Publicly held Trump trials - ongoing

[Hispo]

In the lastest news, I have learnt Trump and his organization have been found guilty of fraud by willingly lying on the value of their real state assets, so they could both ask for loans and also pay less taxes...

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

As usual, I do not expect any of this to negatively affect Trump's poll numbers, but undoubtedly has stroked him bad, looking at his reaction on Truth social.

[TwitchySeal]

In the lastest news, I have learnt Trump and his organization have been found guilty of fraud by willingly lying on the value of their real state assets, so they could both ask for loans and also pay less taxes...

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

As usual, I do not expect any of this to negatively affect Trump's poll numbers, but undoubtedly has stroked him bad, looking at his reaction on Truth social.

This case is a civil case, which is different from a criminal case. (he has 4 criminal cases going on, and one other civil case involving once again defaming the woman that he sexually assaulted the day after being held liable for sexually assaulting and defaming her for $5 million.)

Civil case = only financially related penalties - fines, sanctions, license suspension/revoked, and the bar is lower when it comes requirements to convict.  Instead of "beyond a reasonable doubt" it's closer to "much more likely than not."

Criminal case = you're assumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and obviously prison time is on the table if convicted.


Also, there will still be a trial.  I think it might start next week.  The jury just doesn't have to consider whether or not Trump is a fraud since that's already been proven.  They just have to decide what the punishment will be.  

[suchmoon]

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

[paxmao]

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

In this case it must have been terribly clear how, when and to what point was the fraud out there in ink, to be read and permanently recorded. It was declared a summary trial. The judge decided that it was not even necessary to call witnesses of validation with expert opinion, what was being proposed by the accusation was simply correct.

It also affects that image of Trump as "self-made", which he was never since his father pretty much created the family wealth in the construction industry, but is also now clear that he stole (by not paying) public money in vast amounts and committed fraud to massive extents.

I wonder if this could have been put as criminal case, with evidence classed as so overwhelming by the judge.

[TwitchySeal]

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

It wasn't a bench trial, I don't think,  and it wasn't something Trump agreed to allow to happen.  Since it's a non federal civil case there is no right to a jury trial.  If it were a criminal case, or a federal civil case, he would have a right.  But instead the fraud will just be an established fact that the jury will consider when deciding on what the damages are at the trial.    There was overwhelming evidence, and the only defense attempts were nonsensical, so there was really nothing to deliberate when it comes to whether or not Trump is a fraud.

The same thing happened in Rudys slander case but for another reason.  He didn't turn over the documents and other evidence he was legally required to, so the judge found him liable and the trial will proceed to determine damages.  But that belongs in the Kraken thread.

[paxmao]

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

It wasn't a bench trial, I don't think,  and it wasn't something Trump agreed to allow to happen.  Since it's a non federal civil case there is no right to a jury trial.  If it were a criminal case, or a federal civil case, he would have a right.  But instead the fraud will just be an established fact that the jury will consider when deciding on what the damages are at the trial.    There was overwhelming evidence, and the only defense attempts were nonsensical, so there was really nothing to deliberate when it comes to whether or not Trump is a fraud.

The same thing happened in Rudys slander case but for another reason.  He didn't turn over the documents and other evidence he was legally required to, so the judge found him liable and the trial will proceed to determine damages.  But that belongs in the Kraken thread.

It seems that Trump himself wanted to get a jury - or that is the official version, because getting jury would mean a much wider spread of news and there is always a chance of getting a massive punitive damage.

250 million is a significant amount. Trump real assets are unknow - which funnily enough is linked to his fraud - but a quarter of a billion is not a slap in the hand, is more like cutting a finger. I wonder if he is going to be able to carry business using a loophole, because he has lost his licence to.


https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-no-jury-bench-trial-ny-fraud-case-paperwork-2023-10?r=US&IR=T#:~:text=Trump%20isn't%20getting%20a,failed%20to%20ask%20for%20one&text=Former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20was,correctly%20fill%20out%20court%20paperwork.

Trump isn't getting a jury in his $250 million civil fraud trial because his lawyers failed to ask for one. Former President Donald Trump was entitled to receive a jury trial in his New York civil fraud case. And while he himself wanted a trial by jury, his attorneys didn't correctly fill out court paperwork.

