504
Judge Repeatedly Asks Lawyers to 'Control' Trump as Testimony Goes Off the Rails
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
504 points (99.0% liked)
politics
18992 readers
2088 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem is that this is a strategy, and it might work. The judge is showing signs of exasperation. The defense is laying the grounds for an appeal based on judicial bias. Viewed in that light, each time the judge interjects out of annoyance or exasperation is citable evidence. It's funny, but it is also rather dangerous.
The judge needs to calmly and patiently explain to Trump that he will be jailed for contempt if he doesn't follow the rules and act in good faith, and then dispassionately follow through with that consequence.
Don't threaten him, don't cajole his lawyers to constrain him, don't complain about his behavior. Just give him a time-out, like the petulant toddler he is, until he gets it through his skull that his bullshit won't be tolerated.
Once he comes back, if he won't agree to behave or if he does promise to behave and then breaks that promise, simply immediately put him back in the cell for another round.
Trump needs to see the inside of a holding cell for a while in order to act right.
As much as I'd love to see it, jailing him for contempt would play right into their plan. He wouldn't see 24hr of cell time before his fanatic base would be whipped into violence, painted as political persecution of the GOP (defacto) nominee
It's all paper thin excuses to anyone with critical thinking, but we know it'd be a successful ploy.
They already do violence who cares. Every mass shooting is almost always a Trump supporter.
What the fuck is the national guard for then? It's the correct and legal punishment, and it's a matter of national security. These concepts are not conflicting.
I'm prepared to defend myself, my family and my home. Ever fought a bully? They fucking cave with the quickness.
One silly bitch got shot through the neck and they scrambled out of that part of the Capitol.
I'm not brave, but if they think I'm harmless, they are free to test that assumption.
Get fucked Babbitt
Fuck em. They already sent their best on Jan 6. I'm not impressed. The National Guard can steamroll them and the cops if the cops turn traitor.
It doesn't even need to be 24 hours. I suspect giving him even a 1-hour time-out would be plenty.
I couldn't care less what The Base thinks of it.
That's a luxury only afforded to spectators.
Better be really afraid of them and be extra nice then. They will hate that and your party will win.
It's not terrible for the crazies to show us where they be.
Let them do their violence, it'll end like Ft. Sumpter the first time around.
I don't think it's a strategy, it's just a happy potential by-product, albeit an unlikely one.
Sure it's possible that a judge might make mistakes that may form the basis for a successful appeal. Is Engoron more likely to make mistakes because of Trump's antics? Not necessarily. Most people do their best work under pressure.
Trump's behavior is focused as always on his supporters. The more he appears to be persecuted the more his supporters will throw money at him - it's that simple. He's intentionally pushing the judge as far as he can without crossing the line into actual consequences.
Edit: as an aside the photos of these idiots always makes me think about how much time they've spent practicing their facial expressions in a mirror.
I'll add to that that wasting a judge's time through non-compliance is a fast track to default judgment. Just ask Alex Jones how that goes.
The right to a speedy trial is a right for the prosecutors, too.
Not just wasting the judge's time, but yelling at and insulting the judge on the stand. I'm no lawyer, but I doubt this is a legal strategy that any reputable legal professional would recommend.
Already got the equivalent of a default judgement - he's already ruled on the law.
Right, but not for the punitive damages part.