@@navdeepsinghchauhan7607 For regular folks but she has been on that domain for years and decades. You would expect a bit more from an experienced senior as her.
Mike's side-eye at harvey @ 2:25 mins has me thinking he didn't see the logic in Donna being COO or he was telling Harvey "I told you, we should have prepped Donna"
@@mattneal5257 Mike WANTED to prep Donna, Harvey wouldn't let him. Harvey thought Donna wouldn't be called to testify, and therefore wouldn't need prepping. Mike wanted to prep her anyway, just in case, and he was 100% right to want that.
Mike and people living in glass houses can't throw stones. Mike was a fraud who didn't go to lawsuit ND eventually handed a whole law career that he didn't work for.
Couldn’t agree more! It was all the better having such an amazing actor do it justice(no pun intended). This character lent a shred of credibility back to the show after the writers insulted us with the Donna promotion BS. The only way it was at all tenable (and I mean even within the confines of the imaginary show!) was that it showed the absurd lengths Harvey would go to keep Donna in his life while still protecting his defenses against risking a romantic relationship with her. IMO, this could be seen as one of the greatest indicators of his love/need for her…given the great Harvey Specter willing to risk his professional reputation and the perception of his firm all bc he can’t let her go (he knows this is the compromise needed for her “wanting more”) and he also still can’t reveal and commit to his true feelings for her. It was still really hard to watch this Donna storyline. Total cringe and didn’t fit even within the greatly stretched boundaries of realistic within the show.
@@marydeandrea7039 totally agree. if she have gone to take her MBA or the proper channel to get the proper qualifications like rachel did to get out of her paralegal career, then her promotion would stand valid. instead she just use her excuse as being at the firm for too long and knowing harvey's BS. plus, she got the gall to ask to be the senior partner ij the first place.
The writers built Malik's attack on Donna and made it seem righteous based on the fact that there are many types of COOs, some of which require business licenses. The rest depends on the type of company and the job description. Her duties did not require business degrees or law studies
@@zizzi1227 please list premiere firms that have COOs without MBAs, or a long track record of management promotions to justify the position. I won’t hold my breath. Donna was capable of doing the job, but she wasn’t qualified. It’s why Malik’s attack stung so bad.
@@Elisa-gn5nj nope. Just that she wasn't qualified for the position. Companies can do whatever they want with hiring, but it's a massive joke to say that a premiere law firm in NYC would promote a long time secretary to COO overnight without some progression in leadership, minus having advanced degrees. For example, if Donna had spent a few years being Director of Personnel, then getting the COO job, that might have worked. There are real life examples of people that were secretaries that worked their way up to an executive role. Carly Fiorina is one. However, Donna had no advanced degree, and no progression of work experience to qualify her for the position.
Malik isn't wrong though A ex-waiter/ex-actress work as secretary got fired for destroying evidence and then rehired(with increased salary I believe) and miraculously promoted into a COO because she ask for it For outsider, it doesn't take a genius to think there's something sketchy behind
@@twit9129 its definitely illegal if the promotion wasnt in line with company policies.. and theres no way the firm would be able to attract top talent if they continue going down this line
Since she destroyed the document and was fired and then rehired and promoted at her own request, I don't think any degree would have convinced the judge. And Malik would have speculated about the relationship between Donna and Harvey anyway, especially since the position of COO is defined in relation to the CEO and the close relationship between the two people.
@@Trust-Yourself-1st yes it is its a valid basis for lawsuits.. and the company may have to compensate the aggrieved party if proven guilty of violating policies
He was amazing in this role! Perfectly cast. I mean when I’m more mesmerized by his performance than even Gabriel’s, THAT was refreshing!! His character exposed all the absurdity the writers insulted the viewers with. Gave back some shred of credibility to the show.
The issue regarding the obstruction of justice, specifically the allegation that Donna destroyed evidence, was entirely unconstitutional and illegal. The evidence in question was not pertinent to this case but was associated with another criminal case. It should be noted that Donna has not been found guilty in that case. Furthermore, the document in question was not affiliated with Coastal Motors but was a counterfeit document linked to an unrelated third party. Given these circumstances, Harvey's objection should have been upheld by the judge. However, if the objection had been overruled, as it indeed was, any accusation against Donna in court would grant her the right to invoke the Fifth Amendment, allowing her to abstain from answering any questions related to this matter.
