this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
346 points (97.5% liked)

News

36867 readers
3781 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Former President Trump criticized the judge presiding over his 2020 election case, just days after she warned him against making any “inflammatory statements” that could intimidate witnesses or prejudice the jury pool.

In a statement posted overnight on Truth Social, Trump called U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan “highly partisan” and “very biased & unfair.”

“She obviously wants me behind bars,” he added.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nougat@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yet to be seen. Chutkan has demonstrated that she's going to be the "find out" of "fuck around" in other aspects, but she also knows she is presiding over a uniquely historic case with potentially terminal consequences. Her Friday statement about inflammatory public comments demanding a swift trial fell short of what I would have liked, but I find her decision on the matter to be brilliantly fair, and unassailable.

Also note that the Government has not (so far as we know) made any motions in response to the defendant's weekend commentary. Based on the immediate motion for a protective order after the defendant's "I'm coming after you!" post, I might expect there to be a motion from the Government, and there's not (again, so far as we know). To me, this suggests that they know Judge Chutkan is already working on this, and does not need the Government or public pressure to be any greater than it already is. And if they know, defense knows, too.

I am hopeful, but the consequences (if any) for the defendant's weekend rants are going to be the point upon which the future of democracy turns. She has to know this, and I have to think that the reason we haven't heard anything from her yet is because she is considering very carefully what the response from the court will be.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, so the standard bullshit reasons.

[–] DrPop@lemmy.one 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It may feel like bullshit because we all know what he did, but they are being careful to not give him any legal grounds to appeal or move the trial. What's funny is everyone knows there is a two tiered justice system, it's just who is on which tier is different from person to person. Also trying to minimize collateral damage is important.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago

So it feels like bullshit because it is.