“The fact that the defendant is engaged in a political campaign is not going to allow him any greater or lesser latitude than any defendant in a criminal case.”
Absolutely serious baloney here.
He’s running for the most important office in the world and is facing criminal cases based on novel legal theories that were invented by a human rights court clown to get him and they’re imposing regular, business as usual restrictions?
SCOTUS needs to step in.
Nope, not how it works. Witness tampering is illegal for a reason.
So they say it’s actually about not contaminating the jury pool through making these statements.
Of course I would never endorse some scenario where Trump is literally cornering witnesses and threatening them or trying to meddle… That would be bizarre.
This is about curtailing the speech of someone during their own electoral campaign.
Trump is absolutely capable of and willing to bully and harass judges, lawyers, witnesses, and potential jurors through the press. Gag orders are a common and normal part of trials like this and are not controversial. He can say any dumbass thing he wants once the trial is over.
Yes, once the Kangaroo court does its damage in the middle of the most important election in the world, he’s free to point out how silly it is.
“Stay still while we pin you down during the race - you will be free to complain about this once the race is done. After all, there won’t be another one for years.”
Kangaroo court? He’s such a guilty motherfucker he makes OJ look innocent. Be serious.
Half of these involve novel legal theories - making the CEO of a corporation a felon for the crime of how his bonuses were paid out in the state of New York, claiming that Pres. Trump tried to remove the rights of the American people via Jan 6th…
As Alan Dershowitz pointed out, there is something to be said for the classified documents case, but it is also clear that it is a case of selective prosecution.