|
Rescue Toaster posted:I'm talking about over the next year when Trump keeps posting on truth social "Will no one rid me of this troublesome jury?" over and over and the judge hems and haws and frets and gives stern warnings and points out how sure he is Trump has learned his lesson this time. Prospective jurors are going to see these news stories and also see that absolutely nothing is being done about it. To the extent that I take issue with the RICO indictments, it's that Willis erred on the side of inclusion in contrast with Smith's (arguably also errant) narrow scope. Much of the behavior indicted in GA is protected outside the context of the state's breathtakingly broad RICO statute, and many are arguably protected even as a part of the enterprise. It builds a broad story and makes number go up, but every legal victory for Trump - whether being found "not guilty" on a given count or getting it thrown out before it reaches a jury - gives another foothold to attack the legitimacy of all the investigations. Similarly, any gag order will have to survive SCOTUS review and when a too broad one is overturned he'll be able to justifiably (for the first time!) claim that these proceedings are trying silence him in violation of his rights. All of which is to say that the slow expansion of gag orders is common in less fraught, less focused upon cases (even ones, like Stone, with heavily political elements and even more blatant misbehavior) and has little to do with lilylivered or pollyanna judges or the belief that this, finally, is PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Is this a viable legal argument against potential gag orders at this point? NEBRASKA PRESS ASSN. et al. v. STUART, JUDGE, et al. posted:we must examine the evidence before the trial judge when the order was entered to determine [...] (c) how effectively a restraining order would operate to prevent the threatened danger.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
Madkal posted:So would Trump ever plead the fifth or is he too proud and will have a Sideshow Bob "attempted murder" moment? Nieuw Amsterdam posted:Gambling addicts aren’t addicted to playing games they are actually addicted to losing, which is why they can’t walk away after wins. Winning feels wrong, losing triggers the endorphins.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:It would take the most incompetent legal team imaginable -- like, hundreds of time worse than the actual clowns he's already been reduced to -- to let the dumbfuck take the stand at all. He actually has a constitutional right to speak in his own defense and defense attorneys can get in trouble for not allowing their clients to speak if they truly want to. You have to tell them it's an awful idea but if they truly want to do it you can't stop them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:13
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:It would take the most incompetent legal team imaginable -- like, hundreds of time worse than the actual clowns he's already been reduced to -- to let the dumbfuck take the stand at all. Yeah, it's the brain getting fixated on a variable rate reward schedule. Gamblers can't walk away with their winnings because they're addicted to the feeling of winning rather than possession of money from having previously won.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:He actually has a constitutional right to speak in his own defense and defense attorneys can get in trouble for not allowing their clients to speak if they truly want to. And frankly, he has a story to tell, and its his right to get it out there! I think he should definitely take the stand and say his piece, anything else would be unpresidential. Remember when Clinton was deposed?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
Jon posted:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/government-watchdog-says-secret-service-agents-deleted-jan-6-text-messages CSPAM is right over there sir/ma’am/other. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trumps-legal-advisers-urge-cancel-press-conference-refute/story?id=102336380 When are these lawyers getting fired for trying to stop the free speech of DONALD TRUMP explaining to all of us what’s actually going on. Donald Trump’s Legal Team posted:Oh no oh God no please stop talking stop stop stop talking and posting please we are begging you stop stop stop stop don’t say anything else (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:It would take the most incompetent legal team imaginable -- like, hundreds of time worse than the actual clowns he's already been reduced to -- to let the dumbfuck take the stand at all. https://whywesuffer.com/problem-gamblers-are-addicted-to-losing/ https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160721-the-buzz-that-keeps-people-gambling https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/compulsive-gambling/symptoms-causes/syc-20355178 The first time I heard this theory I also said “what the gently caress” but if you think about it it makes perfect sense- if winning is the goal you stop when you finally win because you feel satiated. If you just get off on something at risk then the amount of the risk should not matter, you could bet pennies or fake tokens and get the same pleasure. Problem gamblers are not satiated by winning. It just makes them gamble more. One of the top things that pops up when you google “problem gambling” or “gambling addiction” is shitloads of people asking “why can’t I stop gambling when I win.” It’s certainly not totally undisputed science but it is a serious theory with supporting evidence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
