Tommy Tuberville admits he went to NYC to help trump break his gag order.

[justoffal]

Tuberville could be held in contempt.

No....he can't be.

 

[Care4all]

What do you expect in NY?

It is of course quite unconstitutional.

Will have to keep going up until it hits some REAL JUDGES.

The only judges that are REAL judges to you, are the judges that agree with you/Trump... We know your M/O!

You ain't fooling anyone!

 

[justoffal]

The only judges that are REAL judges to you, are the judges that agree with you/Trump... We know your M/O!

You ain't fooling anyone!

If you say so ..... To date I have seen only partisan practices in the NYS legal proceedings.
Doesn't mean Trump is innocent. In fact to the law.... everyone is guilty to some degree.

 

[Nostra]

Which of course says that Trump cannot speak about certain topics and cannot solicit others to do so either.

Others can freely speak on their own, stupid. Despite all Pedo Joe's efforts, we still have a Constitution in this country.

 

[justoffal]

Others can freely speak on their own, stupid. Despite all Pedo Joe's efforts, we still have a Constitution in this country.

It's driving them fucking crazy that the Pubs are trashing the judge outside the courthouse every day. They actually want these people dead. Total control freaks! Lol.....

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Others can freely speak on their own, stupid. Despite all Pedo Joe's efforts, we still have a Constitution in this country.

Unless of course it can be shown that they did so at Trump’s behest.

 

[justoffal]

Unless of course it can be shown that they did so at Trump’s behest.

Doesn't matter one bit. First of all that can never be proved. Secondly there is no legal limit to the amount of people who can choose to do the same thing. This is what happens when you twist the law and use it the way it's not supposed to be used.

 

[Nostra]

Unless of course it can be shown that they did so at Trump’s behest.

Prove it then, Simp.

And show us in the order Trump is forbidden from asking others to speak on his behalf.

GO!

 

[westwall]

The beginning of any post in reply to westwall...

Even more so in any reply to one of your posts.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Prove it then, Simp.

And show us in the order Trump is forbidden from asking others to speak on his behalf.

GO!

Page 4 under “Orders”, dupe.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/Clarification-OrderRestrictingES.pdf

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

It's been judged to be a threat. By a judge.

Irrelevant. Threats have specific legal definitions. The judge can't just make shit up as he goes.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Irrelevant. Threats have specific legal definitions. The judge can't just make shit up as he goes.

Hilariously out of touch.

Trump’s Gag Order Upheld In Hush Money Case After Appeal Is Rejected​

Trumpâs Gag Order Upheld In Hush Money Case After Appeal Is Rejected

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $10,000 for violating his gag order in his criminal hush money case, and faces potential jail time for additional violations.

www.forbes.com

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Hilariously out of touch.

Trump’s Gag Order Upheld In Hush Money Case After Appeal Is Rejected​

Trumpâs Gag Order Upheld In Hush Money Case After Appeal Is Rejected

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $10,000 for violating his gag order in his criminal hush money case, and faces potential jail time for additional violations.

www.forbes.com

Upheld by a partisan appeals court. What's your point?

 

[dudmuck]

Prove it then, Simp.

And show us in the order Trump is forbidden from asking others to speak on his behalf.

GO!

 

[Markle]

I'm sure you'll provide evidence for your latest shit throwing.

Just kidding, of course you won't.

It has been all over the news. You're either stupid or intentionally ignorant, and I don't think you're stupid.

 

[justoffal]

Irrelevant. Threats have specific legal definitions. The judge can't just make shit up as he goes.

Eventually it will be decided by them that just his breathing is a threat.

JO

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Are you deaf?

Are you blind?
What words inspired a mob to attack the Capitol? Or Pelosi?

 

[Nostra]

Page 4 under “Orders”, dupe.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/Clarification-OrderRestrictingES.pdf

If this is real (and I hope it isn't) Merchon should be thrown off the bench for having the writing skills of a retarded first grader. 21 errors in a single section.

Also, nobody has violated anything in this, if I have been able to decipher the dumbassery correctly.

Holy shit you just jumped on a rake with both feet, Simp.

ORDERED, that the Court's Order of N{arch 26, 2024, is amended as indicated below. Defendant is directed to refiain tiom: a. b. c. Nlakrng or diiccting others to make public statements about knorvn or teasonably foreseeable witnesses concerning thet potential parucipation rn the rnvestigation or in this criminal proceedrng; Making or dirsgdng c-rthers to make public statements about (1) counsel in the case other than the District Attorney, (2) members of the court's staff and the District Attorney's staff, or (3) the fanrily members of any counsel, staff member, the Court or the District Attorney, if those statements are made with the intcnt to rnateriall), interfere with, or to cause others to materiallv interfere wtth, counsel's or staffs work in this crimrnal case, or with the knowledge that such interference is likcly to result; and l\faking or dtrecung others to make public s)tatements about any prospective juror or any juror in this crimrnal proceeding.

 

[justoffal]

If this is real (and I hope it isn't) Merchon should be thrown off the bench for having the writing skills of a retarded first grader. 21 errors in a single section.

Also, nobody has violated anything in this, if I have been able to decipher the dumbassery correctly.

Holy shit you just jumped on a rake with both feet, Simp.

ORDERED, that the Court's Order of N{arch 26, 2024, is amended as indicated below. Defendant is directed to refiain tiom: a. b. c. Nlakrng or diiccting others to make public statements about knorvn or teasonably foreseeable witnesses concerning thet potential parucipation rn the rnvestigation or in this criminal proceedrng; Making or dirsgdng c-rthers to make public statements about (1) counsel in the case other than the District Attorney, (2) members of the court's staff and the District Attorney's staff, or (3) the fanrily members of any counsel, staff member, the Court or the District Attorney, if those statements are made with the intcnt to rnateriall), interfere with, or to cause others to materiallv interfere wtth, counsel's or staffs work in this crimrnal case, or with the knowledge that such interference is likcly to result; and l\faking or dtrecung others to make public s)tatements about any prospective juror or any juror in this crimrnal proceeding.

WTF????..... WHO WROTE THAT?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Upheld by a partisan appeals court. What's your point?

Upheld by a NY state appellate court.
Your belief that it is partisan or otherwise illegitimate is irrelevant.