[TwitchySeal]

The evidence seemed to be overwhelming enough for the judge to take the choice and not even required a full trial for it (I did not know that was possible in America, I thought you always needed to be judged in front of a jury if you did not take a plea deal).

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

It wasn't a bench trial, I don't think,  and it wasn't something Trump agreed to allow to happen.  Since it's a non federal civil case there is no right to a jury trial.  If it were a criminal case, or a federal civil case, he would have a right.  But instead the fraud will just be an established fact that the jury will consider when deciding on what the damages are at the trial.    There was overwhelming evidence, and the only defense attempts were nonsensical, so there was really nothing to deliberate when it comes to whether or not Trump is a fraud.

The same thing happened in Rudys slander case but for another reason.  He didn't turn over the documents and other evidence he was legally required to, so the judge found him liable and the trial will proceed to determine damages.  But that belongs in the Kraken thread.

It seems that Trump himself wanted to get a jury - or that is the official version, because getting jury would mean a much wider spread of news and there is always a chance of getting a massive punitive damage.

250 million is a significant amount. Trump real assets are unknow - which funnily enough is linked to his fraud - but a quarter of a billion is not a slap in the hand, is more like cutting a finger. I wonder if he is going to be able to carry business using a loophole, because he has lost his licence to.


https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-no-jury-bench-trial-ny-fraud-case-paperwork-2023-10?r=US&IR=T#:~:text=Trump%20isn't%20getting%20a,failed%20to%20ask%20for%20one&text=Former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20was,correctly%20fill%20out%20court%20paperwork.

Trump isn't getting a jury in his $250 million civil fraud trial because his lawyers failed to ask for one. Former President Donald Trump was entitled to receive a jury trial in his New York civil fraud case. And while he himself wanted a trial by jury, his attorneys didn't correctly fill out court paperwork.

Yeah I was wrong in the post above yours.  I thought there already was a jury, but I guess the law the DA used to sue him says a judge should rule from the bench, but I guess maybe there will be a jury?  When Trump walked out after attacking the judge and prosecutor for 5 minutes he said he agreed with what the judge said at the end and implied there will be a jury...?

Also I think the risk to lose all his ability to do any buisness in NY might be bigger than the potentially 250m fine.  Trump Tower, Trump Wall street, his Columbus circle building, the ice skating rink in central park, he really is all over the city...they would all be liquidated I assume.  And remember he was born in Queens and lived in NYC till a couple years ago, his father started the business and his sons are taking it over (although to be fair, Celebrity Apprentice is why he isn't broke today, not the Trump Org).

It's weird thinking back when Trump was just another NYC character.




Edit:

Update:  It turns out the reason there was no jury is most competent lawyers won't work for Trump and he fired all the ones that will.  In other words, his lawyers forgot to request a jury in the paperwork.

“Mind-blowing”: Legal experts warn that lawyer’s incredible “screw-up” is “very ominous” for Trump
https://news.yahoo.com/mind-blowing-legal-experts-warn-171808012.html



Also I now realize that this trial is off topic since this thread is about the trial in Georgia (not to be confused with other trial in NY, or the one in Miami, or the one in DC, or the one where he keeps defaming the woman he's already been found liable for sexual assaulting and defaming).

[paxmao]

Yep, the "official version" is that the lawyers were incompetent, but that may or may not be true. Maybe Trump did not want a case with a jury simply because he did not want to either (a) not take the stand and thus appear weak or (b) take the stand and probably make thing much much worse.

Latest update: Trump needs to find 250 million. It may not be easy. But also, there is chance many of his business are liquidated as the gains may be considered "illegitimate". This could be a much more devastating blow than initially thought.

Oh, yes I am off-topic on my own thread I guess, but it is about "public trials" so I am going to argue that this is public information about a trial and may influence other trials due to the economic blow, so close enough. In any case is interesting, which is the main thing.

Speaking of defaming, he is now doing the same with the prosecutors, the judge,... I guessing that next is their pets.

On the Georgia cases, let's see what happens with the two indicted that managed to get separated by asking for a speedy trial.

[Hispo]

Yesterday I saw some videos about Trump, some of his declarations goin out and in his trial on the alleged fraud he and his family committed with the valuation of their properties.

I must say it is quite interesting how even in such situation Trump can continue to verbally attack the judge and the trial as a whole, calling it a witch hunt and a way to interfere in an election.