Tony Phillips posted:findout.png I missed the first time she surfaced as a topic (and did again apparently) but I had two questions about this for anyone with more of a lawyer background than my 0%. quote:Shry is charged with Transmission in Interstate or Foreign Commerce of any Communication Containing a Threat to Injure the Person of Another Why does the charge sound so benign? It sounds like what I'd get if I left that message on my ex-girlfriend's phone. This is a direct threat to a federal judge meant to materially impact a major trial- like almost what someone in the mob would do. I'm surprised there isn't a "threatened to kill a judge" style charge. It just looks a little bit more clear on the rap sheet when she applies for work. quote:She is being held in detention pending trial, according to court documents, and a bond hearing has been set for September 13. Is she just going to bond out in 4 weeks? My heart says anyone who does this for this particular trial (and oh, will there be more) should be held without bond and not see the light of day until the sentence is served- ideally after the trial. It would serve as a deterrent for people that don't want to also sit in a cage and wait until the trial is over. If she skips free it's just a message that this was NBD bro... girls will be girls. My mind says a chudge in her home state is going to agitate for her immediate freedom with a $100 bond the moment its possible. Which one is more accurate?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 19:45
|
|
|
Scags McDouglas posted:Is she just going to bond out in 4 weeks? My heart says anyone who does this for this particular trial (and oh, will there be more) should be held without bond and not see the light of day until the sentence is served- ideally after the trial. IANAL but as far as I know the courts are pretty lenient in general for crimes that aren't physically violent, and don't involve drugs, when it comes to handing out jail or prison sentences. If she keeps it up then normally they start getting harsher and trying to throw the book at you for this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 19:48
|
|
|
Scags McDouglas posted:I missed the first time she surfaced as a topic (and did again apparently) but I had two questions about this for anyone with more of a lawyer background than my 0%. That's the federal crime she committed: threatening to injure people across state lines. Whether or not the name of the crime sounds scary enough isn't really the primary concern here. The judge's detention order suggests it's extremely unlikely that she'll be allowed to bond out.  That first sentence is the key: the court feels that if she's released, she'll quickly reoffend, and that no reasonable release conditions will be able to prevent her from doing so. Moreover, her prior history of committing similar crimes, as well as the fact that she committed this act while out on bond after being charged for basically the same thing last month, highly weighs against her here. It looks like the only way she's getting out of jail before trial is with a ticket to a substance abuse program and a mental health appointment - and if she skips either one, she goes right back to jail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Nieuw Amsterdam posted:CSPAM is right over there sir/ma’am/other. That's not really a response to someone pointing out that it's a really goofy belief that the secret service would stop a crime that their detail committed. Do you think that SS agents following the children of politicians would enforce drug laws they saw violated, for instance? Of course not! To do so would compromise their actual job. Similarly, the idea of the secret service strong-arming their detail into going to a court appointment he chooses to miss is just a fantasy that's fundamentally divorced from reality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Nieuw Amsterdam posted:https://whywesuffer.com/problem-gamblers-are-addicted-to-losing/ I think an important confounding factor is just the ability to keep going. If you win, you have more money to gamble with. If you lose all your money, you no longer have any to gamble and have to stop. I'm sure if someone came by and gave them their money back after they lost it all, they would just keep playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:IANAL but as far as I know the courts are pretty lenient in general for crimes that aren't physically violent, and don't involve drugs, when it comes to handing out jail or prison sentences. Main Paineframe posted:The judge's detention order suggests it's extremely unlikely that she'll be allowed to bond out. Thanks guys, I know it's a complicated question. In this instance I choose to side with Main Paineframe, because he supplied the answer I want more. Pretty funny seeing some of the fringe residual effects of the right-wing rage machine. Her Dad had to come to court and say she just sits at home all day drinking and getting more mad at the news until it boils over into phone calls. (lol)
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
loving lmao, that's just her nightly ritual? "Oh, Mee-Maw's pounding beers while watching the news until she gets revved up enough to start calling people up and making death threats, is it 7 pm already"
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:40
