this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
381 points (97.3% liked)

News

23661 readers
3875 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Former President Trump criticized the judge presiding over his 2020 election case, just days after she warned him against making any “inflammatory statements” that could intimidate witnesses or prejudice the jury pool.

In a statement posted overnight on Truth Social, Trump called U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan “highly partisan” and “very biased & unfair.”

“She obviously wants me behind bars,” he added.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HR_Pufnstuf 69 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Oh FFS, lock him up already!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Garland said "we will follow up on everyone regardless of who they are". We know now for a fact he was lying.

Every judge says they're going to treat him like any other defendant. We are in the process of learning that they are lying.

I'm not saying Chutkan is going to obviously spike the case like Cannon or Judge Rittenhouse, I think she's going to try to run a decent trial if it gets to that point.

But pre-trial punishment? Not a snowflake's chance in hell. These judges all still want to be invited to cocktail parties and given country club memberships. The elite is loyal to the elite.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

And stop reporting every little inanne thing he says and does.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Seriously, enough with the "warnings". The country's starting to look like China.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Once again Trump pulls out his tiny pecker and rubs it all over our justice system. Anyone else would have been turned into a eunuch on the spot.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago

Sounds like contempt to me. Lock him up.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She's got to call him into court on this.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She won't though, because it would look bad or some other stupid reason.

If it was a regular person they would be thrown in jail immediately.

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

Yet to be seen. Chutkan has demonstrated that she's going to be the "find out" of "fuck around" in other aspects, but she also knows she is presiding over a uniquely historic case with potentially terminal consequences. Her Friday statement about inflammatory public comments demanding a swift trial fell short of what I would have liked, but I find her decision on the matter to be brilliantly fair, and unassailable.

Also note that the Government has not (so far as we know) made any motions in response to the defendant's weekend commentary. Based on the immediate motion for a protective order after the defendant's "I'm coming after you!" post, I might expect there to be a motion from the Government, and there's not (again, so far as we know). To me, this suggests that they know Judge Chutkan is already working on this, and does not need the Government or public pressure to be any greater than it already is. And if they know, defense knows, too.

I am hopeful, but the consequences (if any) for the defendant's weekend rants are going to be the point upon which the future of democracy turns. She has to know this, and I have to think that the reason we haven't heard anything from her yet is because she is considering very carefully what the response from the court will be.

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

Yeah, so the standard bullshit reasons.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It may feel like bullshit because we all know what he did, but they are being careful to not give him any legal grounds to appeal or move the trial. What's funny is everyone knows there is a two tiered justice system, it's just who is on which tier is different from person to person. Also trying to minimize collateral damage is important.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sylver_dragon 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The court absolutely needs to drag Trump back down to Earth and demonstrate that no one is above the law. At the same time, Judges are supposed to be impartial and part of Judge Chutkan's statement, "It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day" could be seen as prejudicial. Whether or not she acts in an unbiased way is an entirely separate issue. The appearance of bias will open the door to an appeal of any verdict against Trump.

Ya, Trump belongs in prison; but, it's going to need to be done in the most scrupulous way possible to keep him from wiggling out of accountability.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

no one is above the law

Why do we keep repeating this obviously false ideal when we make no progress towards making it true?

[–] sylver_dragon 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because, by pushing the ideal we do make progress. It's easy to look at our current situation and bemoan the fact that we aren't there yet, and we still have progr ess to make. But, the truly false statement is "we make no progress towards making it true". Pick up a history book and spend some time critically reading. What happens today is a far cry from even 50 years ago,. Is it perfect? Not even close. But it is better. Throwing up our hands in defeat, because we aren't there yet, serves only to allow things to stagnate. We are pushing forward, but yes, progress is painfully slow. It always has been, and probably always will be. But, that doesn't mean we should stop pushing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

We could change it to "Nobody should be above the law" and it would be true without implying that the system is fine how it is right now.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He may be doing this intentionally. He and his team may be looking for a judicial reaction in order to use it as grounds to move the trial to another location citing unfair bias.

Speeding up the trial would be a good move. The judge still needs to be careful so that she doesn't give grounds for appeal. I vote for huge fines.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Fines mean that it's only illegal for poor people.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Well, he keeps getting away with shit so why stop?

[–] Mindlight 14 points 1 year ago

She obviously wants me behind bars

That's because you have been doing some criminal shit and I promise you that she's not the only one who wants you behind bars.

[–] bazus1 13 points 1 year ago

This popcorn is SOOO good.

[–] eran_morad 5 points 1 year ago

Stupid cunt can’t help himself.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is one of the extremely rare instances where I can almost sympathize with the man. Making inflammatory statements is his whole shtick. It’s all he knows. To him, being told not to make inflammatory statements is like being told not to talk at all.

(Personally, I’d be perfectly happy if I never heard from him again, but that’s beside the point.)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Most federal judges are anti-criminal Don.

[–] PeckerBrown 5 points 1 year ago

Set fire to the prick and let's see how long shit burns.

load more comments
view more: next ›