the fact the CoJ case against Trump is even being tried at all rather than attacking /the defence team per se - because any criminal justice system that can convict a Lawyer for fraud against his client (who he was defending against the current Defendant in another trial to be released from a NDA/hush money agreement), yet can then allow that same suspended Lawyer to defend the Defendant (Trump) in a case where he denies paying that victim off in the first place with a NDA…
I know what your point is - but are you are arguing with the wrong person - you criticised @lasvegan for attacking the defence team - I said that I think he was probably attacking the trial/CoJ for being a sham rather than the defence team that’s all.
@lasvegan isn't a Trump 'supporter'. He simply thinks Trump is a better option than Biden
I see this is going well.
That is too nuanced for people that want a polarised debate. There really isn’t anyone other than Lasvegan they can get their teeth into now Crawley Dingo posts less. I absolutely don’t support Trump either but am interested in hearing from people who are likely to vote for him and why they do. This thread would be much poorer ( and just another echo chamber) without Lasvegan’s input.
Yep. @lasvegan is a thoughtful bloke. Will admit when a decision is a bit knee jerk and doesn't try to baffle us with Maga bullshit, or cut and paste from Fake News pages.
As you're on ignore with Zeberdi I thought I'd tell you what he thinks about what you think about Las Vegans thoughts. It's a very tricky and difficult debate to get into but there is also a need to fully analyse and write as much as we can by replicating previous posts and not adding much at all.
That is actually quite thought provoking. I've recently been hearing a lot about equity of outcomes as opposed to equity of opportunity, and it seems like that is a debate that isn't actually recent - merely continuing.
Yes, this has been a bit of a thing in the states for maybe 30 years. Quotas are bollocks. Looking at numbers may identify unconscious bias, but this can't be assumed. Explanation? They have quite a lot of double backing to do and payback to deliver in the US, to be fair, what with slavery and that. But positive discrimination (as it must inevitably be called) is wrong. And I say that as a working class person with autism. Just give me a level playing field, FFS!
Very good, lol. Probably as effective as alcohol though…dammit though, I think I’m going to give it another shot anyway.Have you tried injecting bleach or shining a bright light to self medicate
On the other hand, the prosecution’s star witness is a convicted felon and perjurer, another opportunist. The entire thing is a circus.
I thought that was probably what you were getting at.
. And regardless of the integrity of the prosecution witnesses, Trump still has a serious case to answer with regard to whether he knew Cohen’s payment to Stormy Daniels was meant to influence the outcome of the election and whether Trump fudged a cover up of the payments. If his lawyers are crap, more fool him. Perhaps he is hoping for a mistrial because of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel 
There is a paper trail though. The witnesses are just dressing I would think.
Have a good evening
Yes, not least I suspect, the one left by Michael Cohen. Surely the fact he was convicted for campaign finance violations provides enough of a paper trail - and his written testimony against his former boss?
