this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
225 points (97.1% liked)

politics

18894 readers
3334 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I don't think the rules change magicaly because it's Trump

[–] Balthazar@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Maybe not, but the application of the rules certainly seems to change.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Fact is the rules of the criminal courts process didn't change, nor the application of those rules.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Like contempt and gag order violations?

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

He was fined repeatedly for those at the maximum amount possible

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

He received a warning after ten violations, which would land a normal schmuck like you or me in jail several times over.

Never mind that a fine for a wealthy person is not justice.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

One of the purposes of being thrown in jail for contempt is so there is a method to punish the wealthy when monetary fines aren't a deterrent. Fining Trump $10k for ten different violations is a prime example of this -- Fining him $10k is like fining you and me a nickel. It's not a deterrent in any form. Especially in a case like this where any one of those violations could have cost someone their lives, he should have been thrown in jail.

And there's not a chance in hell that anyone else would still be walking free after violating a court order ten fucking times.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

IMO the judge was fair and did not give too much deference to the defendant.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How many times do you think you could violate a gag order before you get thrown in jail?

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Your interpretation may not be the same as the judge. It's always judgement call on their part, and it turned out to be a min9r issue after ruling.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call stochastic terrorism "minor."

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Let's review what happened. The gag order was placed on Trump. Per procedure, the prosecution informed the judge that Trump had broken it. The judge held a special hearing on this and asked the prosecutor for curative measures suggested. The judge agreed to this cure and fined Trump. The Trump tonned it down for a time allowing the end of the trail. That's how a gag order is supposed to work.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How many times do you think you could violate a gag order before you get thrown in jail?

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I just explained how the process works. You can sit in armchair judgement, but the real judge is the one who met his duty.

[–] BassaForte@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

You don't have a question, you only have a fantasy of being mighter than you are.