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:loving lmao, that's just her nightly ritual? Yeah the fuckin fox news limbic juicing train just became this hypnotic ritual for so many older americans that it would promote absolute derangement of the very literal kind. it makes sense it would pair well with substance abuse of the more tangibly ingestible kind
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Jon posted:That's not really a response to someone pointing out that it's a really goofy belief that the secret service would stop a crime that their detail committed. Do you think that SS agents following the children of politicians would enforce drug laws they saw violated, for instance? Of course not! To do so would compromise their actual job. Similarly, the idea of the secret service strong-arming their detail into going to a court appointment he chooses to miss is just a fantasy that's fundamentally divorced from reality. What’s your source for “obviously Secret Service agents let protectees do all the criming they want” What’s your source for “The Secret Service can just yell National Security or something and judges orders are void” I have a strong suspicion it’s thriller movies. Barron Trump buying a dime bag - nobody gives a poo poo, right. Donald Trump fleeing to avoid prosecution on conspiracy charges - this is big boy stuff, you are setting your career on fire and exposing yourself to federal prison by aiding this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
In fact one of the reasons he's gonna get bail in all his cases is that, as a dude surrounded by law enforcement at all times and with cameras tracking his every move, he is the exact opposite of a flight risk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 21:48
|
|
|
TBH this seems like the kind of situation that the Secret Service has had some internal discussion about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
The only thing I imagine the Secret Service will do to stop him will be to prevent Trump from leaving the country now that he's the subject of 80+ felony counts. Outside that they're just going to do their normal duty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:The only thing I imagine the Secret Service will do to stop him will be to prevent Trump from leaving the country now that he's the subject of 80+ felony counts. Outside that they're just going to do their normal duty. I would imagine that if anything serious were up they'd call in the US Marshals to do any dirty work. They likely wouldn't do it themselves, but also aren't going to be passive bystanders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
Nieuw Amsterdam posted:What’s your source for “obviously Secret Service agents let protectees do all the criming they want” I've also seen people apply that logic to weird-rear end things like "If Trump took a swing at Obama would their Secret Service details duke it out too?" Maybe it's video game thinking where the minions just go aggro along with the boss.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
Its not like he can drive himself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
Nieuw Amsterdam posted:What’s your source for “obviously Secret Service agents let protectees do all the criming they want” The bush girls drank underage, Obama's daughter drank wine and smoked weed It's not "all the criming they want" but I don't think they'd intervene if Barron tried to buy a dime because it's not worth the hassle Otherwise I agree with your points, but it's not like we haven't seen SS detail let their protectees break the law in small ways, that's not just Hollywood writing room material.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:25
|
|
|
I don't think the Secret Service will physically drag Trump to court, but I also don't see them helping him run either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:... the Secret Service already assisted in committing crimes for Trump (according to the Department of Homeland Security inspector general). It was a whole thing for a while. It's part of why Biden doesn't trust them. This was all a very different beast when he was the president than it is now. If he had a bench warrant when he still had the big chair, I doubt they would. But he isn't anymore. He's just some dude who happened to have one of the most important jobs in the world because Americans just love racism that much. But it won't matter. He's going to show up to court and this is all speculation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
I'm in LA where Scientologists had bought out the police so far that there was even a police station with a Scientology kiosk inside until people started bitching about it. I find it difficult to believe that the secret service isnt half Trump cultists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:39
|
|
|
Well, if they are it will be a good opportunity to charge them with aiding and abetting suspect in the commission of a crime. Have fun not getting your pension.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 22:59
|
|
|
trump's not going to run, it would mean giving up so much that he loves and requires planning and forethought. but, most of all, trump is never going to prison. it would 100% be against decorum to have a former president in prison. no one in government wants that. he might spend the rest of his life in courtrooms but he'll never go to prison so he has no reason to run
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 23:00
|
|
|