@@ElectroDFW A testimony is a form of evidence that can be introduced in Court by a witness, but, in this case, Malik is not taking Donna's statement as a witness about the hearing's subject, he is, in fact, accusing her of a crime. That's when our 5th amendment rights kick in, because a person cannot be forced into pleading guilty before the Court.
@@ElectroDFW also, Malik is using a very tricky strategy, he is applying the witness duty to tell the truth and to not mislead the Court, this would be considered perjury, to, in fact, speculate and get a forced confession of crime to destroy her character's reputation. Although, any criminal attorney should know the difference between witness's law and Constitutional rights, Harvey is potrayed as a succesful attorney, but he did not realize this simple tricky tatic.
Having experienced the previous trial, Harvey was afraid of Louis' questions and Donna's answers. Although she insisted they easily gave up on the mock trial to protect their own feelings
If I were Donna, I would've argued that the acting position of COO draws a parallel to that of a programmer. Although programmers generally develop an advanced skillset through a computer science degree, a skillset developed by oneself is sufficient given that the skills the person possesses does not render the person incapable of their job duties.
Wouldn't Donna be protected by the Fifth Amendment from the question on whether she destroyed that document? If it's illegal, she has the right to not self-incriminate. Harvey, Mike and the Judge should've immediately been on it.
No, because like Harvey said, the file was a fake and destroying fake evidence is not a crime. The question is fair as to whether she destroyed the file though, because his main objective was to have the article admitted about the memo, and to explain the absence of the memo with Donna's promotion. He didn't actually ask her if she destroyed the memo, just made her look sketchy on the stand. If he really wanted to get her in trouble, he could have questioned her about impersonating a federal agent to steal evidence in a lawsuit. My guess is that she would have folded like a cheap suit at that questioning, much like she did in Mike's trial.
@@ganthc I think Donna had no way out of this situation because The COO is generally a position created to complement the existing CEO. The CEO chooses his COO because, apart from the conditions necessary to fulfill the job, there must be trust, respect, connection between the two and, according to some studies, even chemistry. Exactly the relationship the writers created between Donna and Harvey. So Malik would have twisted the questions anyway to conclude that Harvey promoted her because she slept with him or destroyed documents at his request.
While Malik might've been right on some things. He crossed so many lines and broke so many laws that the few things he might have been right about pale in comparison.
I think Louis' first question was if Donna slept with Harvey. and I really don't know what would have been more terrible: to answer this question in front of the firm or Malik's attack in court
One major flaw: if the guy at the end brought charges against jessica that fast, right after losing to her former firm, it would 100 percent come up as a conflict of interest.
I feel bad for her. Humiliated by Malik in front of a room full of people and disappointed by the two friends she always supported and who avoided preparing her no matter how much she insisted.
i dont feel sorry, as much as we like Donna, its evident she wasnt qualified to be COO and anyone couldve question it since she does not have an MBA to support her claim, it looks suspicious under any circumstances, she shouldve known from the beggining people were going to judge her
@@johanhoyos2318 She was wrongly accused. None of the accusations were true and MBA is not mandatory either. The employer decides the terms of employment in according to the needs of the company, and his promotion did not violate the law. Malik manipulated the court and made everything seem true in order to admit the false evidence.
@@Elisa-gn5nj She destroyed evidence. It might have not been real but she didn't know that. She had the intent to do it which questions her ethics. And she clearly is being favored over other employees. She's a Secretary and got promoted to Partner then demoted and promoted to COO. This all came because she asked for it.
@@thatonenoob7854 Donna destroyed the ticket, but not at Harvey's request. And he didn't promote her to destroy documents or sleep with him, as Malik implied. I don't think she was favored because there was no one else like her. She was the only one in whom he had full confidence, with whom he communicated without reservations, he considered her essential for the company and for his work. They were a team where she did what Harvey didn't want or didn't like.
@@thatonenoob7854 she's favored because she deserved it. She was the only person who knew how Harvey functions to the point where he couldn't physically and mentally get work done without her. She's smart, incredibly smart, she knows everything almost Sherlock levels of intellect, if that doesn't make her deserving of being favored then idk what else. She may be 'unqualified' in terms of traditional education but she has enough experience and intellect to qualify for the job so idk what's wrong.
i don't know why they went to andy to get him to drop it. If they embarrassed him and outed him as an evidence manufacturer in court, then his career is finished and he can't do shit anymore
Wow. I had no idea that there were such machinations out there in the world. Back here, anything like this would be resolved with someone kneeling in front of a ditch.
