472
Trump shares article doxxing Letitia James address--may violate gag order
(www.thedailybeast.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
472 points (97.6% liked)
politics
19135 readers
2053 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Imprisoning a former president for contempt of court, even as blatant as this, is always going to be a topic of skittishness among the judges.
This is an institution that typically loathes setting new precedent when it can avoid it, and imprisoning a former president, one who is running again especially, is a Rubicon that is going to intimidate even the most tough on corruption judge you can have on that bench.
The sheer unprecedentedness of this case and the others involving trump are gonna go snails pace simply because of how freaked out the judges will be over making sure every i and t have been dotted and crossed.
They're setting a precedent either way.
Either hold decorum over the individual or abandon it.
How Trump acts, and what he is allowed to get away with, is carte blanche for his followers paying attention.
If you want to be wealthy, act like the wealthy, right?
The judges either have spines or they don't. In that same vein, we either have laws that apply equally, or we don't have respect for the law across the board.
This is remedial psychology.
As much as my justice boner is deflated by this statement, I'd rather have Trump convicted by a jury while having a competent attorney making smart decisions and defending him zealously. The last thing I want is his conviction to be overturned because someone took a shortcut.
Why? The law should be applied equally, prince or pauper.
I don't give a fuck about tradition and precedent - a traitor as the head of the nation is unprecedented too.
Gather evidence, make a case, throw the book at him - with stiffer sentencing solely because as a former president, he SHOULD be held to a higher standard.
Just like cops should be held to a higher standard than a civilian, but I digress.