politics
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
view the rest of the comments
The prosecution made a point of not asking for any jail time in this hearing, but rather a warning that future violations will escalate to that. I don't think the Judge really wants to jail Trump while the trial is ongoing. Trump will get a hefty fine as well as that warning. Well see how long it takes for Trump to end up in Rikers.
But why, though? Trump doesn't give a fuck about fines; time spent in jail is the only thing that has any chance of getting through to him because his wealth/grift can't solve it for him.
I'm willing to bet even just sending him to the holding cells in the couthouse for a couple hours each time he makes another out-of-order outburst would shut him up real quick.
All a short term trip to jail would do is play into the Martyr complex that he and his supporters have. He would complain that he's not getting a fair trial, and low-information voters who are not paying attention will believe it.
While the judge doesn't care about Trump's political prospects, he does care that the trial is fair and that public perceptions don't make it into the jury's deliberations. But marching Trump off to a holding cell will be such an event that it would be impossible to keep it from the jury, and could give Trump a valid avenue for appeal.
However, if the judge establishes a paper trail that proves Trump was given every chance to comply, then it would make it harder for the appeal to succeed. Trump can't very well argue that the court is biased against him when they gave him extra opportunities to comply.
He has and will continue to do this, and worse, and his cult will believe all of it, and worse. We cannot make decisions, especially not exceptions to laws, based on fears of how a fascist cult of supporters will react to it. They are going to do and say stupid/crazy shit, all the time, no matter what.
I don't care what it plays to. Make lady liberty stop peaking through her blindfold and treat him like the rest of us would be treated.
Because he wants to come off as a martyr to his base, and putting him in jail is exactly what he's aiming for to do that.
Can we try once? Just give him a night, let him know what he's up against?
They will make him one no matter what, deciding not to carry out justice out of fear of an angry and uninformed mob just puts decision making entirely in the hands of that mob.
Oh yeah, because if his base was even more motivated they might vote extra hard.
The Appellate Court likes to see that judges gradually escalate through the options, not just go straight for the harshest one available. It’s likely Marchan (and the prosecution) want to make this case as appeal-proof as possible.