re: trump lawsuit vs clinton is frivolous.

quote:

---

a statement against one’s own interest is usually more reliable than other puffery.

---

I do not recall the context of the "$50k rent" assertion by Hunter.

How was it a statement against his interest ... at the time that it was made? Isn't that the standard, as opposed to being something that (in hindsight) may not have been in his best interest?

After all, the basis for the exception is that a person is not likely to say something that he knows to be against his own interest, making it statistically more-likely that the statement is true. That rationale would not seem to apply to a statement that was NOT known to be against the interest of the speaker at the time of the utterance.

quote:

---

sanctioning Trump for advancing a conspiracy theory that wasn't back up with facts.

---

WOw.....too bad we can't hold the Media, the Democrats, Big Pharma etc to those sort of standards....

The hammer of punitive justice only seems to swing one way.

quote:

---

I've not litigated much regarding this sort of sanctions, but would "pattern of behavior" not be a factor that the Judge can consider ... especially if Clinton's attorneys presented those other dismissals and/or sanctions into evidence?

---

The OP didn’t include a link so I haven’t read the entire ruling. The only pieces I’ve seen are the judge referencing cases not in his court, but not referencing that they were arguments made by the Clinton legal team.

quote:

---

Can judges not take judicial notice of other litigation when determining whether something fits into a pattern of behavior?

---

Judges have wide discretion. Putting the fact he thought trump formed a pattern in other cases simply because they had been dismissed is this judge putting his partisan ruling in the open.

To award sanctions over a case where trump accused Clinton and Steele of defamation is insane and clearly partisan. Outside of doc and Decatur, not a single person still believes the Steele dossier was anything but a complete fabrication.

quote:

---

Can judges not take judicial notice of other litigation when determining whether something fits into a pattern of behavior?

---

I don't know about you, but "Judge, please take judicial notice" is not something I use except in an emergency, when surprised.

If I wanted a judge to consider the results in 20 other lawsuits, I would attach certified copies of the filings/orders from those other lawsuits. Clinton's lawyers seem pretty sharp, and it would surprise me if they were not equally-thorough.

quote:

---

It gets better-

Judge Donald Middlebrooks who was appointed by Bill Clinton is presiding over this matter.

---

Link us to your posts sharing the same concern when Aileen Cannon heard the suit filed by Trump over the raid.

quote:

---

Link us to your posts sharing the same concern when Aileen Cannon heard the suit filed by Trump over the raid.

---

And the partisan part of her ruling was slapped down. Hopefully that happens here. Unfortunately sanctions are rarely turned over as judges discretion is given great deference.

Oh, how did that raid work out, by the way? Just another example of a two tiered justice system. I assume that disgusts you.

Ultimately courts are accountable too, of course. In a well-working system, executives and legislatures push back on overweening courts. I don't think any of this is radical - it's Montesquieu and Madison sort of stuff.

quote:

---

He won’t pay fine….. or lawyers He doesn’t pay he just collects

---

Just yesterday you said trump’s tax returns show he only knows how to pay and not collect. Despite you not understanding the returns, it seems obvious you are inflicted with TDS and are willing to take opposite opinions from day to day if it, in your feeble mind, makes trump look bad.