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think I insulting the judge in camera is a good idea. Granted, he may be doing it to further increase the numbers in the polls, he has learned how to do so with his late legal problems

[paxmao]

Yesterday I saw some videos about Trump, some of his declarations goin out and in his trial on the alleged fraud he and his family committed with the valuation of their properties.

I must say it is quite interesting how even in such situation Trump can continue to verbally attack the judge and the trial as a whole, calling it a witch hunt and a way to interfere in an election.

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think I insulting the judge in camera is a good idea. Granted, he may be doing it to further increase the numbers in the polls, he has learned how to do so with his late legal problems

You know the says - The fact that I am paranoid does not mean that they are not following me or the fact that I am a hypochondriac does not mean I am not sick... well, I could even say yes, this is a which hunt, but that does not mean that he has not been "witching" a lot with his accounts. Trump always plays the victim. He does never, ever take responsibility for his actions and it works, his followers just play along and the rest of the Republican Party simply wants to win no matter what's needed.

I however have a reservation -  it might be common practice in the industry to inflate valuations, not that it makes this right.

[Hispo]

Yesterday I saw some videos about Trump, some of his declarations goin out and in his trial on the alleged fraud he and his family committed with the valuation of their properties.

I must say it is quite interesting how even in such situation Trump can continue to verbally attack the judge and the trial as a whole, calling it a witch hunt and a way to interfere in an election.

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think I insulting the judge in camera is a good idea. Granted, he may be doing it to further increase the numbers in the polls, he has learned how to do so with his late legal problems

You know the says - The fact that I am paranoid does not mean that they are not following me or the fact that I am a hypochondriac does not mean I am not sick... well, I could even say yes, this is a which hunt, but that does not mean that he has not been "witching" a lot with his accounts. Trump always plays the victim. He does never, ever take responsibility for his actions and it works, his followers just play along and the rest of the Republican Party simply wants to win no matter what's needed.

I however have a reservation -  it might be common practice in the industry to inflate valuations, not that it makes this right.

In the sense that Trump is an atypical politician who is threatening the Washington establishment using his populism, then certainly we could say he is being procesuted for those in power (both in the democrat and Republican party) who do not want to have him messing around the status quo. They thought back in 2016 that they could control him, but they were wrong, and now are afraid of him.

On the other hand, Trump was an idiot for commiting crimes while being an atypical politician and make it easier for his foes to try to end his career and put him in prison. He is a defendant, but also a VIP in the politics of USA.

[paxmao]

While not about the trials, it seems that Forbes does no longer consider Trump as one of the 400 richest persons in the US, mostly due about the massive devaluation of the "Truth" platform that he owns at 90%.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/article/the-definitive-networth-of-donaldtrump/

He’s nowhere near as rich as he boasts, nor as poor as some critics claim. Donald Trump’s real net worth? $2.6 billion, according to our most recent tally, conducted in September 2023. Below, Forbes offers an asset-by-asset breakdown of the former (and possibly future) president’s fortune.

I wonder if he ever gives a honest figure, but the point is that the penalty of 250 million is not a small thing for Trump, and the removal of the license to do business in NY is probably worth as much as that, I will be following and reporting on the consequences of it.

[TwitchySeal]

While not about the trials, it seems that Forbes does no longer consider Trump as one of the 400 richest persons in the US, mostly due about the massive devaluation of the "Truth" platform that he owns at 90%.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/article/the-definitive-networth-of-donaldtrump/

He’s nowhere near as rich as he boasts, nor as poor as some critics claim. Donald Trump’s real net worth? $2.6 billion, according to our most recent tally, conducted in September 2023. Below, Forbes offers an asset-by-asset breakdown of the former (and possibly future) president’s fortune.

I wonder if he ever gives a honest figure, but the point is that the penalty of 250 million is not a small thing for Trump, and the removal of the license to do business in NY is probably worth as much as that, I will be following and reporting on the consequences of it.

The 250m would be a big deal today.  But before this case is through appeals, in about 15 months from now, Trump will either be on his way to prison or the entire federal  government including the military will be run by the most loyal magatards reporting directly to him.  I don't think it's too dramatic to say the judges and prosecutors in each of his cases will likely flee the country and live in exile.

