And BTW the reason we have nutjobs like Rudy Giuliani and Lin Wood now on these cases is that reputable law firms don't want to touch this nonsense.
Actually law firms have decided to not represent the Trump campaign because of public pressure against these law firms and their other clients. The pressure campaign to get law firms to drop the Trump Campaign as a client should be condemned in the strongest way possible. Everyone has a right to legal representation.
Representing a client is not an endorsement of their alleged actions or viewpoints. Representing a client is a means to ensure their rights are not violated and that the law is properly enforced.
*Weird flex*. It reminds me of:
It is the modern liberal that is against free speech.
Have my last remaining sMerit.If, even in a case whereby the facts are undisputed, a drug-addicted rapist and murderer with a record of an incorrigibly felonious character were to lack an all-star legal dream team for his final death-row appeal, then the liberals would scream!
Whereas if an attorney dares to represent aggrieved voters and/or the reëlection campaign for the President of the United States, then he is a “nutjob” who is ipso facto engaged in frivolous litigation and other unethical conduct—subject even to disbarment (!).
Some disbarments are more likely than this getting past SC,
You are obviously not a lawyer. You have no idea what the standards for disbarment are. Please stop opining from total ignorance—or else hit up West/Lexis, and show some case law applicable to any circumstance even remotely similar. Every state has mountains of published opinions about its rules of professional conduct for attorneys. Have fun with that.
