"Dude, this is wild. You’ve got Trump, one of the most controversial figures in history, and a massive law firm making some kind of deal—people are calling it extortion, others are calling it strategy. But here’s the thing—what actually happened? Like, did Trump strong-arm these guys? Or did they just see the winds shifting and go, ‘Yeah, let’s make a play that keeps us in good standing with a potential future administration?’ Because, man, corporations and politicians do this all the time. It’s just usually not so out in the open." "But here’s the deeper issue—if this was extortion, why aren’t there indictments? If there’s proof, boom, hit him with the charges. But if it’s just people pissed off because they don’t like the optics, that’s different. The real question is: Where do we draw the line between influence and corruption? Because if we’re calling this extortion, you could argue half of Washington is guilty of the same thing every election cycle. It's like the UFC—everyone's trying to negotiate their way into a title fight, but only some get accused of 'playing dirty.' Wild times, man."
Today, President Donald J. Trump and Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP (“Willkie”) announce the following agreement regarding a series of actions to be taken by Willkie: 1. Willkie will provide a total of at least $100 Million Dollars in pro bono Legal Services, during the Trump Administration, and beyond, to causes that President Trump and Willkie both support, in relation to the following areas: Assisting Veterans and other Public Servants including, among others, members of the Military, Gold Star families, Law Enforcement, and First Responders; Ensuring fairness in our Justice System; and Combatting Antisemitism. Willkie’s pro bono Committee will ensure that new pro bono matters are consistent with these objectives, and that pro bono activities represent the full political spectrum, including Conservative ideals. 2. Willkie affirms its commitment to Merit-Based Hiring, Promotion, and Retention. Accordingly, the Firm will not engage in illegal DEI discrimination and preferences. Willkie affirms that it is Willkie’s policy to give Fair and Equal consideration to Job Candidates, irrespective of their political beliefs, including Candidates who have served in the Trump Administration, and any other Republican or Democrat Administration. Willkie will engage independent outside counsel to advise the Firm in confirming that employment practices are fully compliant with Law, including, but not limited to, anti-discrimination Laws. 3. Willkie affirms that it will not deny representation to clients, such as members of politically disenfranchised groups and Government Officials, employees, and advisors, who have not historically received Legal representation from major National Law Firms, including in pro bono matters and in support of non-profits, because of the personal political views of individual lawyers. Statement from the White House: “Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP proactively reached out to President Trump and his Administration, offering their decisive commitment to ending the Weaponization of the Justice System and the Legal Profession. The President is delivering on his promises of eradicating Partisan Lawfare in America, and restoring Liberty and Justice FOR ALL.” Statement from Thomas M. Cerabino, Chairman of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP: "We reached an agreement with President Trump and his Administration on matters of great importance to our Firm. The substance of that agreement is consistent with our Firm’s views on access to Legal representation by clients, including pro bono clients, our commitment to complying with the Law as it relates to our employment practices, and our history of working with clients across a wide spectrum of political viewpoints. The Firm looks forward to having a constructive relationship with the Trump Administration, and remains committed to serving the needs of our clients, our employees, and the communities of which we are a part.”
We have a poster celebrating Trump corruptly extorting and shaking down law firms for personal monetary value by using the power of his elected office. It’s illegal but the firms decide it’s better for business just to bend the knee and pay Trump his Putin Fee.
If you tried to reason with an Trumper about how lawless this is, none of it would register. It’s a WWF wrestling match to them and their hero is breaking chairs on people’s heads.
I never realized how easily our nation would abandon the rule of law in service of a carnival barking fraudster.
Trump's legal and ethical breaches are blaringly obvious. Yet, maga replies with "but somebody else did something once" as if that excuses total constitutional disregard. It is stunning.
During Trump 45, a friend told me that being maga means hating everthing democrat, nothing more. The Constitution, law and order, and ethics are not exceptions.
Everyone of your posts, and I mean EVERY ONE, is simply trashing Trump. is that all you have?
He's spouting lies continuously. There is no evidence Trump is "corruptly extorting." Him and agip only post nonstop negative posts. We are led to believe they are paid activists. It must be hard on their mental health having to do this all day and night.
Trumps executive orders forbid these law firms from being in federal buildings!
How do they try cases in federal court buildings? How do they obtain evidence and testimony? All of these cases are corrupt and lawless.
So, you are denying that what was posted amounts to extortion?
Or you just think that it is appropriate for the president of the United States to be practicing extortion?
I am.
The statement does not constitute extortion under 18 U.S. Code § 1951 (The Hobbs Act) unless there is evidence that Trump or his administration coerced Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP into making this agreement through threats, force, or illegal pressure. The agreement, as described, presents Willkie’s commitments in areas such as pro bono work, hiring practices, and representation policies, aligning with political and legal principles rather than suggesting direct coercion.
For extortion to be proven legally, there must be clear evidence that Trump used the power of his office to force Willkie into compliance under duress, rather than the firm voluntarily choosing to align with policies that benefit its business and reputation. If Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP proactively sought this agreement, as the statement suggests, then this is a strategic business and political decision rather than a legally defined shakedown.