Malik is no joke!!! And the fact that what he said to Donna affected her that much lets us all know what he said was true. Nobody likes the truth when it hurts.
Malik was always correct in saying from an external view in almost any other case Donna’s promotion was BS. Donna was the exception, she had like 15 years with the firm at that point, and spent much of that time helping and having an ear in pretty much every aspect of the firm. She was self-trained to be a match for any standard qualified coo and everyone in the firm knew it. Also, that judge is one of the worst on this show to date, blatantly disregarding basic court etiquette just to allow an incredibly sketchy evidence piece to be admitted. Malik should’ve been held in contempt the second he started accusing her of a crime.
No objecting to badgering the witness, judge not stopping him from clearly doing so. That is such a ridiculous scene. What he did would have gotten him thrown out of court and possibly jailed for contempt if he didn't stop. Granted, he probably would have stopped when the judge jumped in like he would in real life.
why its ok that he will risk everything for her and want pepole stop everything help him and tell them to do what he say to save her but when it comes to mike and rachel he said no and alot off pepole comes to him and ask him again and again more then ones He wasnt care about mike love life oy his
Malik had a point. Donna started out working as a part time waitress, part time actress. Then goes to work for years as Harvey’s secretary, and in recent memory gets fired for a week for destroying manufactured evidence, only to come back at an increased pay rate, then promoted to COO. Like that isn’t sketchy.
This Title should have been *"Malik is Coming After Harvey"* or Alternative title *"Malik is Coming After Everyone"* cuz he is literally going after Everyone Harvey Cares about.
Malik was going at harvey and donna was suppose be professionnal but he made it way way personal and he wanted Harvey disbarred and I like the fact Harvey made him lose his license and put him I prison.
I mean, Jessica willingly chose to go along with pretending Mike was a lawyer and admitted as such. Harvey may have created the situation but she chose not to report them and play along.
Once again, people not listening to Mike bites them. If they had prepped Donna, they would've destroyed Malik in court. But Harvey, as usual, thinks with his heart at the WORST times.
@@z1az285Not really!! She didn’t sleep her way to the top. Mike isn’t more qualified than her for his position but y’all are not batting an eye. This whole cross was inflammatory and no judge would allow it.
@@justafanfave228 She didn't ofc but Malik isn't wrong . Yes, Mike wasn't qualified for his role either but he had an incredible memory which she did not. She was efficient as a legal secretary but was out of her depth in the new role
@@z1az285She didn't have a photographic memory, but she had emotional intelligence and a whole set of social skills that made her well suited to managing people. Her duties (if you saw them from the show) had nothing to do with the law. And what Malik does is revolting because he eviscerates a witness to fabricate evidence.
I wasn't rooting for Malik to win but seeing someone expose and verbally beat Donna down will always leave a smile to my face. She is just the worsttttt
Man, strong and independent woman Donna who is smartest and prettiest turn into a cry baby every time something doesn't go her way. She is insufferable and that increased 10 times after her promotion.
Malik was great actor , maaan the expressions and the dialogue delivery … my favorite part “THATS THE LOOK I CAME HERE TO SEE”
Usman Ally
That’s the look I came to see is a bar!
Donna being all smug and cocky all the time but chokes EVERY time she gets to court.
fr she always thinks she is so much smarter that she is
That's close to reality
@@navdeepsinghchauhan7607 For regular folks but she has been on that domain for years and decades. You would expect a bit more from an experienced senior as her.
In her defense, every time she gets to court mfs are like "you like Harvey 😻😻"
@@dinisgoncalves3744 Exactly! And yet she is never prepared for that haha
the actor who played malik was insane talented!
Usman Ally.
Agreed man!
Yea he made me want to punch him through the screen and I hate violence xD. Need some strong talent to provoke that
Agreed
👌🏽
Harvey loses his temper while telling Mike that he can handle it proves Mike’s point
Mike's side-eye at harvey @ 2:25 mins has me thinking he didn't see the logic in Donna being COO or he was telling Harvey "I told you, we should have prepped Donna"
I’d argue the latter here
They are both awful attorneys - prepping a witness is basic preparation for trial
Definitely the latter. I'm sure if they'd been alone at the time, he would've laid into Harvey for not listening.
