this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
174 points (99.4% liked)

politics

19290 readers
2585 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Feel free to let out a long curse in the comfort of your home reading this:

Page 17:

"While this Court as a matter of law must not make any determination on sentencing prior to giving the parties and Defendant an opportunity to be heard, it seems proper at this juncture to make known the Court's inclination to not impose any sentence of incarceration, a sentence authorized by the conviction but one the People concede they no longer view as a practicable recommendation. As such, in balancing the aforementioned considerations in conjunction with the underlying concerns of the Presidential immunity doctrine, a sentence of an unconditional discharge appears to be the most viable solution to ensure finality and allow Defendant to pursue his appellate options. Further, to assuage the Defendant's concerns regarding the mental and physical demands during this transition period as well as the considerations set forth in the 2000 OLC Memorandum, this Court will permit Defendant to exercise his right to appear virtually for this proceeding, if he so chooses."

What is "unconditional discharge"? Exactly what it sounds like:

  1. Sentence. When the court imposes a sentence of unconditional discharge, the defendant shall be released with respect to the conviction for which the sentence is imposed without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision. A sentence of unconditional discharge is for all purposes a final judgment of conviction.

https://casetext.com/statute/consolidated-laws-of-new-york/chapter-penal/part-2-sentences/title-e-sentences/article-65-sentences-of-probation-conditional-discharge-and-unconditional-discharge/section-6520-sentence-of-unconditional-discharge-

The judge is literally giving him no imprisonment, fine or penalty, and the entire crux of the decision is that Trump's rights to exercise his appeals needs to be ripe. So Trump gets all opportunities to clear his name, while the people whose rights he violated by criminal conduct get nothing except maybe the ability to call him a convicted felon, pending appeal.

This is NOT the finding of unconditional discharge. The judge explicitly says he is allowing an opportunity for Trump and the prosecution's team to make their arguments before sentencing on 1/10/25. But his putting the above paragraph in is certainly going to severely limit what the prosecution will demand by signaling ahead of time that the judge will likely reject any imprisonment, fine or probation.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah if you read the whole thing from the start to finish, it's like the most disappointing ruined orgasm ever. 17 pages of telling Trump and his lawyers that they're a bunch of fuckwits and their arguments are trash. Then "but none of that matters, I ain't doing shit about it".

[–] WhatAmLemmy 3 points 4 days ago

Corporate dictatorship, doing corporate dictatorship things, because it's a corporate dictatorship.