406
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
406 points (97.4% liked)
politics
18863 readers
5153 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.
- 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.
- 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
To avoid a First Amendment fight. Generally speaking, gag orders are on less sure footing than most people realize; they really do run up against prior restraint concerns. There's actually a fair amount of legal debate over them but the vast majority of defendants don't have the wherewithal, or a compelling reason, to really fight them; Trump does. So judges are likely leery of issuing too broad a gag order on him for fear of being overturned, which they never want anyway, and thereby setting a precedent that weakens all judges' ability to issue future gag orders.
Thank you for this explanation. I think it is important context to the discussion that needs to be spread far and wide so everyone better understands the legal calculus rather than getting mad because they think the judicial system is taking it easy on him.
The judicial system is taking it easy on him because he's rich* and powerful and will throw a tantrum whatever happens.
Here's a Tennessee judge who has prohibited these people from discussing their case at all or sharing the footage they obtained legally on cases that have been dismissed.
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/09/27/coffee-county-judge-denies-request-by-georgia-man-to-share-footage-of-traffic-stop/
Thousands of gag orders are issued from the bench that nobody hears about because there aren't news reporters covering every courtroom in the country. Trump is getting special treatement because our justice system is inherently unjust.
I know the judicial system is taking it easy on him.
AG Garland can go on TV 1000 more times and tell me he treats all cases equally, it's still a lie.
There is still internal politics in apolitical institutions. You are shitting on Merrick Garland for taking the measured approach, but to do anything else would simply add further fuel to the fire of the vindictive psycopathy of the christo-fascist cult. The right way to exhume Donald Trump from politics is through the slow, methodical, dispassionate legal process of boiling him alive on full public display until he finally breaks.
This was only ever going to work via imploying the "death by a thousand cuts" war-gaming that we are seeing. If you thought it was ever going to work via shock and awe or judicial blitzkrieg then you are beyond naive. If you are results oriented rather than emotionally motivated then I would think you could see that rather than yelling about some perceived lack of balls & strikes justice that does not exist in the real world.
Garland deliberately obstructed any investigation into Trump (or speaking his name out loud in front of him) over J6 until the Hutchinson testimony humiliated both the FBI and him.
As much as people would like to pretend he didn't, Garland sandbagged like hell to protect Trump. Reporting is that it was because he didn't want to seem political.
And it's really past time to encourage appeasement of MAGA rage. They will be angry regardless. There is no "right way" to behave that they will accept.