@@mattneal5257 Mike WANTED to prep Donna, Harvey wouldn't let him. Harvey thought Donna wouldn't be called to testify, and therefore wouldn't need prepping. Mike wanted to prep her anyway, just in case, and he was 100% right to want that.
Mike and people living in glass houses can't throw stones. Mike was a fraud who didn't go to lawsuit ND eventually handed a whole law career that he didn't work for.
Sorry but watching Donna get called out for not being qualified to be COO is still very satisfying… even now years later
Couldn’t agree more! It was all the better having such an amazing actor do it justice(no pun intended).
This character lent a shred of credibility back to the show after the writers insulted us with the Donna promotion BS.
The only way it was at all tenable (and I mean even within the confines of the imaginary show!) was that it showed the absurd lengths Harvey would go to keep Donna in his life while still protecting his defenses against risking a romantic relationship with her.
IMO, this could be seen as one of the greatest indicators of his love/need for her…given the great Harvey Specter willing to risk his professional reputation and the perception of his firm all bc he can’t let her go (he knows this is the compromise needed for her “wanting more”) and he also still can’t reveal and commit to his true feelings for her.
It was still really hard to watch this Donna storyline. Total cringe and didn’t fit even within the greatly stretched boundaries of realistic within the show.
Yes yes yesssss
Her being so cocky inspite of choking every time it counted was so infuriating
@@marydeandrea7039 totally agree. if she have gone to take her MBA or the proper channel to get the proper qualifications like rachel did to get out of her paralegal career, then her promotion would stand valid. instead she just use her excuse as being at the firm for too long and knowing harvey's BS. plus, she got the gall to ask to be the senior partner ij the first place.
Sad to say but Malik was right. I always thought Donna was a great secretary, she should’ve stayed like that. Her promotion was so forced.
She became the worst part of the show
The writers built Malik's attack on Donna and made it seem righteous based on the fact that there are many types of COOs, some of which require business licenses. The rest depends on the type of company and the job description.
Her duties did not require business degrees or law studies
@@zizzi1227 please list premiere firms that have COOs without MBAs, or a long track record of management promotions to justify the position. I won’t hold my breath. Donna was capable of doing the job, but she wasn’t qualified. It’s why Malik’s attack stung so bad.
@@ganthc Are you saying that her promotion was illegal?
@@Elisa-gn5nj nope. Just that she wasn't qualified for the position. Companies can do whatever they want with hiring, but it's a massive joke to say that a premiere law firm in NYC would promote a long time secretary to COO overnight without some progression in leadership, minus having advanced degrees.
For example, if Donna had spent a few years being Director of Personnel, then getting the COO job, that might have worked. There are real life examples of people that were secretaries that worked their way up to an executive role. Carly Fiorina is one. However, Donna had no advanced degree, and no progression of work experience to qualify her for the position.
Malik isn't wrong though
A ex-waiter/ex-actress work as secretary got fired for destroying evidence and then rehired(with increased salary I believe) and miraculously promoted into a COO because she ask for it
For outsider, it doesn't take a genius to think there's something sketchy behind
Sketchy or not, it isn't illegal.
@@twit9129 its definitely illegal if the promotion wasnt in line with company policies.. and theres no way the firm would be able to attract top talent if they continue going down this line
Since she destroyed the document and was fired and then rehired and promoted at her own request, I don't think any degree would have convinced the judge.
And Malik would have speculated about the relationship between Donna and Harvey anyway, especially since the position of COO is defined in relation to the CEO and the close relationship between the two people.
@@aisolutionsindia7138 Violating company policy is not illegal.
@@Trust-Yourself-1st yes it is its a valid basis for lawsuits.. and the company may have to compensate the aggrieved party if proven guilty of violating policies
The way he got straight into business @ 1:40 was terrifying 😂😂😂
This Malik dude is a great actor
I mean, he was alright.
He was amazing in this role! Perfectly cast. I mean when I’m more mesmerized by his performance than even Gabriel’s, THAT was refreshing!!
His character exposed all the absurdity the writers insulted the viewers with. Gave back some shred of credibility to the show.
Whats his name
They should've prepare her. Even if her chance to be up there is small, they should've prep her.