[BADecker]

You jokers are missing it. You are trying to bring in socialism and maybe communism. And maybe you don't even know it.

Consider. Grandma has an old picture, in reasonable shape, of her wedding to Grandpa, who has passed on some time ago. She is getting kinda old, and is making mistakes in her memory at times. Her kids are in the process of cleaning up her belongings... getting rid of any non-essentials.

The kids come to the picture, and they want to sell it at an auction along with a lot of Grandma's property. They put a value of $5 on the picture. But Grandma wouldn't sell that picture for $10 million.

Who cares what other people think about the value of your property. It's your property, and you can put a value on it that suits you.

Granted, Trump doesn't understand the basics of law in the US. If he did, he would have hired his attorneys as advisors, rather than to speak on his behalf in court. But the point is, he has a right to value his property at any amount he desires... because it is his property. If the whole world says the value is different than Trump says, they don't have the right to change the value of it regarding what Trump says, because it is Trump's property. He has placed the value to be what it is worth to him.

Suppose Trump decided to sell some property that he had given a high value in the eyes of the world. Nobody would buy it from him at that value. He would have to drop the value of it before they would even consider buying it. But that isn't what he was doing. So, he has the right to value it any way he likes.

Since the court is taking away Trump's right to freely say things like this, he's losing things. But it's about him not realizing what the basic rights are in America.

Consider yourselves and your property. You probably wouldn't part with some of your property at just about any price. The precedent that is being set is that government and appraisers can value your property no matter what it is, and for any reason. This kind of precedent is bringing us into socialism and communism. You don't own your property as much as you did before if somebody else can force you to value it like they think.

You jokers are losing it... the American Dream, that is.

[TwitchySeal]

Granted, Trump doesn't understand the basics of law in the US.

Ignorance is no defense for breaking the law.  If it were, his chances would be much better in his 4 criminal trials where he's been charged with 91 state and federal felonies including Racketeering, Defrauding the United States and Violating the Espionage act.

I have a feeling Jack Smith has many surprises like this one that we will get to learn about during Trumps criminal trial(s).

Trump Said to Have Revealed Nuclear Submarine Secrets to Australian Businessman

Shortly after he left office, former President Donald J. Trump shared apparently classified information about American nuclear submarines with an Australian businessman during an evening of conversation at Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The businessman, Anthony Pratt, a billionaire member of Mar-a-Lago who runs one of the world’s largest cardboard companies, went on to share the sensitive details about the submarines with several others, the people said. Mr. Trump’s disclosures, they said, potentially endangered the U.S. nuclear fleet.

Federal prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, learned about Mr. Trump’s disclosures of the secrets to Mr. Pratt, which were first revealed by ABC News, and interviewed him as part of their investigation into the former president’s handling of classified documents, the people said.

According to another person familiar with the matter, Mr. Pratt is now among more than 80 people whom prosecutors have identified as possible witnesses who could testify against Mr. Trump at the classified documents trial, which is scheduled to start in May in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla.

During his talk with Mr. Pratt, Mr. Trump revealed at least two pieces of critical information about the U.S. submarines’ tactical capacities, according to the people familiar with the matter. Those included how many nuclear warheads the vessels carried and how close they could get to their Russian counterparts without being detected.






Mr. Trump has been known to share classified information verbally on other occasions. During an Oval Office meeting in 2017 shortly after he fired the F.B.I. director James B. Comey, Mr. Trump revealed sensitive classified intelligence to two Russian officials, according to people briefed on the matter.

Well into his presidency, he also posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, a classified photo of an Iranian launch site.

The indictment in the documents case also accused Mr. Trump of showing a classified battle plan to attack Iran to a group of visitors to his club in Bedminster, N.J. Prosecutors claim that a recording of the meeting with the visitors depicts Mr. Trump as describing the document he brandished as “secret.”

Mr. Trump has not had access to more updated U.S. intelligence since leaving the presidency; President Biden cut off the briefings that former presidents traditionally get when Mr. Trump left office in the wake of Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election and the attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob on Jan. 6, 2021.

“I just think that there is no need for him to have the intelligence briefings,” Mr. Biden said at the time.

“What value is giving him an intelligence briefing?” he said. “What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?”