Tenkaris posted:The bush girls drank underage, Obama's daughter drank wine and smoked weed I feel like watching the movie “First Kid” now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:trump's not going to run, it would mean giving up so much that he loves and requires planning and forethought. I’d agree that that seems most likely, as of now. But I don’t know what he’ll do during the trial or after the verdict, and he could do all sorts of hosed up poo poo that could change his sentencing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
Trump doesn't want the trial to happen until 2026 https://twitter.com/AndrewFeinberg/status/1692308451270013237
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:but, most of all, trump is never going to prison. it would 100% be against decorum to have a former president in prison. no one in government wants that.  with Trump unable to attend, and while none of the ~☆decorum☆~ crew will stomach disinviting him, seems odd they'd also actively work to thwart the courts from doing it for them  In more Proud Boy filing news, Marcy Wheeler (national security/classified documents reporter who has been both involved in and tracking Trumpworld's legal jeopardy since before he took office) dove in to a couple of Nordean's codefendants sentencing thoughts. It's no "Penalty of the Bazaar" but is a lovely juxtaposition: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1692297519659688176 https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1692298875736879303 And we can all join Norm in agreeing how awful it is that these veterans who tried to overthrow the United States Government would lose their military pensions for doing so: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1692302390785953896 Finally, I don't even have the words to mock this but cannot wait to see a version in Trump's sentencing memo: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1692304068897632338
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 23:58
|
|
|
Piell posted:Trump doesn't want the trial to happen until 2026 This is pretty normal, right? Doesn’t the defense council (assuming their client isn’t being detained) pretty much always ask for a crazy late date to give the prosecution more time to mess up and then they end up somewhere between what the defense and prosecution asked for?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
I don't know about normal but it was of course widely expected that they would to ask to wait until after the election for... some reason that currently escapes me, hm. Pretty rich that they want 2 1/2 years solely because that's how long it's been since Jan 6.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:14
|
|
|
edit: oh right the above is the DC case not georgia. anyways i googled how long georgia RICO cases have taken: prior to the current Young Thug/YSL Rico trial (somehow more than six months into jury selection due to insane circumstances and drama), the longest trial in georgia history was the RICO case against atlanta public schools teachers for systematic cheating: 35 officials got indicted on 3/29/2013 and are ultimately convicted (mostly) on 4/1/2015 Young Thug and a few dozen others were indicted in May 2022 and jury selection began on 1/4/2023 these are big, complicated cases but, to be clear, they have requested a trial date farther from now than the entire start-to-finish process of prior massive RICO cases, even ones that famously dragged on a long time eke out fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Aug 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:I don't know about normal but it was of course widely expected that they would to ask to wait until after the election for... some reason that currently escapes me, hm. The judge'll deny their request and the filing will then serve its purpose: allowing Trump and cable news talking heads to yell that it's proof that it's all about hurting his election odds, not justice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:25
|
|
|
eke out posted:i went and googled this to see how unreasonable it is I think this is the Federal trial, not Georgia. The note in the CourtListener docket just dropped but the PDF isn't on their site yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:I think this is the Federal trial, not Georgia. The note in the CourtListener docket just dropped but the PDF isn't on their site yet. oh lol you're right i'd just assumed it was in response to Willis' "we'd like a trial seven months from now" filing we just saw recently anyways, when he responds asking for a trial in georgia in like 2028 i will refer back to my above post eke out fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Aug 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Even granting that it'll be upon conviction that decorum will finally rise up and bend judges and prosecutors to its will (and ignoring the times that we've been told decorum'll ensure there's no special counsel and no grand jury and no indictment and no charges about behavior in office and no charges about behavior after office) - wouldn't decorum run in the opposite direction here? All the times former presidents gather (fundraisers, funerals, library openings) would be much more Lolling that these guy's lawyer is Norm Pattis, the same guy who got his license suspended in Connecticut while being Alex Jones' lawyer and was on the case that lost Jones a billion dollars. Good choice guys! Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Aug 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:Lolling that these guy's lawyer is Norm Pattis, the same guy who got his license suspended in Connecticut while being Alex Jones' lawyer and was on the case that lost Jones a billion dollars. Good choice guys! This is their Perry Mason moment! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 01:27
|
|