In actual court this would be days of objection and the prosecutor would be reprimanded
Right?! So argumentative and inflammatory.
The issue regarding the obstruction of justice, specifically the allegation that Donna destroyed evidence, was entirely unconstitutional and illegal. The evidence in question was not pertinent to this case but was associated with another criminal case. It should be noted that Donna has not been found guilty in that case. Furthermore, the document in question was not affiliated with Coastal Motors but was a counterfeit document linked to an unrelated third party. Given these circumstances, Harvey's objection should have been upheld by the judge. However, if the objection had been overruled, as it indeed was, any accusation against Donna in court would grant her the right to invoke the Fifth Amendment, allowing her to abstain from answering any questions related to this matter.
Oh.
Agree
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the 5th applies in a motion hearing. Only at an actual trial.
@@ElectroDFW A testimony is a form of evidence that can be introduced in Court by a witness, but, in this case, Malik is not taking Donna's statement as a witness about the hearing's subject, he is, in fact, accusing her of a crime. That's when our 5th amendment rights kick in, because a person cannot be forced into pleading guilty before the Court.
@@ElectroDFW also, Malik is using a very tricky strategy, he is applying the witness duty to tell the truth and to not mislead the Court, this would be considered perjury, to, in fact, speculate and get a forced confession of crime to destroy her character's reputation. Although, any criminal attorney should know the difference between witness's law and Constitutional rights, Harvey is potrayed as a succesful attorney, but he did not realize this simple tricky tatic.
Having experienced the previous trial, Harvey was afraid of Louis' questions and Donna's answers.
Although she insisted they easily gave up on the mock trial to protect their own feelings
So why did the judge not respond to any of their objections to the incredibly inappropriate and unrelated questions he was asking Donna?
The writers: judges can just ignore objections right?
If I were Donna, I would've argued that the acting position of COO draws a parallel to that of a programmer. Although programmers generally develop an advanced skillset through a computer science degree, a skillset developed by oneself is sufficient given that the skills the person possesses does not render the person incapable of their job duties.
Donna should have pleaded the Fifth.
“Objection!”
“ANSWER THE QUESTION”
"I've got it all right here." Vintage Mike Ross 6:13
Hate to say it, but Donna wasn’t qualified for the promotion she got and the moment she got it, things were never the same.
Now THATS a cliff hanger!
Wouldn't Donna be protected by the Fifth Amendment from the question on whether she destroyed that document? If it's illegal, she has the right to not self-incriminate. Harvey, Mike and the Judge should've immediately been on it.
No, because like Harvey said, the file was a fake and destroying fake evidence is not a crime. The question is fair as to whether she destroyed the file though, because his main objective was to have the article admitted about the memo, and to explain the absence of the memo with Donna's promotion. He didn't actually ask her if she destroyed the memo, just made her look sketchy on the stand. If he really wanted to get her in trouble, he could have questioned her about impersonating a federal agent to steal evidence in a lawsuit. My guess is that she would have folded like a cheap suit at that questioning, much like she did in Mike's trial.
@@ganthc I think Donna had no way out of this situation because
The COO is generally a position created to complement the existing CEO.
The CEO chooses his COO because, apart from the conditions necessary to fulfill the job, there must be trust, respect, connection between the two and, according to some studies, even chemistry. Exactly the relationship the writers created between Donna and Harvey.
So Malik would have twisted the questions anyway to conclude that Harvey promoted her because she slept with him or destroyed documents at his request.
Yikes. Harvey brain stops working around Donna 😅
this is true
😂😂
A different brain starts working.....
While Malik might've been right on some things. He crossed so many lines and broke so many laws that the few things he might have been right about pale in comparison.
Yeah cuz Harvey never does anything wrong either
Although Malik was on point with his questions, the judge was the worst at this situation.
Do you hate when a Man calls out the bs of a woman.
That judge was there for the drama.
I think Louis' first question was if Donna slept with Harvey.
and I really don't know what would have been more terrible:
to answer this question in front of the firm or Malik's attack in court
yea uhh lawyers can't testify like that instead of asking questions.
Law is brutal.
This show is nothing like the real world
Malik handing out advise like DIY belts.
I know its just a story line but judge is poor. Every grounds for every objection and malik bullies the witness yet judge allows it
The judge is secretly a gossip hound. His curiosity got the better of him. (jk)
I beat an attorney named Malik. He was new foreclosure attorney. Real chump.
