Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"Vote the Felon, Not the Melon!"
(set 14 days ago)
Location: Crooked Pennsylvania
1,448 posts, read 734,122 times
Reputation: 2460
Advertisements
It is satisfying to watch DJT's support increasing daily with every Soviet style tactic the degenerates try to use against him..hopefully the retribution will be medieval.
I read elsewhere that the Secret Service and the Court (or the jailers thereof) have been in discussions about what to do if Mr. Trump were to be jailed for a few days.
However, I agree with the sentiment that the Court will not jail Mr. Trump. If he were a poor black man? Sure. But a 'wealthy' white man running for President? No.
A poor black man running for President? Yes.
By the by: gag orders are valid, as two minutes on Google will show. Mr. Trump is free to speak on many subjects. He may discuss Mr. Biden; he may discuss the economy, immigration, foreign policy, interest rates, inflation, the Federal Reserve, capital gain taxes, most anything his heart desires.
He simply cannot attack staff members of the Court (the judge is exempt), or attack witnesses, or try to intimidate witnesses. Really, a very narrow gag order.
Yet, Mr. Trump does not choose to talk about anything other than how he is the victim in all this. He is the weakest 'strong man' I think I have ever seen.
Can't campaign because of the trial? He just went through four straight days of no trial in which he could have campaigned, but he choose to play golf.
I’m no Constitutional Scholar. It does strike me though that there should be certain rules in place that prevent those accused of crimes from taking actions that might undermine the integrity of the legal proceedings. Threatening witnesses, court staff, etc. should be out of bounds. Reasonable people can disagree about what constitutes a threat, or statement that would impede the fair application of justice. Has Trump crossed the line? I think so. I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that Trump’s words could incite someone to take actions that might cause harm to another person….in my mind, this isn’t dissimilar to what happened on January 6. I don’t think the Judge is being unreasonable based on Trump’s current and past rhetoric to apply a gag order in the interests of justice.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
24,840 posts, read 13,203,748 times
Reputation: 10910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler
He's taking orders from Biden, he'll lock Trump up if Biden tells him to.
Yep. Democrats had already been opening many doors in their frenetic zeal in trying to "Get Trump by any means necessary", doors that they will eventually wish they'd kept shut.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
24,840 posts, read 13,203,748 times
Reputation: 10910
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVNomad
I’m no Constitutional Scholar. It does strike me though that there should be certain rules in place that prevent those accused of crimes from taking actions that might undermine the integrity of the legal proceedings. Threatening witnesses, court staff, etc. should be out of bounds. Reasonable people can disagree about what constitutes a threat, or statement that would impede the fair application of justice. Has Trump crossed the line? I think so. I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that Trump’s words could incite someone to take actions that might cause harm to another person….in my mind, this isn’t dissimilar to what happened on January 6. I don’t think the Judge is being unreasonable based on Trump’s current and past rhetoric to apply a gag order in the interests of justice.
What had he said about Cohen that he's being fined for it?
Based on what his inability to just keep his mouth shut, there's never any challenge to this frequently used court option in other cases. Maybe if he didn't threaten, belittle and demean those involved or simply those related to those involved he wouldn't be under it. Maybe those receiving his verbal wrath should just sue him for defamation of character, or would that be picking on him too.
His actions have placed him where he is now, can't wait for all the lawyers, contractors and service providers that he owes money to start taking him to court to collect...
Based on what his inability to just keep his mouth shut, there's never any challenge to this frequently used court option in other cases. Maybe if he didn't threaten, belittle and demean those involved or simply those related to those involved he wouldn't be under it. Maybe those receiving his verbal wrath should just sue him for defamation of character, or would that be picking on him too.
His actions have placed him where he is now, can't wait for all the lawyers, contractors and service providers that he owes money to start taking him to court to collect...
You have a lot of "Maybe" in your post, but what we don't see is anything backing up what you see with facts. As normal, people such a as you cannot back anything up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
