this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
399 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19170 readers
4794 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump battled a fraud lawsuit in New York that could determine his future as a businessman with a torrent of insults and taunts… and no coherent legal strategy.

Former President Donald Trump wrapped up his massive civil fraud case with a trademark personal touch: An attack on the judge, right in the courtroom.

“You have your own agenda,” Trump told Judge Arthur Engoron Thursday. “You can’t listen for more than one minute.”

And with that, the trial was over. Now, it’s the judge’s turn.

The man Trump just spent months taunting and insulting will now deliver a judgement within weeks that could wallop Trump’s business empire, with hundreds of millions in fines, a possible lifetime ban on doing business in New York, and possibly other penalties. This case could force Trump to hand over flagship New York properties, including even his Trump Tower headquarters in Manhattan. Trump, who spent a lifetime buffing his preferred self-image as the ultimate brash New York real estate tycoon, may shortly be banned from working in the Big Apple ever again.

With so much at stake, Trump’s decision to repeatedly insult the man with so much power over his fate was an unorthodox choice, to say the least.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BaddDadd@lemmy.world 65 points 9 months ago

"The man Trump just spent months taunting and insulting will now deliver a judgement within weeks that could wallop Trump’s business empire, with hundreds of millions in fines [...]". "With so much at stake, Trump’s decision to repeatedly insult the man with so much power over his fate was an unorthodox choice, to say the least."

Sure, but the judge has more class than Trump can even conceive, and will be certain to not let the insults sway his decision, possibly swinging into Trump's favor. Not by much, but some rather than none. Plus he'll complain about the "mistreatment" anyway.