this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
342 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19115 readers
3805 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Some context:

Former Trump White House Communications Director Michael Dubke suggested on CNN Tuesday that Trump had mobilized his allies and proxies to the courthouse in an effort to “get around the gag order” imposed on him by Judge Merchan.

Yep. He's trying to violate the gag order indirectly. Unfortunately for him, the gag order specifically includes attempting to have surrogates violate the order on his behalf.

I suspect there's another gag order hearing incoming.

all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 89 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

That's a witness to criminal contempt of court. The prosecution should get this guy to swear to his hat he saw under oath so Trump can spend some time in prison for his games.

Edit: I'm not fixing that typo, let him swear to his hat.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Edit: I’m not fixing that typo, let him swear to his hat.

💯

[–] ripcord 18 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I am totally blanking on what he actually meant there.

Swear to his...god? Heart? I feel like I'm missing something really stupidly more obvious.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I have no idea either, and that makes it even better.

[–] Cosmonauticus 8 points 6 months ago

I'm all for making this a thing

[–] AngryCommieKender 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

He accidentally hit the suggested word "his" while trying to type the word "what," would be my guess.

The sentence should read: ...swear to what he saw....

[–] DekesEnormous 4 points 6 months ago

Honestly having Trump swear on one of his stupid red hats with MAGA would probably be the equivalent to his version of swearing on the Bible. After all, his word is gospel to his mouth breathing cult.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

I figured it was just some turn of phrase I had never heard before.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

"..swear to what he saw under oath.." I think

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago

Edit: I'm not fixing that typo, let him swear to his hat.

Upbean for standing on principle 👍

[–] Delusional 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They clearly don't want to send trump to prison, even though he most definitely deserves to rot in there, because of his rabid dumbass cult followers. So why not send anyone who helps him violate the gag orders to prison instead?

[–] barsquid 1 points 6 months ago

That's a start. Donald loves throwing his cronies under the bus so he'll be fine with it also.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

Trump is never going to prison. This judge will not jail him.

[–] Bookmeat 1 points 6 months ago

Americans swear to hats in court? That explains a lot.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It was so clear that these stooges were only there to violate trump's gag order on his behalf. Of course he edited their speeches. Imagine how embarrassing it must be to have a senile dullard who can't string a sentence together correcting you when you already lie for a living.

[–] dogsnest 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Imagine how embarrassing it must be to have a senile dullard who can't string a sentence together correcting you when you already lie for a living.

That's mighty fine prose, dude.

I'm borrowing.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

I’m borrowing.

You can keep it! I don't need it back.

[–] Dkarma 6 points 6 months ago
[–] Nightwingdragon 44 points 6 months ago (3 children)

"It's not an 11th violation of the gag order! It's the first time he violated the gag order in this way. That automatically restarts the count!" -- Trump's lawyers, probably.

80/20 odds says this judge goes with it so he doesn't actually have to punish Trump.

[–] barsquid 3 points 6 months ago

Just like QI. Was never warned about this specific type of violation, so this scolding won't even cost $1,000 for Donald.

[–] kikutwo 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Probably had to dumb down the language for the intended audience.

[–] MegaUltraChicken 39 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Dumb down TOMMY TUBERVILLE? We're in uncharted territory now...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

It’s just grunting and “master lock” over and over.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

The submarine will almost certainly implode before we get that deep.

[–] Tyfud 18 points 6 months ago

Honestly, I'm kind of impressed that trump could read at a high enough level to edit quotes. That's gotta be like 5th or 6th grade level at least, which is well beyond where I thought his reading skills were at.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

So what? It's clear that he gets to do what he wants.