Mr. Trump’s interactions with Mr. Pratt appear to fit a pattern of the former president’s collapsing his public office and its secrets into his private interests.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/05/us/politics/trump-nuclear-submarine-classified-documents.html

[paxmao]

You jokers are missing it. You are trying to bring in socialism and maybe communism. And maybe you don't even know it.

Consider. Grandma has an old picture, in reasonable shape, of her wedding to Grandpa, who has passed on some time ago. She is getting kinda old, and is making mistakes in her memory at times. Her kids are in the process of cleaning up her belongings... getting rid of any non-essentials.

The kids come to the picture, and they want to sell it at an auction along with a lot of Grandma's property. They put a value of $5 on the picture. But Grandma wouldn't sell that picture for $10 million.

Who cares what other people think about the value of your property. It's your property, and you can put a value on it that suits you.

Granted, Trump doesn't understand the basics of law in the US. If he did, he would have hired his attorneys as advisors, rather than to speak on his behalf in court. But the point is, he has a right to value his property at any amount he desires... because it is his property. If the whole world says the value is different than Trump says, they don't have the right to change the value of it regarding what Trump says, because it is Trump's property. He has placed the value to be what it is worth to him.

Suppose Trump decided to sell some property that he had given a high value in the eyes of the world. Nobody would buy it from him at that value. He would have to drop the value of it before they would even consider buying it. But that isn't what he was doing. So, he has the right to value it any way he likes.

Since the court is taking away Trump's right to freely say things like this, he's losing things. But it's about him not realizing what the basic rights are in America.

Consider yourselves and your property. You probably wouldn't part with some of your property at just about any price. The precedent that is being set is that government and appraisers can value your property no matter what it is, and for any reason. This kind of precedent is bringing us into socialism and communism. You don't own your property as much as you did before if somebody else can force you to value it like they think.

You jokers are losing it... the American Dream, that is.

What kind of wonderland do you live in?? Is your troll farm in China??

You can put whatever value on your property at the golf club or in your political meetings but not when you are going to ask for credits based in your assets!! The accurate quantification / representation of the value of your assets and liabilities is called accounting and actually it is one of the pillars of Capitalism.

Valuations are done at market prices when available - before you say something that further proves your ignorance, Real State valuation is done everyday and the price of land (another pillar of Capitalism) is well known and determined for the best part of Trump assets because they are placed in liquid markets. They can vary +/- 5% at most, but not by 200%. Misrepresenting that IS fraud.

The simplest example: market price of you granny's house: 1 million. The bank will happily give you around 750k backed by the value of that house because they will sell it if you do not pay. Saying that your grannie's house is 2 million and borrowing 1.4 against is fraud - read it carefully: you are committing fraud if you do that by misrepresenting information to the bank. Even if you lie in your marital status, your date of birth or in the number of credits you already have. Even the smallest of these "little mistakes" are defined as fraud.

What Trump did is the equivalent of putting Chelsea (NY) prices to a flat in Modesto, California and get business credit based on that value. I personally would also indict the banker for fraud to their shareholders for accepting it.


Edited to add: TRUMP dEPOSITION: https://youtu.be/L_xMe80gQQI

Is a bit long but, basically Trump pleads the 5th and does not answer. As he never answers for anything he does.

[paxmao]

Latest news... A Trump co-defendant pleads guilty of the charges, gets a modest fine and sentence, but... listen carefully, this person will now testify, as required, to the rest:

https://youtu.be/KworJIScBr4

Also, Trump cannot simply keep his mouth shut, even when it is evident that it would be the wise course of action... so... he got a gag order:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/17/trump-gag-order-00121976

Trump’s fountain of bile — calling people “disgusting,” “moron,” “dummies,” “disgraceful,” “horseface,” “lowlife,” ‘dogs,” “low I.Q.,” or branding them with degrading nicknames — flowed then and flows now like an impure stream. In recent weeks, he’s topped even himself by calling obliquely for the execution of Gen. Mark A. Milley, urging shoplifters to be “shot,” accusing NBC News of “treason,” which is punishable with prison or death, and repeatedly calling the special counsel putting him on trial a “thug.”

How to deal with such an unstoppable force? Two judges have now wrapped gags around Trump’s big mouth in two of the many court cases he faces. In the New York state civil fraud case, Justice Arthur Engoron has barred Trump from making comments about his staff after Trump attacked one of the judge’s clerks in a Truth Social post. Engoron ordered the post taken down (Trump complied) and he has promised sanctions for future offenses. “Consider this statement a gag order,” Engoron said.