It's a TV show. I love the drama.
Yep. I shut down my analytical mind because fhere are so many areas that doesn't make sense you have to ignore
What does he have against Harvey? He would've done the same thing.
Donna on the bench is like the Snowman on a hot Summers day 😂😂😂
I really like how louis says "You just got Lit"
Mike and Harvey are lethal
Donna was a great secretary, but you can tell by her lack of confidence that she clearly isn't fit to be COO.
One major flaw: if the guy at the end brought charges against jessica that fast, right after losing to her former firm, it would 100 percent come up as a conflict of interest.
It is sad that Malik managed to make it seem like he is right
2:23 I love when Donna realizes saying “I’m Donna” isn’t an answer to what your qualifications are in the _real_ world
she for the streets
Andrew Malik ate during that courtroom scene. He crushed it.
OBJECTION: Testifying + Badgering + Inflammatory
Great acting by Sarah Rafferty - playing Donna
I feel bad for her.
Humiliated by Malik in front of a room full of people and disappointed by the two friends she always supported and who avoided preparing her no matter how much she insisted.
i dont feel sorry, as much as we like Donna, its evident she wasnt qualified to be COO and anyone couldve question it since she does not have an MBA to support her claim, it looks suspicious under any circumstances, she shouldve known from the beggining people were going to judge her
@@johanhoyos2318 She was wrongly accused. None of the accusations were true and MBA is not mandatory either.
The employer decides the terms of employment in according to the needs of the company, and his promotion did not violate the law.
Malik manipulated the court and made everything seem true in order to admit the false evidence.
@@Elisa-gn5nj She destroyed evidence. It might have not been real but she didn't know that. She had the intent to do it which questions her ethics. And she clearly is being favored over other employees. She's a Secretary and got promoted to Partner then demoted and promoted to COO. This all came because she asked for it.
@@thatonenoob7854 Donna destroyed the ticket, but not at Harvey's request. And he didn't promote her to destroy documents or sleep with him, as Malik implied. I don't think she was favored because there was no one else like her. She was the only one in whom he had full confidence, with whom he communicated without reservations, he considered her essential for the company and for his work. They were a team where she did what Harvey didn't want or didn't like.
@@thatonenoob7854 she's favored because she deserved it. She was the only person who knew how Harvey functions to the point where he couldn't physically and mentally get work done without her. She's smart, incredibly smart, she knows everything almost Sherlock levels of intellect, if that doesn't make her deserving of being favored then idk what else.
She may be 'unqualified' in terms of traditional education but she has enough experience and intellect to qualify for the job so idk what's wrong.
Andrew Malik can't go toe to toe with Jessica
Why?@
i don't know why they went to andy to get him to drop it. If they embarrassed him and outed him as an evidence manufacturer in court, then his career is finished and he can't do shit anymore
Wow. I had no idea that there were such machinations out there in the world.
Back here, anything like this would be resolved with someone kneeling in front of a ditch.
Malik is no joke!!! And the fact that what he said to Donna affected her that much lets us all know what he said was true. Nobody likes the truth when it hurts.
Judge Ward is everything wrong with the legal system in real life
malik malik malik, jealousy gets you nowhere
Aww you poor simp. Malik owned her.
He’s right.
Yes Donna you don’t deserve your job
I wonder ....why did this awesome show end??......Can anyone tell me please?
it finished was 9 seasons long it completed its story
because it fell off a cliff when Mike left.
was watching this episode
Malik was always correct in saying from an external view in almost any other case Donna’s promotion was BS. Donna was the exception, she had like 15 years with the firm at that point, and spent much of that time helping and having an ear in pretty much every aspect of the firm. She was self-trained to be a match for any standard qualified coo and everyone in the firm knew it. Also, that judge is one of the worst on this show to date, blatantly disregarding basic court etiquette just to allow an incredibly sketchy evidence piece to be admitted. Malik should’ve been held in contempt the second he started accusing her of a crime.
No objecting to badgering the witness, judge not stopping him from clearly doing so. That is such a ridiculous scene. What he did would have gotten him thrown out of court and possibly jailed for contempt if he didn't stop. Granted, he probably would have stopped when the judge jumped in like he would in real life.
