- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Former President Donald Trump has replaced his top Georgia lawyer ahead of his surrender Thursday evening, sources tell CNN.
Drew Findling, the lawyer who has led Trump’s defense in Georgia, is being replaced by Steven Sadow, an Atlanta-based attorney whose website profile describes him as a “special counsel for white collar and high-profile defense.”
“hopefully the case just goes away. But I guess I could try to somehow get a not guilty for him if we can stack the jury the Right way.”
"I just want some of that sweet Trump train money.
What do you mean, get the invoice later?"
But he doesn’t pay his bills. My guess is, the lawyer wanted the money up front for handling his bond and Trump said no way.
The former guy didn’t like the optics of being represented by a liberal. Optics is everything for him.
He hired him last year so I don’t think that’s it.
I doubt he cares about politics, but he does care about his image so it’s plausible. I personally think it’s because he wants yes men, someone pitched an idea to him and his lawyer probably told him it’s a bad idea and he had to be replaced.
Putting in appropriate effort for a job where the pay is exposure.
That exposure is gonna backfire- this case is basically a slam dunk.
God damn, do I want to live in the reality where bad press exists. Or have you not watched these exact assholes fail upwards for the last seven years?
The reason it’s going to back fire is you know trump is going to throw them under the bus when there’s nobody else to toss.
They’re going to fail, and trump is going to blame them. And he’s going to let the world know it.
Oh no, the condemnation of a narcissistic felon.
@mindbleach @FuglyDuck
There’s a reason it took 2.5 years to bring charges, and it’s not that multiple prosecutors were sitting on their ass twiddling their thumbs.
A slam dunk unless someone in the audience (a single juror) decides that nothing the prosecution can do will make it a slam dunk so nobody gets any points (not guilty). Metaphor got away from me but all it takes is one juror to lie his way into the box and refuse to vote guilty no matter what.
Actually, that would be a mistrial.
Which results in a second trial- in this case it would be with a new jury. There would be no reason to dismiss the case if only one hold out was present.
And if it’s demonstrable that the juror lied- maybe by looking at social media- then they’re gonna get his with perjury.