Meanwhile, this week in federal court, Judge Tanya Chutkan barred Trump from attacking, intimidating or threatening prospective witnesses (like Milley), court officers and prosecutors. Trump remains free to attack his campaign opponent Joe Biden and the Department of Justice itself, and he has already vowed to appeal the gag order. Should he offend again, sanctions in the form of fines or jail time may ensue.

Something is very wrong when a judge has to give you the order of not threatening witnesses 

[BADecker]

Latest news... A Trump co-defendant pleads guilty of the charges, gets a modest fine and sentence, but... listen carefully, this person will now testify, as required, to the rest:

https://youtu.be/KworJIScBr4

Also, Trump cannot simply keep his mouth shut, even when it is evident that it would be the wise course of action... so... he got a gag order:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/17/trump-gag-order-00121976

Trump’s fountain of bile — calling people “disgusting,” “moron,” “dummies,” “disgraceful,” “horseface,” “lowlife,” ‘dogs,” “low I.Q.,” or branding them with degrading nicknames — flowed then and flows now like an impure stream. In recent weeks, he’s topped even himself by calling obliquely for the execution of Gen. Mark A. Milley, urging shoplifters to be “shot,” accusing NBC News of “treason,” which is punishable with prison or death, and repeatedly calling the special counsel putting him on trial a “thug.”

How to deal with such an unstoppable force? Two judges have now wrapped gags around Trump’s big mouth in two of the many court cases he faces. In the New York state civil fraud case, Justice Arthur Engoron has barred Trump from making comments about his staff after Trump attacked one of the judge’s clerks in a Truth Social post. Engoron ordered the post taken down (Trump complied) and he has promised sanctions for future offenses. “Consider this statement a gag order,” Engoron said.

Meanwhile, this week in federal court, Judge Tanya Chutkan barred Trump from attacking, intimidating or threatening prospective witnesses (like Milley), court officers and prosecutors. Trump remains free to attack his campaign opponent Joe Biden and the Department of Justice itself, and he has already vowed to appeal the gag order. Should he offend again, sanctions in the form of fines or jail time may ensue.

Something is very wrong when a judge has to give you the order of not threatening witnesses 

Everything in general regarding accusing someone of something, must include a warning that the suit is coming if the activity doesn't stop. If Trump is going to legally attack someone and bring him into court, he has to tell him about it first. The same with the judges. That's why there are indictments without simple arrests when no violence has been done.

The judges' gag orders are nothing more than warnings. If they were actual prohibitions, they would have simply had Trump placed in chains, and stuck in solitary in a jail cell somewhere. The warnings hold a financial punishment, and possibly a jail sentence if the financial punishment doesn't work.

This is the same with Trump. His supposed threats are not threats. They are warnings. His problem is that he has not used the words 'fair warning' when he issued the warnings. Now that the judges have stopped Trump from giving fair warnings, they have taken it on themselves to allow Trump to sue without giving fair warnings ahead of time.

Based on Trump's history, I would guess that he won't sue very much. He doesn't seem to know the basics of the right way to sue, anyway. But that's like most Americans. Rather than sue the correct way, they hand themselves over to the will of the BAR Association, thereby taking themselves out of the exercising of the suit they wanted to exercise. Instead, they give their suit over the the members of the BAR (judges, attorneys) to play with. And if those BAR people are crooks, the suit goes where the BAR people want it to.

[Hispo]

Latest news... A Trump co-defendant pleads guilty of the charges, gets a modest fine and sentence, but... listen carefully, this person will now testify, as required, to the rest:

https://youtu.be/KworJIScBr4

Also, Trump cannot simply keep his mouth shut, even when it is evident that it would be the wise course of action... so... he got a gag order:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/17/trump-gag-order-00121976

Trump’s fountain of bile — calling people “disgusting,” “moron,” “dummies,” “disgraceful,” “horseface,” “lowlife,” ‘dogs,” “low I.Q.,” or branding them with degrading nicknames — flowed then and flows now like an impure stream. In recent weeks, he’s topped even himself by calling obliquely for the execution of Gen. Mark A. Milley, urging shoplifters to be “shot,” accusing NBC News of “treason,” which is punishable with prison or death, and repeatedly calling the special counsel putting him on trial a “thug.”

