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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: "It would be a disaster": Judge's ruling could "short-circuit" Trump's plan to testify at trial [View all]quakerboy
(13,923 posts)20. Are we really thinking that any lawyer who would choose to represent him
a) actually cares about the laws?
b) is aware enough to know if he was lying/planning to lie?
c) is going to get paid for their services?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
39 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
"It would be a disaster": Judge's ruling could "short-circuit" Trump's plan to testify at trial [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Apr 22
OP
The Bible would burst into flames as soon as Trump put his hands on it before the bailiff could speak.
cstanleytech
Apr 22
#25
What they can do, though, is warn him that if he lies (which he almost certainly will)
Ocelot II
Apr 22
#14
No. He won't anyway. Although he loves "testifying" at his one way rallies, he knows he doesn't do well with questions
LeftInTX
Apr 22
#18
If he testified it would be an endless litany of "objection" as he tried to filibuster from the witness stand
AZSkiffyGeek
Apr 22
#4