There have been many times during Donald Trump’s campaign where I’ve had to make sure what I’m seeing is actually true. I’ve often found stories concerning the GOP presidential candidate that are so incredibly ridiculous that, initially, I really thought they were satire.
Fox example, court documents Trump’s lawyers submitted pertaining to the lawsuit brought against Trump University and what they don’t want to be allowed as evidence in the case.
Here’s the list — and no, this is not a joke:
- Campaign speeches.
- Statements at political rallies, including statements about this case.
- Statements at debates.
- Statements about individuals or entities unrelated to this litigation.
- Campaign advertisements.
- Statements by campaign surrogates.
- Audio and video recordings made or publicized during the campaign.
- Tax issues.
- Comments about this case or the Court.
- Donald J. Trump Foundation or other businesses owned or managed by Mr. Trump not part of this litigation, including Trump Organization.
- Personal conduct accusations.
- Other politicians, state attorneys, general or public servants.
- Beauty pageants, casinos, and other corporate bankruptcies.
- Other litigation.
Again, that’s everything Trump and his lawyers want barred as evidence.
Basically, Trump wants a trial where nothing he’s ever said or done can be used against him in a lawsuit aimed at exposing him for being a corrupt, unethical crook who defrauded innocent people out of tens of thousands of dollars.
Perhaps the only thing more delusional than Donald Trump’s presidential campaign is this list.
How can you rationally create a list of evidence you don’t want allowed in a case against you that includes practically everything you’ve said and done; what other people think of your character; your tax issues; your personal conduct (which is a big part of a case where someone is accused of being a con artist); past business failures; and other litigation that’s been brought against you (including being found guilty of trying to slander Native Americans to block a casino) — and think that these are reasonable and rational requests?
You really do have to be devoid of all reality to think that practically everything Trump’s lawyers requested be inadmissible in the Trump U case is irrelevant and should be barred from being used as evidence against him.
This is sort of like a defense lawyer for an individual accused of theft going into a court and saying that all the people their client has admitted to being a thief to, as well as the social media post where they bragged about being good at stealing things, and past cases where they were accused and/or charged with theft, all shouldn’t be allowed as evidence.
Trump and his lawyers are headed toward a case where he’s accused of fraud, basically saying that nothing he’s ever said or done, his business history or opinions of those who know him should be allowed as evidence — in a lawsuit that’s largely predicated on the type of person he is and whether or not Trump U was, in fact, a giant scam concocted to con people out of a whole lot of money.
Latest posts by Allen Clifton (see all)
- Trump’s Rhetoric on DACA is a Textbook Example of How He Treats His Supporters Like Idiots - March 23, 2018
- Chris Cuomo Has Perfect Response When Kellyanne Conway Once Again Brings Up Clinton (Video) - March 23, 2018
- Tapper Lays Out a Key Argument for Why Many Believe Trump’s Being Blackmailed by Russia (Video) - March 22, 2018