How to deal with such an unstoppable force? Two judges have now wrapped gags around Trump’s big mouth in two of the many court cases he faces. In the New York state civil fraud case, Justice Arthur Engoron has barred Trump from making comments about his staff after Trump attacked one of the judge’s clerks in a Truth Social post. Engoron ordered the post taken down (Trump complied) and he has promised sanctions for future offenses. “Consider this statement a gag order,” Engoron said.

Meanwhile, this week in federal court, Judge Tanya Chutkan barred Trump from attacking, intimidating or threatening prospective witnesses (like Milley), court officers and prosecutors. Trump remains free to attack his campaign opponent Joe Biden and the Department of Justice itself, and he has already vowed to appeal the gag order. Should he offend again, sanctions in the form of fines or jail time may ensue.

Something is very wrong when a judge has to give you the order of not threatening witnesses  

Trump does not understand that defendants are supposed to remain quiet and with a low profile, if they want their lawyers to have more chances of getting you out of trouble.

Still, he is one of the leading presidential candidates in this race and he has learnt he needs to be as polemic as possible and belittle others as often as he has the chance, in order to further rally his base and continue to increase his advantage over others, Biden included.

On the other side, he may be getting nervous of some codefendants pleading guilty and further cooperating with investigators to get the other people accused several long time sentences. At this point, he is running for the charge so he won't get himself thrown into a cell.
The United States of America will certainly be at her lower point in politics, if Trump gets back into the White House next year.

[paxmao]

Latest news... A Trump co-defendant pleads guilty of the charges, gets a modest fine and sentence, but... listen carefully, this person will now testify, as required, to the rest:

https://youtu.be/KworJIScBr4

Also, Trump cannot simply keep his mouth shut, even when it is evident that it would be the wise course of action... so... he got a gag order:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/17/trump-gag-order-00121976

Trump’s fountain of bile — calling people “disgusting,” “moron,” “dummies,” “disgraceful,” “horseface,” “lowlife,” ‘dogs,” “low I.Q.,” or branding them with degrading nicknames — flowed then and flows now like an impure stream. In recent weeks, he’s topped even himself by calling obliquely for the execution of Gen. Mark A. Milley, urging shoplifters to be “shot,” accusing NBC News of “treason,” which is punishable with prison or death, and repeatedly calling the special counsel putting him on trial a “thug.”

How to deal with such an unstoppable force? Two judges have now wrapped gags around Trump’s big mouth in two of the many court cases he faces. In the New York state civil fraud case, Justice Arthur Engoron has barred Trump from making comments about his staff after Trump attacked one of the judge’s clerks in a Truth Social post. Engoron ordered the post taken down (Trump complied) and he has promised sanctions for future offenses. “Consider this statement a gag order,” Engoron said.

Meanwhile, this week in federal court, Judge Tanya Chutkan barred Trump from attacking, intimidating or threatening prospective witnesses (like Milley), court officers and prosecutors. Trump remains free to attack his campaign opponent Joe Biden and the Department of Justice itself, and he has already vowed to appeal the gag order. Should he offend again, sanctions in the form of fines or jail time may ensue.

Something is very wrong when a judge has to give you the order of not threatening witnesses  

Trump does not understand that defendants are supposed to remain quiet and with a low profile, if they want their lawyers to have more chances of getting you out of trouble.

Still, he is one of the leading presidential candidates in this race and he has learnt he needs to be as polemic as possible and belittle others as often as he has the chance, in order to further rally his base and continue to increase his advantage over others, Biden included.

On the other side, he may be getting nervous of some codefendants pleading guilty and further cooperating with investigators to get the other people accused several long time sentences. At this point, he is running for the charge so he won't get himself thrown into a cell.
The United States of America will certainly be at her lower point in politics, if Trump gets back into the White House next year.

Yep. It is not about his politics -  they are not that different from most right-right Republicans and his views are not that special. It is about how he does politics and how he acts like a consented brat name calling the opponents, threatening, etc... You know, who the f*ck threatens the clerk of the courtroom?? or some random person that happened to be counting votes one day??

That is not a proper conduct for a president and is not politics, is not ideas, it is simply misbehaviour.