At least Trump can't taint the jury pool since his lawyers neglected to request a jury.
this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
425 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19150 readers
1630 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Limited? Why? I don't get it. Why are they being so lenient with him?
To avoid a First Amendment fight. Generally speaking, gag orders are on less sure footing than most people realize; they really do run up against prior restraint concerns. There's actually a fair amount of legal debate over them but the vast majority of defendants don't have the wherewithal, or a compelling reason, to really fight them; Trump does. So judges are likely leery of issuing too broad a gag order on him for fear of being overturned, which they never want anyway, and thereby setting a precedent that weakens all judges' ability to issue future gag orders.
Thank you for this explanation. I think it is important context to the discussion that needs to be spread far and wide so everyone better understands the legal calculus rather than getting mad because they think the judicial system is taking it easy on him.
The judicial system is taking it easy on him because he's rich* and powerful and will throw a tantrum whatever happens.
Here's a Tennessee judge who has prohibited these people from discussing their case at all or sharing the footage they obtained legally on cases that have been dismissed.
Thousands of gag orders are issued from the bench that nobody hears about because there aren't news reporters covering every courtroom in the country. Trump is getting special treatement because our justice system is inherently unjust.
I know the judicial system is taking it easy on him.
AG Garland can go on TV 1000 more times and tell me he treats all cases equally, it's still a lie.
There is still internal politics in apolitical institutions. You are shitting on Merrick Garland for taking the measured approach, but to do anything else would simply add further fuel to the fire of the vindictive psycopathy of the christo-fascist cult. The right way to exhume Donald Trump from politics is through the slow, methodical, dispassionate legal process of boiling him alive on full public display until he finally breaks.
This was only ever going to work via imploying the "death by a thousand cuts" war-gaming that we are seeing. If you thought it was ever going to work via shock and awe or judicial blitzkrieg then you are beyond naive. If you are results oriented rather than emotionally motivated then I would think you could see that rather than yelling about some perceived lack of balls & strikes justice that does not exist in the real world.
Garland deliberately obstructed any investigation into Trump (or speaking his name out loud in front of him) over J6 until the Hutchinson testimony humiliated both the FBI and him.
As much as people would like to pretend he didn't, Garland sandbagged like hell to protect Trump. Reporting is that it was because he didn't want to seem political.
And it's really past time to encourage appeasement of MAGA rage. They will be angry regardless. There is no "right way" to behave that they will accept.
They apparently realize the implicit dangers of making a martyr out of a moron. It seems like the prevailing wisdom is to continue to give him enough tether to hang himself. For the record, I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that strategy, but I do understand it.
From what I've been reading the judges involved do not want to create any First Amendment issues.
From what I have seen, judges can do whatever the fuck they want in regards to a case and especially in their own courtroom.
Yep. Only because it's Trump and his massive cult of sycophants that they are using baby gloves with him.
Wish they had the balls to actually treat him like they would literally any other criminal. But I guess its better to try to avoid another Jan. 6th.
In some sick way, I would like to see them attempt another "rebellion". There absolutely won't be a minimal police force waiting for them this time around. Seeing those idiots go up against a proper riot force might be interesting to watch.
However, I understand that the risks outweigh the potential entertainment value. No more lives need to be lost or destroyed over this garbage.
They want 10ft of rope, not 10”.
The judge always has a duty to avoid appellate issues and therefore judges tend to be very lenient to make sure this case is done for good at the end of the court process.
And just because ppl say this is a trump thing, NO. Sam Bankman-Fried, is one of a lot of other prominent cases where they have been swaths of leniency as well.
Sheesh, I reckon only some 300lb beta cuck with tiny hands, fake tan and bad hair would comply with a gag order!
A strong, fearless leader would speak his mind and not be gagged by any witch hunt!
Put him in a cell until he cools off.
He’s been in need of a time out for years.
Until he shuts up, too.
Trump has removed his social post attacking one of the judge's law clerks.
So what happens when Trump violates the order?
(Dog fart noise)
Pfffffffffffft.
I bet there is going to be a "fundraising email" in my spam folder violating this order... lemmie check, brb. (I somehow got on the trump spam list years ago and they send between 3-4 emails (or more) a day trying to grift.)
..
Not yet. I'll add to this comment when and if it arrives.
💀
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Judge Arthur Engoron issued the order, which applies to all parties in the case and pertains only to verbal attacks on court staff.
Engoron had suggested on Monday that testimony about Trump’s 2011 financial statement might be beyond the legal time limit applicable to Attorney General James’ lawsuit.
A lawyer for James’ office, Kevin Wallace, went on to suggest that he was using the 2011 document to show that Trump’s financial statements were prepared in the same manner — giving him and his company the final say over the valuations that appeared — for at least a decade.
Donald Bender, an accountant who prepared the financial statements for years, testified that Trump’s company supplied the numbers that went into the documents.
While grumbling that he’d rather be on the campaign trail, the Republican former president and 2024 GOP front-runner has used the waiting cameras in a courthouse hallway as a microphone for political messaging.
James scored an early victory when Engoron, a Democrat, ruled last week that Trump committed fraud by exaggerating the size of his penthouse at Trump Tower, claiming his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida was worth as much as $739 million and putting similar oversized valuations on office towers, golf courses and other assets.
The original article contains 937 words, the summary contains 206 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
If only we could gag this motherfucker in general.
why would we want to stop his self-incriminating tirade?
at least until he's actually behind bars (and broke)
Why bother? It's not like they're going to enforce it.