- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump gag order applies to campaign NOT a limited gag order a contempt trap for Team Trump
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:06 am to cajunangelle
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:06 am to cajunangelle
Election interference possibly but proving Trump enlisted others to speak on is provable unless he does it on tape. The first amendment would like a word or two with this characters
0
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:06 am to auggie
quote:
She would need proof and evidence, would she not?
Of course not. There was no evidence Trump ever had any sexual interaction with E Jean Carrol. How did that civil trial turn out at this level?
Obviously, Trump will eventually beat all of these spurious cases. It just may take years of appeals.
If he doesn't beat all of them, then law and order is dead in our country. The people cheering these things on will soon discover they didn't actually want what they're supporting.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:06 am to cajunangelle
quote:
Trump gag order applies to campaign
Only if the person was directed by Trump.
This is standard language for gag orders, restraining orders, protective orders, etc. Just FYI.
Discussing the propriety of the "gag order" is one thing, but trying to tie standard language into some conspiracy is the silly part.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:07 am to auggie
quote:
She would need proof and evidence, would she not?
Yes. I have actually had a trial on this very issue.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:08 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
If he doesn't beat all of them, then law and order is dead in our country.
Our criminal justice system has been authoritarian for 40+ years.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:08 am to stout
This.
A clear election speech case which should be fast tracked to SCOTUS because there is irreparable harm to the candidate, party, and country by blocking their speech.
A clear election speech case which should be fast tracked to SCOTUS because there is irreparable harm to the candidate, party, and country by blocking their speech.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:09 am to cajunangelle
Doesn’t it only apply to 1-4?
So don’t talk about the court, counsel or witnesses. Still fricked up but doesn’t seem as bad as OP.
So don’t talk about the court, counsel or witnesses. Still fricked up but doesn’t seem as bad as OP.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:10 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Our criminal justice system has been authoritarian for 40+ years.
I’m trying to figure out from this statement when you think it was something different and what you think that difference was.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:10 am to cajunangelle
This is a pretty standard gag.
And you know they could just...
not make statements that target attorneys, court staff or witnesses.
Pretty sure that is possible and what virtually everyone on earth does when they are being prosecuted.
He could campaign on, and I know this is crazy, actual issues.
And you know they could just...
not make statements that target attorneys, court staff or witnesses.
Pretty sure that is possible and what virtually everyone on earth does when they are being prosecuted.
He could campaign on, and I know this is crazy, actual issues.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:12 am to Fun Bunch
Lol you should gag on a cock , commie bot
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:12 am to stout
quote:
Election interference
And likley unconstitutional
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:17 am to momentoftruth87
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:18 am to riccoar
quote:
And likley unconstitutional
How so?
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:26 am to auggie
quote:
She would need proof and evidence, would she not?
You've seen his posts right? It doesn't exactly take a brain surgeon to figure it out.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:29 am to Fun Bunch
You claim to be a strong conservative so you should be able to figure it out. You’re not though so it’s no wonder why you can’t see how it is unconstitutional.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:31 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Pretty sure that is possible and what virtually everyone on earth does when they are being prosecuted.
But this isn't anything resembling a typical court case and you know it.
The State will continue to leak and huddle with the Media in an effort to get OMB.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:33 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
I’m trying to figure out from this statement when you think it was something different and what you think that difference was.
Our rights started eroding in the 70s and especially the 80s with respect to protection from LEO-Prosecutorial intervention. Incorrectly applying our constitutional concepts to cars was the start and the WOD was the killshot. That started in the 80s.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:34 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
You claim to be a strong conservative so you should be able to figure it out.
Secret knowledge/research: [ENGAGED] PAUSED
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:34 am to tango029
Wrong. That would be a leap of judgement and assumption without direct evidence that he instructed his campaign people to make any statements and weren't guided by their own thoughts.
Unless the judge is a mind reader or calls the psychic hotline.
Unless the judge is a mind reader or calls the psychic hotline.
Posted on 10/18/23 at 9:35 am to oogabooga68
quote:
But this isn't anything resembling a typical court case and you know it.
That is a different issue.
There is no reason Trump needs to campaign on criticizing court staff. That's not a campaign issue. Neither is the judge.
And Trump can still criticize "the DOJ" or "Biden's DOJ" so specifically limiting commentary on Smith isn't a campaign issue, either.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News