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.
Find another judge without the family member receiving millions of dollars from governing officials that have a primary interest in getting a guilty verdict from a political opponent. That is a major conflict of interest.
Is that too much to ask?
The second underline is laughable at this point. Trump has been around forever, and now all of a sudden he has 91 indictments in an election year. Yeah - OK...
How is there a conflict? The judge is presumed to be independent of his daughter.
No, she's not off limits. We have something in this country called a First Amendment, and Judge Juanie would do well to abide by it. He's a judge, not The Law. Defendants don't lose their Constitutional rights just because the judge thinks they're "BS."
Yes, judges can actually limit the 1st Amendment rights of defendants outside the courtroom until the trial is over. The limits are specific, have a definite start and end and are limited in scope. If the defendant thingks the gag order is too tight, there are appeals available.
Neither is on trial, neither one of those attacked a judge's daughter in the middle a criminal trial.
Irrelevant. The prosecution can’t bias the jury pool, yet that’s exactly what they’ve been doing for years. Any verdict against Trump is illegitimate.
Threats, harassment, libel, and slander are not protected by the First Amendment.
A judge has discretion to issue a gag order, change the terms/scope of a gag order, monitor adherence to a gag order, determine when a gag order has been violated, and rule on consequences/punishment for violating a gag order.
Yes, judges can actually limit the 1st Amendment rights of defendants outside the courtroom until the trial is over. The limits are specific, have a definite start and end and are limited in scope. If the defendant thingks the gag order is too tight, there are appeals available.
True that. But you would have to explain to the Appellate Court exactly why attacking the court staff and jurors and their families is an integral part of your defense against the criminal charges. I doubt the justices would buy into your story.
Irrelevant. The prosecution can’t bias the jury pool, yet that’s exactly what they’ve been doing for years. Any verdict against Trump is illegitimate.
That is quite the stretch, any citizen can comment on a criminal trial it doesn't make the trial illegitimate much as you want that to be the case. Trump can't defend himself in court so he is attacking anything that moves and people like yourself attempt to make this normal behavior.
Justice Thomas' wife Ginni works on political campaigns, it's not illegal.
We watch the socialist regime rising, as if we were the people in Germany condemned for allowing the the ovens and concentration camps to obliterate anyone opposed to the regime. Witness to history repeating itself and not realizing it.
The perception of bias by the judicial is discouraged, an exception is made for Trump.
Hochul spilled the beans, 'don;t worry, these laws used to prosecute and persecute Trump will not be used against you....YOUR FREEDOM EXISTS AT OUR POLITICAL DISCRETION.
Baiting the judge into being overly heavy handed with the gag order in order to use as part of a bid to get a change of venue was smart....worst case scenario, it's just yet another decision that can be used as part of an appeal, best case scenario, it is granted and he gets the case moved somewhere that he might actually get a somewhat fair trial.
Baiting the judge into being overly heavy handed with the gag order in order to use as part of a bid to get a change of venue was smart....worst case scenario, it's just yet another decision that can be used as part of an appeal, best case scenario, it is granted and he gets the case moved somewhere that he might actually get a somewhat fair trial.
Judges are picked in New York like a take a number system in a deli, and both prosecution and defense are involved in selection of jurors. What would you do to make it more fair? Where would you propose the trial be moved?
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.