Why do dems continue to mold reality to whatever they want it to be?
This is not a court of law. So nobody is saying anything about "extortion (being) proven legally". Well, except you, of course.
And if you think that these types of arrangements are being put in place free of coercion then, well, you don't really think . . . at all.
You're a weirdo, dude. Poor baby was bullied in high school. Did ya sit in the corner table in the cafeteria with your two obese friends wearing eyeliner and a hot topic t shirt? Your buddies Trey and Harley, one with super thick glasses. Fuzzy mustaches. Drove your truck to school in 8th grade. Special classes. PE. GED. Part time worker.
The statement does not constitute extortion under 18 U.S. Code § 1951 (The Hobbs Act) unless there is evidence that Trump or his administration coerced Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP into making this agreement through threats, force, or illegal pressure. The agreement, as described, presents Willkie’s commitments in areas such as pro bono work, hiring practices, and representation policies, aligning with political and legal principles rather than suggesting direct coercion.
For extortion to be proven legally, there must be clear evidence that Trump used the power of his office to force Willkie into compliance under duress, rather than the firm voluntarily choosing to align with policies that benefit its business and reputation. If Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP proactively sought this agreement, as the statement suggests, then this is a strategic business and political decision rather than a legally defined shakedown.
Why do dems continue to mold reality to whatever they want it to be?
This is not a court of law. So nobody is saying anything about "extortion (being) proven legally". Well, except you, of course.
And if you think that these types of arrangements are being put in place free of coercion then, well, you don't really think . . . at all.
So your rebuttal is: name calling? Got it. Come back with something more substantial next time. This is why you people lost. And piss/ sh!t on Teslas.
You're a weirdo, dude. Poor baby was bullied in high school. Did ya sit in the corner table in the cafeteria with your two obese friends wearing eyeliner and a hot topic t shirt? Your buddies Trey and Harley, one with super thick glasses. Fuzzy mustaches. Drove your truck to school in 8th grade. Special classes. PE. GED. Part time worker.
He's spouting lies continuously. There is no evidence Trump is "corruptly extorting." Him and agip only post nonstop negative posts. We are led to believe they are paid activists. It must be hard on their mental health having to do this all day and night.
Trumps executive orders forbid these law firms from being in federal buildings!
How do they try cases in federal court buildings? How do they obtain evidence and testimony? All of these cases are corrupt and lawless.
While President Trump's executive orders did restrict certain law firms' access to federal buildings, they did not outright forbid law firms from entering federal court buildings or from practicing in federal court. The restrictions were largely aimed at preventing specific firms from accessing federal offices, security clearances, or working with federal agencies. These orders were more about limiting interaction between those firms and the executive branch rather than blocking them from performing legal work in courtrooms.
Under Marbury v. Madison (1803), the courts have the power of judicial review and can strike down executive actions that violate constitutional principles, such as the Sixth Amendment right to legal representation and due process under the Fifth Amendment.
If law firms were truly banned from court buildings, there would be public records of lawyers being denied entry, disrupted cases, and legal challenges filed in response. No such cases have emerged, indicating that this claim is either exaggerated or outright false. Until verifiable evidence is presented, the assertion that all cases involving these firms are “corrupt and lawless” remains an unfounded opinion rather than a factual statement.
You're a weirdo, dude. Poor baby was bullied in high school. Did ya sit in the corner table in the cafeteria with your two obese friends wearing eyeliner and a hot topic t shirt? Your buddies Trey and Harley, one with super thick glasses. Fuzzy mustaches. Drove your truck to school in 8th grade. Special classes. PE. GED. Part time worker.
You're a weirdo, dude. Poor baby was bullied in high school. Did ya sit in the corner table in the cafeteria with your two obese friends wearing eyeliner and a hot topic t shirt? Your buddies Trey and Harley, one with super thick glasses. Fuzzy mustaches. Drove your truck to school in 8th grade. Special classes. PE. GED. Part time worker.
"Dude, this is wild. You’ve got Trump, one of the most controversial figures in history, and a massive law firm making some kind of deal—people are calling it extortion, others are calling it strategy. But here’s the thing—what actually happened? Like, did Trump strong-arm these guys? Or did they just see the winds shifting and go, ‘Yeah, let’s make a play that keeps us in good standing with a potential future administration?’ Because, man, corporations and politicians do this all the time. It’s just usually not so out in the open." "But here’s the deeper issue—if this was extortion, why aren’t there indictments? If there’s proof, boom, hit him with the charges. But if it’s just people pissed off because they don’t like the optics, that’s different. The real question is: Where do we draw the line between influence and corruption? Because if we’re calling this extortion, you could argue half of Washington is guilty of the same thing every election cycle. It's like the UFC—everyone's trying to negotiate their way into a title fight, but only some get accused of 'playing dirty.' Wild times, man."
You people look up to Rogan? Seriously?
He asks, Why are there no indictments for Trump extorting law firms? And you post that here as intelligent?
1. Immunity for Presidential Acts. Executive orders are presidential acts..
2. Pam Bondi- No MAGA will be investigated nor indicted for the next 4 years. Much less Trump.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.