Yesterday a judge told Trump not to break the law, or threaten anyone. He didn’t listen. Yesterday he was threatening Jack Smith’s family. Here’s what the judge said: https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-news-2662765315/
Magistrate Judge Moxila Upadhyaya warned the former president that failure to adhere to the court’s terms of his release could result in his detention or add to a potential sentence if he’s convicted. She specifically told Trump that it is a crime to "influence a juror or try to threaten or bribe a witness or retaliate against anyone" connected to the case, which Trump told the judge he understood.
So today?
“IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”
You gotta love this reply:
Former GOP strategist and Lincoln Project co-founder Rick Wilson wrote, “We’re coming after you, @realDonaldTrump. We’re going to break you, humiliate you, defeat you at the ballot box, shatter your movement. You’ll spend your sorry last years weeping in a lonely prison cell, your hideous legacy a warning to future generations, your shame eternal.”
gounion wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2023 5:55 pm
Yesterday a judge told Trump not to break the law, or threaten anyone. He didn’t listen. Yesterday he was threatening Jack Smith’s family. Here’s what the judge said: https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-news-2662765315/
So today?
You gotta love this reply:
Nothing will happen to him, just like cons here will do NOTHING when they come for you and me, and they will, if this goes bad.
WE dont have a system to deal with someone like this traitor. He needs to be locked up, can you imagine I mean can you I M A G I N E how insane board cons and faux news and millions would be. We simply are not prepared for someone this corrupt and the tens of millions of traitors that support him. I mean RIGHT HERE on this board they support him more now than before, they call the most NON partisan DOJ in history names.
Joyce Alene
@JoyceWhiteVance
The special counsel just alerted the court to Trump's threat-tweet in a motion asking the court for a protective order so it can begin providing discovery. There would be serious consequences for Trump if he violates the order. If he keeps it up, he's got to end up in jail.
This is an idea from a rando on Twitter, but it seems possible.
“ He isn’t trying for an acquittal. He is trying to delay his trials for as long as possible. He is convinced that winning the election is only his way out. He also believes the less his crimes see the light of day, the better his chances with the voters.
So…we file to revoke his conditional release. He appeals that his 1A rights are being restricted. It goes to the Appellate, then the Supreme Court. Weeks possibly months of delay. Then he’ll appeal the judge has it in for him…so on and so forth.
Yeah, we don’t like it but we’ll take the hits. We want a speedy trial. We want to see him held accountable. We want Justice. As you do.
It’s ok to walk away from the battles you want to fight in order to win the war.”
"Some of those that work forces,
Are the same that burn crosses"
Well, Jack Smith doesn’t seem to believe he should locked up for the post. He does think the post supports a request for a protective order on discovery evidence. Pretty good idea.
Violate something as precise and specific as that and he can be put in custody. And an appeals court will be very quick to let him remain in custody for such a violation.
So this is the new normal. Any mafia don or criminal can now make public threats against witnesses, prosecutors and judges, and nothing can be done - as they will point to Trump and say “there’s the precedent”. And no, handling the threats would not slow down his case. It’s separate.
It does astonish me that supposedly “rule of law” conservatives are just fine with these attacks upon our judges and prosecutors. If Jack Smith’s family is attacked, you’ll all just say “no one could have foreseen this!”
gounion wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 7:04 am
So this is the new normal. Any mafia don or criminal can now make public threats against witnesses, prosecutors and judges, and nothing can be done - as they will point to Trump and say “there’s the precedent”. And no, handling the threats would not slow down his case. It’s separate.
It does astonish me that supposedly “rule of law” conservatives are just fine with these attacks upon our judges and prosecutors. If Jack Smith’s family is attacked, you’ll all just say “no one could have foreseen this!”
You are really once again exaggerating the facts.
Jack Smith has done the right thing asking for a protective order. While Trump just keeps digging himself deeper into that hole he ( Trump) started the day after the election.
Our DOJ is dealing with Trump in a nonpartisan non-political manner. I feel 90pct sure Trump will be convicted of many legitimate crimes by the legitimate federal prosecutor in legitimate federal courts.
As opposed to running in circles screaming and shouting I choose to let our legal system deal with Trump
Glennfs wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 7:43 am
You are really once again exaggerating the facts.
Jack Smith has done the right thing asking for a protective order. While Trump just keeps digging himself deeper into that hole he ( Trump) started the day after the election.
Our DOJ is dealing with Trump in a nonpartisan non-political manner. I feel 90pct sure Trump will be convicted of many legitimate crimes by the legitimate federal prosecutor in legitimate federal courts.