Yea... people don't talk like that.
4:10 Very interesting
''Objection, thats inflammatory!'' Judge wouldve stopped Malik from continuing that line of questioning. It had nothing to do with the current case.
More malik battles would be awesome! Sik actor
why its ok that he will risk everything for her and want pepole stop everything help him and tell them to do what he say to save her but when it comes to mike and rachel he said no and alot off pepole comes to him and ask him again and again more then ones He wasnt care about mike love life oy his
The judge must've been Malik's best man at his wedding. The pure bias he showed was so irritating
Malik had a point. Donna started out working as a part time waitress, part time actress. Then goes to work for years as Harvey’s secretary, and in recent memory gets fired for a week for destroying manufactured evidence, only to come back at an increased pay rate, then promoted to COO.
Like that isn’t sketchy.
😂😂Malik made fun of her
What kind of judge allows this kind of cross?
The judge was very prejudicial and biased , the witness was being harassed , and the judge let it continue , bad scene
2:51
Which episode?
6:39 real women of power. Donna, Jessica, and Sheila Sazs.
ooooohhhh!!!! What episode was that?!
Season 7 episode 10
Malik ☝️🥇
This Title should have been *"Malik is Coming After Harvey"* or Alternative title *"Malik is Coming After Everyone"* cuz he is literally going after Everyone Harvey Cares about.
I dont understand why they say "ill wrap it" up and its all ok with testifying, it makes no sense
What you borrow
if they prove the letter was fake,he would get a job at MSNBC
Malik was going at harvey and donna was suppose be professionnal but he made it way way personal and he wanted Harvey disbarred and I like the fact Harvey made him lose his license and put him I prison.
I mean, Jessica willingly chose to go along with pretending Mike was a lawyer and admitted as such. Harvey may have created the situation but she chose not to report them and play along.
Once again, people not listening to Mike bites them. If they had prepped Donna, they would've destroyed Malik in court. But Harvey, as usual, thinks with his heart at the WORST times.
Harvey thinks about him and protects himself, as he always does when it comes to Donna.
They went to trial after having the case for a WEEK? Hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhaa’
Without Mike, Harvey would've lost to Malik!
Malik is asking for attention . That’s what it looks like 🧐😜🤪😝🤓
No it does not
No, actually he is spot on and frankly I love what he did here
@@z1az285Not really!! She didn’t sleep her way to the top. Mike isn’t more qualified than her for his position but y’all are not batting an eye. This whole cross was inflammatory and no judge would allow it.
@@justafanfave228 She didn't ofc but Malik isn't wrong . Yes, Mike wasn't qualified for his role either but he had an incredible memory which she did not. She was efficient as a legal secretary but was out of her depth in the new role
@@z1az285She didn't have a photographic memory, but she had emotional intelligence and a whole set of social skills that made her well suited to managing people.
Her duties (if you saw them from the show) had nothing to do with the law.
And what Malik does is revolting because he eviscerates a witness to fabricate evidence.
Love the cinematrography at 9:37. Harvey's back is against the wall.
Human beings do not talk and act like this. Hard to stop watching anyways.
Court scenes ate bogus, no lawyer can ramble on with no objections.. Smh
donna was so insufferable in the later seasons
Malik always making it worse with fake evidences and a smart mouth
Dudes really trashing Donna in the comments. Unbelievable.
Season 9
Secretary becoming coo???
I rooted for Malik here, the cocky trio Dona, Harvey and Mike deserved what they got, but of course the shady tactics by Harvey, as always pay off…
A prosecutor, a public official eviscerating a witness to create false evidence and you talk about Harvey's shady tactics?
What a LOOSER! Involve other people because you couldn't win in your own game. Loved when he got into prison. 😂
I wasn't rooting for Malik to win but seeing someone expose and verbally beat Donna down will always leave a smile to my face. She is just the worsttttt
Real
Donna is overrated
O Thiago ventura véi
Man, strong and independent woman Donna who is smartest and prettiest turn into a cry baby every time something doesn't go her way. She is insufferable and that increased 10 times after her promotion.
This wasn't in the series
you’re right this is from better call saul
thought it was in Dragonball Z
POV: You’re watching the WowWowWubzy season finale
Looks like The Incredible Hulk to me
😂
why do they have to win every case though.
Donna is probably the most annoying character in tv history
Andwer the question