Judge warns Trump: ‘Inflammatory’ statements about election case could speed trial

This is brilliant. Instead of threatening Trump with jail if he violates the court orders regarding tainting jury and the integrity of the case with inflamatory or threatening remarks, posts, etc., she is going to speed up the trial. That is the last thing Trump wants.

I like this judge. Unlike Cannon down in FLA, she's not going to put up with Trump's crap. And this business about 'free speech' is bs, all defendants in criminal cases must abide by court rules, and the first amendment does not protect speech that violates court rules during criminal proceedings.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/11/judge-warns-trump-speed-trial-00110870

‘The more a party makes inflammatory statements about this case … the greater the urgency will be that we proceed to trial quickly.’

Your client’s defense is supposed to happen in this courtroom, not on the internet,” U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan told Trump lawyer John Lauro.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan warned Donald Trump and his attorney Friday that repeated “inflammatory” statements about his latest criminal prosecution would force her to speed his trial on charges related to his bid to subvert the 2020 election.

“I caution you and your client to take special care in your public statements about this case,” Chutkan told Trump lawyer John Lauro during a hearing. “I will take whatever measures are necessary to safeguard the integrity of these proceedings.”​

​

 

Will you make a hero out of her:

 

If this is true, this is misconduct and the judge should be removed from the case.

Threatening prejudicial decisions in the conduct of the trial if the defendant exercises their free speech rights.

This sounds like just an excuse. It's difficult to make the argument that any of those internet posts are targeted specifically to people who will serve on the jury.

It's another example of how a judge can interpret the law and come up with excuses to try to limit free speech rights, claiming it could interfere with the trial, even when the connection between the two is obviously very weak.

 

TRaitor tRump and his legal team have met their match.

 

Trump should have the right to communicate any "crap" outside of the court room.

It's not appropriate for the judge to be doing this.

 

This comment of yours just seems to demonstrate how much contempt many of the Left have for the concept of free speech.

"Court rules" should only apply to conduct within the courtroom, or that could interfere with the court case in a very direct sort of way. It is true there is not always a clear line exactly where that begins, but the judge trying to include those posts on Twitter is ridiculous.

Does the judge really think inflammatory statements will bias the jury pool?
Seems very absurd to me.

Patricio Da Silva, you seem to be defending the indefensible, and just bringing to light this judge's idiotic reasoning and likely bias.
(in my opinion)

 

TRaitor tRump has in the past, attempted to intimidate and bully his way through trials. This judge ain’t having it. Good for her!

 

You really think those posts on Twitter are going to really bully anyone who will be on the jury in that trial?

Even if - and this is a hypothetical - Trump's words were intended to bully the prosecutor and the judge, that still would not be justification to speed up the trial.

If Trump is sending a message that amounts to he will go after (in a legal way) the judge and prosecutor if he believes they committed misconduct, what is wrong with that?

Is there any reason to believe Trump's messages amount to something other than that?

 

that is the only punishment (a speedier trial) Trump doesn't want, smart of the judge

 

they may incite people, like the guy that just got show by the FBI

 

It totally seems there are many people who do not care about logic or the right thing.

I think Conservatives reading this need to be aware the Left holds a very different type of ethics. One that is only concerned with expected outcome in a specific situation (the means justify the ends).

 

he can await trial in jail like others that violate the judges orders

 

Tyrants in black robes.

I could say something about you people, but I suspect some forum moderator would interpret it as being against the rules and would delete my post.

 

nope

 

Funny when the rights guy just tried to steal an election he LOST, and is still the front runner as he faces criminal charges for it.

 

Trump wants to execute drug dealers, and this is tyranny? Lmao

 

As you know, many people have a different view about that from you.

 

That might be a fair point for God to make, when it comes time for divine judgement, but not you.

I notice you keep trying to divert the issue. Like throwing lots of different things out in one thread discussion, making it impossible to have a focused discussion about all those things, thinking that will help your side.

 

That’s bullshit and, tRaitor tRump didn’t say, “in a legal way”. You did.

There is a reason to believe tRaitor tRump’s messages amount “to more than that”. Have you forgotten his vow to pay the legal bills of any of his followers that roughed up people opposing his message.

 

It's implied. There's no reason to think he meant in an illegal way or that anyone has reason to interpret the messages like that.

That is different. Those people were disrupting rallies.
They weren't being roughed up for talking, they were being roughed up for first talking in a loud voice, disrupting the crowd from hearing the speaker, then not leaving when told to, and then resisting and fighting and making a disruptive noisy scene when the attendants tried to escort them out.

They could have held a sign or shouted their message out of sound range away from the rally, but no, they had to come into the rally to try to disrupt it.

 

some think the earth is flat too...

 

The Right to Free Speech is NOT absolute...
Trump needs to shut up...

 

The weasel is a tRaitor; how low must it be trying to defend him.

 

That's just another way of saying the Left does not hold the concept of Free Speech in anywhere near as high of a regard.

Always looking for any excuse to curtail it.

We all know you'd scream and wail if this was being used to shut your side up.

 

No it’s not, it’s long been recognized that speech cannot be used to cause harm. Yelling “fire in a theater, when there is no fire” is the most used example.