The Trump Card...

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
As long as he doesn’t physically threatened them, how is it that he can’t criticize people involved in the process? Again, OJ Simpson’s Attorney Johnny Cochran and his stable of lawyers criticized everyone involved at the police department, prosecution, and judge Lance Ito. It was their First Amendment right to do so.
Gag orders are designed to protect the defendants rights, not to shield the authorities from criticism.
But Chutkan is not listening to you, is she? She seems to know a thing or two about the law. In her considered opinion the points you make are meaningless and the gag order is reinstated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Busy Week in Court Coming Up

In the NY fraud trial, the witness stand will host three Trumps this week; Eric, John, Jr., and Ivanka. Donald Trump will take that seat next Monday. After Donald testifies, the prosecution will rest.

Additionally, the Colorado ballot eligibility trial begins this Monday.

Trump has fought mightily to stop or delay these trials, but here we are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
But Chutkan is not listening to you, is she? She seems to know a thing or two about the law. In her considered opinion the points you make are meaningless and the gag order is reinstated.
What’s going to happen to the Left’s psyche when Trump’s appeals get to the SCOTUS and all their hopes and efforts to thwart Trump come crumbling down by merely a couple court decisions?
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
What’s going to happen to the Left’s psyche when Trump’s appeals get to the SCOTUS and all their hopes and efforts to thwart Trump come crumbling down by merely a couple court decisions?
We will never know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
There is nothing unconstitutional about a gag order properly imposed by a court. They are common. If they were unconstitutional, they would have been ruled out by the US Supreme Court long ago. Yes, SCOTUS sometimes reverses itself, and that could happen here, but it is highly unlikely. And for now, gag orders are indeed constitutional. Opinions expressed on Twitter will not change that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ragman

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
There is nothing unconstitutional about a gag order properly imposed by a court. They are common. If they were unconstitutional, they would have been ruled out by the US Supreme Court long ago. Yes, SCOTUS sometimes reverses itself, and that could happen here, but it is highly unlikely. And for now, gag orders are indeed constitutional. Opinions expressed on Twitter will not change that.
More EO lawyering
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I see the judge didn’t recuse herself like she should have. She gave a donation. A clear appearance of conflict of interest.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Colorado Trial Timing

Regarding the Colorado trial which is taking up the question of Trump's ballot eligibility under the 14th Amendment, we learned this today:

"The trial is expected to last for one week and the judge has said she wants to issue her decision by Thanksgiving, so there is time for appeals before the ballot-printing process begins in January for the GOP primary in Colorado on March 5, 2024." (Source)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
The standard for recusal of a judge:
The judge knows the law and so do Trump's attorneys, and so do the justices on the appellate courts. If she committed reversible error, you can be sure Trump's attorneys will appeal. In fact, it is probable they will appeal even if she did not error.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The judge knows the law and so do Trump's attorneys, and so do the justices on the appellate courts. If she committed reversible error, you can be sure Trump's attorneys will appeal. In fact, it is probable they will appeal even if she did not error.
Does the judge know the law? That’s just an opinion.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ragman and RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Does the judge know the law? That’s just an opinion.
Yes. It's fair to assume a sitting judge knows the law. But judges are human and our system of governance knows that. That's why there is an appeals process.

Regarding "just an opinion," opinions are common. Some carry more weight than others. The weight is determined by the degree to which the opinion corresponds to reality. That naturally brings up the question what reality, or whose reality?

You can determine that by observing the results. Trump has an opinion that the legal proceedings are a witch hunt and not legitimate. The judges before whom he appears disagree. They think their court proceedings and rulings are legitimate.

Which is true? Which opinion better corresponds to reality? Look at the results. Trump faithfully appears when summoned to appear. He faithfully complies with the court orders regarding him. And in the few cases he does not, he faithfully pays the fines or responds to the sanctions that follow.

Trump's compliance with the orders of the courts tell you which opinion matters and which does not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Busy Week in Court Coming Up

In the NY fraud trial, the witness stand will host three Trumps this week; Eric, John, Jr., and Ivanka. Donald Trump will take that seat next Monday. After Donald testifies, the prosecution will rest.

Additionally, the Colorado ballot eligibility trial begins this Monday.

Trump has fought mightily to stop or delay these trials, but here we are.
The schedule has changed. I do not know why. Now, Eric and Donald Jr. will testify this week. Donald will testify next Monday. Ivanka will testify after Donald.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Yes. It's fair to assume a sitting judge knows the law. But judges are human and our system of governance knows that. That's why there is an appeals process.

Regarding "just an opinion," opinions are common. Some carry more weight than others. The weight is determined by the degree to which the opinion corresponds to reality. That naturally brings up the question what reality, or whose reality?

You can determine that by observing the results. Trump has an opinion that the legal proceedings are a witch hunt and not legitimate. The judges before whom he appears disagree. They think their court proceedings and rulings are legitimate.

Which is true? Which opinion better corresponds to reality? Look at the results. Trump faithfully appears when summoned to appear. He faithfully complies with the court orders regarding him. And in the few cases he does not, he faithfully pays the fines or responds to the sanctions that follow.

Trump's compliance with the orders of the courts tell you which opinion matters and which does not.
The SCOTUS opinions will carry the final weight. And they will be coming at some point before the election.
 
Top