He's calling the court's bluff. I'm afraid it'll work. They should hold him in contempt and put in in jail, pending trial. I don't believe they will.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
374 points (97.5% liked)
News
23301 readers
3410 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
As I understand it, knowing that throwing him in jail in contempt of court would likely set off riots, her threat to him for interfering in the process was to speed up the trial. Considering his only real defense is pushing conviction until after the election, I think Trump will soon learn the meaning of “the right to a speedy trial.”
EDIT: Source
Good to know that threats of violence are effective in suppressing justice.
He's pulling BS in Georgia this morning as well: Trump tells Georgia witness not to testify
Hope those charges get witness tampering added on
I'm torn, because I think that incitement would bring about the end of the trump era much more quickly, as it'll get put down hard. But I also don't want to advocate violence or for stupid people to get hurt for no reason other than their ignorance.
Ignorance has been out the window for a decade. These people knowingly engaged in falsehoods long enough to convince themselves they're right, and I am sick of giving them a pass as if they're just dumb, poorly informed, unable to find alternatives to their hate rhetoric, etc.
At a certain point, it's malice. The saying about not attributing to malice what can be explained by ignorance is for situations *where all else is equal." We are beyond that point.
Throw the book at him. Let them riot and ruin their own shithole counties, or let them try to drive to big cities to attack them, and then throw the book at them too. I'm done accepting responsibility for the actions of these people, who have been given countless opportunities to not be assholes.
Ignorance punishes itself every day. Yes we should try to prevent it, but Facebook will build a bigger idiot.
load more comments
(2 replies)
The thing is, both sides have a right to a speedy trial. The prosecution, and the citizens they represent, have been waiting three and a half years already.
Simply because of the complexity of it all. I mean it's never happened before so the DOJ and state justice dept's had to triple-check that each and every "i" was dotted and "t" was crossed. Never mind the millions of pages of evidence that had be collated, then backed up from other sources.
It is mind-boggling it's only been 3.5 years!
It can take a year and a half to convict a mass shooter caught red-handed.
Then let there be riots. The man needs his due.
That’s why there’s an Insurrection Act.
Right? This whole "we can't punish criminals because other criminals might engage in criminal behavior" attitude is mystifying to me. What ever happened with not negotiating with terrorists as a national policy?
It is very odd, someone was claiming we should have let him win the other day because this would have been less dangerous. That is so fucked up. Appeasement is almost never a viable long-term solution is politics and geo-politics. The best time to deal with an abusive force is yesterday, not pulling the Band-Aid early is just making things worse. They will riots anyway, unless he turns America into autocracy, only at this point we won't have to worry about riots.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The very scenario that quote came from was one of... Extensive, and disastrous, negotiation with terrorists. So, not much has changed.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I read somewhere that the order of "locking him up" could be appealed extensively and would be an effective delay tactic for him. I think that is why the DC judge wants to speed things up in response to this behavior.
If you mean that he can appeal a contempt charge, that is technically true, but the appeal for that would take place after the main trial and would not prevent him from being held in detention until then.
He can appeal from jail.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Oh FFS, lock him up already!
And stop reporting every little inanne thing he says and does.
Garland said "we will follow up on everyone regardless of who they are". We know now for a fact he was lying.
Every judge says they're going to treat him like any other defendant. We are in the process of learning that they are lying.
I'm not saying Chutkan is going to obviously spike the case like Cannon or Judge Rittenhouse, I think she's going to try to run a decent trial if it gets to that point.
But pre-trial punishment? Not a snowflake's chance in hell. These judges all still want to be invited to cocktail parties and given country club memberships. The elite is loyal to the elite.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Once again Trump pulls out his tiny pecker and rubs it all over our justice system. Anyone else would have been turned into a eunuch on the spot.
Sounds like contempt to me. Lock him up.
She's got to call him into court on this.
She won't though, because it would look bad or some other stupid reason.
If it was a regular person they would be thrown in jail immediately.
Yet to be seen. Chutkan has demonstrated that she's going to be the "find out" of "fuck around" in other aspects, but she also knows she is presiding over a uniquely historic case with potentially terminal consequences. Her Friday statement about inflammatory public comments demanding a swift trial fell short of what I would have liked, but I find her decision on the matter to be brilliantly fair, and unassailable.
Also note that the Government has not (so far as we know) made any motions in response to the defendant's weekend commentary. Based on the immediate motion for a protective order after the defendant's "I'm coming after you!" post, I might expect there to be a motion from the Government, and there's not (again, so far as we know). To me, this suggests that they know Judge Chutkan is already working on this, and does not need the Government or public pressure to be any greater than it already is. And if they know, defense knows, too.
I am hopeful, but the consequences (if any) for the defendant's weekend rants are going to be the point upon which the future of democracy turns. She has to know this, and I have to think that the reason we haven't heard anything from her yet is because she is considering very carefully what the response from the court will be.
Yeah, so the standard bullshit reasons.
It may feel like bullshit because we all know what he did, but they are being careful to not give him any legal grounds to appeal or move the trial. What's funny is everyone knows there is a two tiered justice system, it's just who is on which tier is different from person to person. Also trying to minimize collateral damage is important.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The court absolutely needs to drag Trump back down to Earth and demonstrate that no one is above the law. At the same time, Judges are supposed to be impartial and part of Judge Chutkan's statement, "It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day" could be seen as prejudicial. Whether or not she acts in an unbiased way is an entirely separate issue. The appearance of bias will open the door to an appeal of any verdict against Trump.
Ya, Trump belongs in prison; but, it's going to need to be done in the most scrupulous way possible to keep him from wiggling out of accountability.
no one is above the law
Why do we keep repeating this obviously false ideal when we make no progress towards making it true?
Because, by pushing the ideal we do make progress. It's easy to look at our current situation and bemoan the fact that we aren't there yet, and we still have progr ess to make. But, the truly false statement is "we make no progress towards making it true". Pick up a history book and spend some time critically reading. What happens today is a far cry from even 50 years ago,. Is it perfect? Not even close. But it is better. Throwing up our hands in defeat, because we aren't there yet, serves only to allow things to stagnate. We are pushing forward, but yes, progress is painfully slow. It always has been, and probably always will be. But, that doesn't mean we should stop pushing.
We could change it to "Nobody should be above the law" and it would be true without implying that the system is fine how it is right now.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Everyone with a brain wants him behind bars. It’s only his shit-eating army of clones that don’t want him in prison.
load more comments
(1 replies)
He may be doing this intentionally. He and his team may be looking for a judicial reaction in order to use it as grounds to move the trial to another location citing unfair bias.
Speeding up the trial would be a good move. The judge still needs to be careful so that she doesn't give grounds for appeal. I vote for huge fines.
Fines mean that it's only illegal for poor people.
Well, he keeps getting away with shit so why stop?
This popcorn is SOOO good.
She obviously wants me behind bars
That's because you have been doing some criminal shit and I promise you that she's not the only one who wants you behind bars.
This is one of the extremely rare instances where I can almost sympathize with the man. Making inflammatory statements is his whole shtick. It’s all he knows. To him, being told not to make inflammatory statements is like being told not to talk at all.
(Personally, I’d be perfectly happy if I never heard from him again, but that’s beside the point.)
Most federal judges are anti-criminal Don.
Set fire to the prick and let's see how long shit burns.
Stupid cunt can’t help himself.
view more: next ›