Chillicothe
Platinum Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 10,195
- 6,541
- 938
On Wednesday night ---last night ----Smith's team filed a motion with the court asking that a more robust gag order be installed against the disgraced former president, Don Trump.
His latest pronouncements ---in front of cameras, in interviews, and on social media ----have caused alarm among judges and prosecutors. In fact, just yesterday, Don Trump was again fined for violating a 'don't-target-my-staff' warning by a judge.
In other words, Smith's filing last night is sort of a 'ba-da-bing'.....a one-two punch .....signaling that the justice community is not going to tolerate a defendant who threatens, or attempts to intimidate court staffs, prosecutorial staffs, .....or most importantly, witnesses.
If you really want to know what my avatar thinks on this ------ well, we think it is a good thing to exercise more discipline in court matters.
Don Trump is being treated with kid gloves by the prosecutors and the courts. No other defendant could get away with such behavior as dissing judges, judges' staff, or prosecutors, witnesses.
Justice needs to treat all the defendants equally and not give highly preferential treatment to any one. So, the various judges involved in the 91 criminal charges against the former president need to exercise proper but stringent control on all the participants...... including Don Trump.
This was reported this morning:
"Special counsel Jack Smith argued in new court filings Wednesday that recent comments by Donald Trump show not only that a federal gag order should be reimposed, but that the court should weigh stricter sanctions, including sending him to jail, if he keeps talking about witnesses in his case.
In recent weeks, Trump’s public statements attacking prosecutors, court personnel and others have raised alarms among judges who worry that such verbal broadsides might inspire someone to commit violence against the subjects of Trump’s wrath.
Without the court’s order, prosecutors wrote, there is an “immediate risk” that witnesses’ testimony “could be influenced or deterred by the defendant’s documented pattern of targeting.”
“Otherwise, ………..the defendant will continue to threaten the integrity of these proceedings and put trial participants at risk,” the 32-page filing argues."
His latest pronouncements ---in front of cameras, in interviews, and on social media ----have caused alarm among judges and prosecutors. In fact, just yesterday, Don Trump was again fined for violating a 'don't-target-my-staff' warning by a judge.
In other words, Smith's filing last night is sort of a 'ba-da-bing'.....a one-two punch .....signaling that the justice community is not going to tolerate a defendant who threatens, or attempts to intimidate court staffs, prosecutorial staffs, .....or most importantly, witnesses.
If you really want to know what my avatar thinks on this ------ well, we think it is a good thing to exercise more discipline in court matters.
Don Trump is being treated with kid gloves by the prosecutors and the courts. No other defendant could get away with such behavior as dissing judges, judges' staff, or prosecutors, witnesses.
Justice needs to treat all the defendants equally and not give highly preferential treatment to any one. So, the various judges involved in the 91 criminal charges against the former president need to exercise proper but stringent control on all the participants...... including Don Trump.
This was reported this morning:
"Special counsel Jack Smith argued in new court filings Wednesday that recent comments by Donald Trump show not only that a federal gag order should be reimposed, but that the court should weigh stricter sanctions, including sending him to jail, if he keeps talking about witnesses in his case.
In recent weeks, Trump’s public statements attacking prosecutors, court personnel and others have raised alarms among judges who worry that such verbal broadsides might inspire someone to commit violence against the subjects of Trump’s wrath.
Without the court’s order, prosecutors wrote, there is an “immediate risk” that witnesses’ testimony “could be influenced or deterred by the defendant’s documented pattern of targeting.”
“Otherwise, ………..the defendant will continue to threaten the integrity of these proceedings and put trial participants at risk,” the 32-page filing argues."