Gag Order for Trump?
“The founder of the conservative “Article III Project” attorney Mike Davis
‘If this judge imposes a gag order on Trump, that should be immediately appealable,” he insisted. “The gag orders protect the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial. And defendants have First Amendment rights. So, if the defendant wants to speak, I can’t understand why a judge would put a gag order on that.'”
As reported at Crooks and Liars, David Edwards.
Why? It could be true trump could reveal incriminating evidence. Although, trump babbling about his innocence could also taint the potential pool of jurors. He is a national figure and has a large following. As it is, it will be difficult to find a jury which does not have ill or supportive feelings about trump.
The trump team could argue a gag order could impede his presidential aspirations too.
Sure, it’s appealable. Most judicial decisions are, except SCOTUS decisions. Appeals may be won and appeals may be lost. If Trump believes a gag order violates his 1st amendment rights, let him engage in civil disobedience. This country has a rich history of civil disobedience. Often, those who tested the law ended up in jail (think Rosa Parks, MLK). Think Trump wants to campaign from jail?
I think they’re grasping at straws, but that sums it right up …
Who is “they” here?
Although, trump babbling about his innocence could also taint the potential pool of jurors….
[ The legal system is supposed to be impartial, and defendants are supposed to be presumed innocent, however these words defame the defendant and are sneeringly biased. Disgraceful language. ]
Is this a bad time to note the only one proclaiming Trump’s innocence is Trump?
Everyone else claims he’s above the law …
I hear much of what Trump has been saying as a call for violence. I hear threats against the families of the judge and the prosecutor. I am sure he and his lawyers will deny any intention to cause harm to people, but the people he targets get death threats. If you have to give him a judicial order forbidding the mention of the families of the people involved in the case, do it. Just be prepared to jail him for contempt when he violates it.
As for letting him rant about the actual case, he is more likely to incriminate himself than not. Maybe we should have Hannity ask him about these charges too.
@Jane,
Guess you didn’t get the memo. According to Fox, Dems *want* Trump to get the nomination.
“On Monday morning, Fox News contributor and Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen declared on America’s Newsroom: “The indictment will help Donald Trump win the nomination, and it’ll help Democrats win the presidency. That’s why they are happy about it.””
https://www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump/fox-tests-new-conspiracy-theory-donald-trumps-indictment-trick-democrats-get#:~:text=On%20Monday%20morning%2C%20Fox%20News,they%20are%20happy%20about%20it.%E2%80%9D
Is this a bad time to note the only one proclaiming Trump’s innocence is Trump?
[ Yes, this is precisely such a bad time. Actually, quite a number of civil rights attorneys are questioning and criticizing the indictments. However, the point is that a defendant assuredly has a right to “proclaim” innocence. ]
@Anon,
I certainly think Trump has the right to bleat his innocence. Attacking the judge, his daughter and the DA to make it appear that these people are part of a conspiracy, I’m not so comfortable with. In particular, attacking the judge’s daughter, who played no role in the indictments, strikes me as out of bounds.
Biden may run the risk of fading from the electorate’s view for 2024, like Carter’s Rose Garden Strategy of 1980.
‘Hostage’ in Rose Garden?
CS Monitor – April 1980
(Actually, Jimmy Carter was swamped by Ronald Reagan’s charisma, to a great extent.)