A New York appeals court has reinstated a gag order that barred Donald Trump from commenting about court personnel after he disparaged a law clerk in his New York civil fraud trial.
Indeed, a normal defendant would have been treated much differently. Then again, a normal defendant doesn’t have an army of enraged violent dipshits with a tenuous relationship with reality, eager and willing to end democracy on his behalf, supporting them. That’s why he gets treated with kid gloves.
They’re treating him with kid gloves because they’re trying to avoid an appeal. They know he’s going to appeal whatever verdicts he gets. But you can only appeal a conviction on the basis of a mistrial. Basically, you need to prove that your trial wasn’t fair. And one way to do that is to show that the judge was biased against you. So they’re avoiding giving him any ammo for his inevitable appeal.
Because higher courts get more and more conservative as they go up, so his chances of getting a conviction overturned increase with each subsequent appeal. And if it makes it all the way to the SCOTUS, they’ll gladly light the constitution on fire to let him walk. So their best chance of having anything stick is to stop the appeals process before it can even begin, by refusing to give him any basis for an appeal. They’re doing everything they can to treat him with kid gloves, so the appeals court can’t go “yeah maybe the lower courts treated you unfairly.” It means that if a conviction happens, it’ll truly be ironclad.
Bingo. It’s like the Colorado judge who found Trump factually guilty of insurrection. That case was getting appealed, no matter what. But now the next court(s) in line has to take that fact into account, they don’t get to rehash or question it.
tl;dr: All these things we’re mad about are brilliant legal maneuverings.
Yeah right. Like how Mueller was taking his time because he was building an air-tight case. I’ve been hearing this kind of thing since early in his presidency. I no longer buy that the “good guys” have a plan and will put a bow on it in the end.
A “brilliant” legal maneuver would be having a legal system where a fucking literal traitor doesn’t need to be treated with kid gloves… This entire thing is a fucking farce and no amount of “genius” political posturing will ever correct it.
CREW is disputing Wallace’s final determination that Trump qualifies for Colorado’s primary ballot, while Trump’s team identified 11 issues for review from the final order, including but not limited to the finding that he engaged in an insurrection.
So they are trying to overturn that factual finding. Trump will try to drag this out forever or until he can try and pardon himself.
Very well explained! You should make a new post on a YSK site highlighting this. It’d be good to get this info out there so people can stop being upset about it.
Ah I see, well he’s clearly being treated differently than a normal defendant and I speculated on why, but after reading this comment I agree with @PM_Your_Nudes_Please that it’s probably more about denying him a case for appeal even if it means treating his behaviors with more leniency than a normal defendant. Getting it right is important because of the damage he can cause, (due to said army and the scary possibility of reelection,) if he gets off with a technicality. I’m referring to his legal woes in general and not just this trial, he’s been trying stochastic terrorism in many of them.
Indeed, a normal defendant would have been treated much differently. Then again, a normal defendant doesn’t have an army of enraged violent dipshits with a tenuous relationship with reality, eager and willing to end democracy on his behalf, supporting them. That’s why he gets treated with kid gloves.
They’re treating him with kid gloves because they’re trying to avoid an appeal. They know he’s going to appeal whatever verdicts he gets. But you can only appeal a conviction on the basis of a mistrial. Basically, you need to prove that your trial wasn’t fair. And one way to do that is to show that the judge was biased against you. So they’re avoiding giving him any ammo for his inevitable appeal.
Because higher courts get more and more conservative as they go up, so his chances of getting a conviction overturned increase with each subsequent appeal. And if it makes it all the way to the SCOTUS, they’ll gladly light the constitution on fire to let him walk. So their best chance of having anything stick is to stop the appeals process before it can even begin, by refusing to give him any basis for an appeal. They’re doing everything they can to treat him with kid gloves, so the appeals court can’t go “yeah maybe the lower courts treated you unfairly.” It means that if a conviction happens, it’ll truly be ironclad.
Bingo. It’s like the Colorado judge who found Trump factually guilty of insurrection. That case was getting appealed, no matter what. But now the next court(s) in line has to take that fact into account, they don’t get to rehash or question it.
tl;dr: All these things we’re mad about are brilliant legal maneuverings.
Yeah right. Like how Mueller was taking his time because he was building an air-tight case. I’ve been hearing this kind of thing since early in his presidency. I no longer buy that the “good guys” have a plan and will put a bow on it in the end.
A “brilliant” legal maneuver would be having a legal system where a fucking literal traitor doesn’t need to be treated with kid gloves… This entire thing is a fucking farce and no amount of “genius” political posturing will ever correct it.
That turns out not to be the case. Both sides are appealing that ruling.
So they are trying to overturn that factual finding. Trump will try to drag this out forever or until he can try and pardon himself.
Very well explained! You should make a new post on a YSK site highlighting this. It’d be good to get this info out there so people can stop being upset about it.
Sooo… you’re saying that negotiating with terrorists is the best thing to do here?
I’d say they’re more insurrectionists than terrorists, and no I do not.
Speculating why they are doing something is not endorsing it.
Not acting out of fear is essentially allowing them to negotiate the outcome of his trial.
Can you elaborate? I don’t follow.
You’re suggesting he’s getting treated with kid gloves because of his army of terrorists.
I’m saying that’s not how things work.
Ah I see, well he’s clearly being treated differently than a normal defendant and I speculated on why, but after reading this comment I agree with @PM_Your_Nudes_Please that it’s probably more about denying him a case for appeal even if it means treating his behaviors with more leniency than a normal defendant. Getting it right is important because of the damage he can cause, (due to said army and the scary possibility of reelection,) if he gets off with a technicality. I’m referring to his legal woes in general and not just this trial, he’s been trying stochastic terrorism in many of them.
Holy shit I was about to copy/paste that exact same comment in response if you question further. I totally agree!