As opposed to running in circles screaming and shouting I choose to let our legal system deal with Trump
So it’s now legal to make threats against judges, prosecutors and witnesses. Got it.
Rule of law refers only to their law, most of which is an attempt to restore 17th century morality. It's basically the Missionary Position slightly adapted for a reality in which ancient encyclicals from an "infallible" Pope are not the basis of law. If you press them on it, they'll take some cop-out like they believe in God's law, or something.
Too much of this and we'll start seeing severed heads appearing on freeway overpasses.
"We must remember that we cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation." --Liz Cheney, Republican, 7/21/22
Glennfs wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 7:43 am
You are really once again exaggerating the facts.
Jack Smith has done the right thing asking for a protective order. While Trump just keeps digging himself deeper into that hole he ( Trump) started the day after the election.
Our DOJ is dealing with Trump in a nonpartisan non-political manner. I feel 90pct sure Trump will be convicted of many legitimate crimes by the legitimate federal prosecutor in legitimate federal courts.
As opposed to running in circles screaming and shouting I choose to let our legal system deal with Trump
Normal rational folks recognize the post as a rather puny idle threat toward no one in particular. It is of interest that the normal and rational just ignore buffoons like trump. The post was vague and imprecise, naming no one nor a class of individuals.
Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:01 pm
Normal rational folks recognize the post as a rather puny idle threat toward no one in particular. It is of interest that the normal and rational just ignore buffoons like trump. The post was vague and imprecise, naming no one nor a class of individuals.
So THAT'S the new norm, eh? Out on bail, you can threaten judges, prosecutors, witnesses and the jury pool?
So now everyone can do this. And you'll just call it a "puny, idle threat" - I'm sure that's how you saw Trump during the runup to Jan 6th, too, right? Just some puny idle threats no one would pay attention to.
And Trump also went after Jack Smith's wife. I'm sure you'd be fine with threats to his kids, too, right?
Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:01 pm
Normal rational folks recognize the post as a rather puny idle threat toward no one in particular. It is of interest that the normal and rational just ignore buffoons like trump. The post was vague and imprecise, naming no one nor a class of individuals.
No, normal, rational folks do not. You have no clue what’s going on so you side with your hero. Trump has been non stop threatening people and spamming and slamming about the DOJ and law officials using his social media account. Right before his threat was broadcast he was slamming Smith, the judge, Bragg and Willis with unhinged lunacy.
You normalizing Trump and referring to him as a mere buffoon either means you’re stupid and clueless or you are complicit. He’s the leader of the Republican Party and the front runner and his MO is always threats.
"Some of those that work forces,
Are the same that burn crosses"
These are some examples of what Trump was blasting out RIGHT before his threat. To say it wasn’t a threat is denying reality. It’s all within the same stream.
"Some of those that work forces,
Are the same that burn crosses"
gounion wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:05 pm
So THAT'S the new norm, eh? Out on bail, you can threaten judges, prosecutors, witnesses and the jury pool?
So now everyone can do this. And you'll just call it a "puny, idle threat" - I'm sure that's how you saw Trump during the runup to Jan 6th, too, right? Just some puny idle threats no one would pay attention to.
And Trump also went after Jack Smith's wife. I'm sure you'd be fine with threats to his kids, too, right?
There’s no specific threat to judges, prosecutors, witnesses, and the jury pool in that post. Jack Smith recognizes it. But then Jack Smith is rational. Lashing out with generic idle threats only fools irrational fools.
gounion wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:36 pm
Judge Tanya Chutkan just gave Trump’s lawyers until Monday 5 PM to respond to Smith’s request for a protective order.
Look for Glenn and Green Grass to smart smearing Chutkan. And, of course, Trump will call her a racist against white people. Glenn loves that one.
You’re a moron. I’m the one who posted Jack Smiths request and stated it was a smart move. I try not to use the term stupid. But you really make it difficult.
Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:41 pm
There’s no specific threat to judges, prosecutors, witnesses, and the jury pool in that post. Jack Smith recognizes it. But then Jack Smith is rational. Lashing out with generic idle threats only fools irrational fools.
Like I said, that’s what you want the law of the land to be from now on. All threats are legal.
Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:45 pm
It is the law of the land when it’s not a legitimate threat. And it’s not a legitimate threat. Except to fools and morons
Before Trump, you couldn’t make such threats. You’d be in jail.
And his Jan 6th threats weren’t legit, either, right?
And has attacks oh Jack Smith’s family isn’t legit either right?
