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.
They miss them horribly. Trump's tweets gave them the permission they needed to hate openly.
Not all. I hated him since he came to notoriety in the 90's and it was evident he was a scumbag. I'm what you would consider a 'legacy' Trump hater. The icing on the cake was the Taj Mahal debacle in NJ when people got stiffed and a commercial analyst, Roffman, got fired because he determined the whole thing would implode less than 2 years after opening. Trump got him fired, the commercial bank caved to Trump and guess what?
Within 2 years it imploded- bankrupt.
And the analyst Roffman? Let's just say he did very, very well when Trump settled the lawsuit filed by the analyst. Very well indeed.
As a commercial lender I followed this idiots moves a lot. He is the quintessential example of who to never lend money to, lol.
It is, and I do think the judges are handling him with kid gloves. But this judge warned him that the consequences would escalate if he continues. He's been warned before this. In my view this should be his final warning. Three strikes and you're out. The next one involves jail time.
Jailing him for intimidating witnesses to scare them from testifying is not stupid. That is classic mob thug tactics, which Trump excels at. We want to make sure he's not around to be elected again, and this is how you do it.
Not unless he's convicted of something that prevents him from holding federal office.
Barring that, he can run and be elected while in jail.
For violating the gag order he was fined $5000 earlier today.
These judges must be scared to punish gag order violations.
$5000 is a joke of a deterrent.
You're right. Have the judge double the fine for every violation. It won't take long for him to either shut up or for us to find out if he really is worth billions. Win-win.
Not all. I hated him since he came to notoriety in the 90's and it was evident he was a scumbag. I'm what you would consider a 'legacy' Trump hater. The icing on the cake was the Taj Mahal debacle in NJ when people got stiffed and a commercial analyst, Roffman, got fired because he determined the whole thing would implode less than 2 years after opening. Trump got him fired, the commercial bank caved to Trump and guess what?
Within 2 years it imploded- bankrupt.
And the analyst Roffman? Let's just say he did very, very well when Trump settled the lawsuit filed by the analyst. Very well indeed.
As a commercial lender I followed this idiots moves a lot. He is the quintessential example of who to never lend money to, lol.
The KKK and Stormfront both used Trump's candidacy for fundraising and membership drives. The first couple of days the Klan's server crashed, and Stormfront had to get bigger servers to handle the traffic.
He hit my radar in the early 70s on a trip to New York when I read an article in the Village Voice about the housing discrimination lawsuit he and his father were in. That was enough for me to never have anything to do with anything Trump, ever.
Name the criminal trial where a judge allowed the defendant to threaten and smear not only the judge but the clerks and prosecuting attorney. Trump has been warned several times for his behavior, but he can't help himself, where is his legal team.
Threaten?
Have a link for these threats?
Smear, on the other hand, is strictly a matter of interpretation and opinion.
The First Amendment protects speech judges don't like.
Again, if I have to pick, I'll choose my Sixth Amendment rights over my First Amendment rights any day.
One lets you flap off your mouth.
One helps keep you out of prison.
No choice in my opinion.
No one has to make the choice.
Trump doesn't have a First Amendment right to intimidate anyone, much less a staff member of the judge trying his case. And given his nutty followers, posting her opinion could result in harm to her.
If he keeps it up he's liable to find himself facing a weekend in jail for contempt of court, or criminal charges for interference with a legal proceeding.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,532 posts, read 12,509,523 times
Reputation: 10459
Quote:
Originally Posted by RosieSD
The applicable part of the Constitution is the Sixth Amendment which guarantees the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.
The Sixth Amendment applies not just to Federal law but to State law as well, so this isn't a question of "New York law."
The Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that Judges (both Federal and state) not only can, but should, issue gag orders on defendants (and others, such as defense attorneys, witnesses, prosecutors, even the press) if their public actions risk tainting the jury pool's opinion so that an impartial jury can't be seated.
In other words: The more loudly you quack in public about the details of the case and the people involved in prosecuting the case (including witnesses), the greater the risk that you're tainting the jury pool.
So, the judge needs to step in and protect you from yourself to insure an impartial jury can be sat. (This doesn't just apply to Trump --- lots of other defendants have had gag orders imposed by judges for the exact same reason).
I know it's difficult to think in terms of this protecting Trump's right to a fair trial, but that is ultimately what the judges are trying to do. It's not to silence Trump; it's to protect his legal rights.
He is still free to publicly say he's not guilty, and to campaign. He can discuss the case privately with whoever he wants (except, of course, his co-defendants when ordered by a judge not to do so as part of his bail release). He just can't bad mouth anyone connected to the trial.
Now, you may want to argue that his best bet is to taint the jury pool in his favor by badmouthing everyone "out to get him", but I can guarantee you that every time he tweets/says bad stuff about the judge, prosecutors, court workers, jury, and witnesses, he's also having the OPPOSITE effect, and making it harder for HIS attorneys to find jurors who will be able to put all of that aside to give him a fair trial.
If you want to be mad at anyone for making things worse for himself, it should be Donald Trump himself.
If you want the best outcome for him, you should be pushing for him to start zipping his lip and focus on helping his attorneys get his legal cards in order for the actual courtroom, not the court of public opinion.
That's his safest path forward. Any half way smart defendant should understand that.
I can't figure out what he is doing here.. it must just be stupidity.
His base doesn't care about the law clerk but the law clerk decides his case. I mean..... is he trying to lose?
Don't attack court staff - dumb.
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.
