Trump's Georgia TRIAL will be TELEVISED, Judge Says

Problem is, even if Trump is charged with contempt of court, that only bolsters his image in the eyes of those who've given themselves over to his fake narratives. They will love it if he gets in trouble and he knows it. In fact, if he just sits there and behaves, it would likely hurt his image. People think he's a fighter who stands up to power, that's part of the character he plays. He will do everything possible to turn the trial into the mockery that he and his supporters already think it is. The adults in the room can't take the bait.

 

I don't foresee that happening-- first, because I don't expect any judge would put up with that; second, because Trump understands the real consequences of this trial, and that it's not a joke.

It sounds like you have bought at least some of the Trump hype, yourself. I can't see Trump doing anything that might hurt himself, personally, just to try to impress his already enamored followers. Acting out of order, in a court of law, is not going to help his chances of finding some juror, harboring a doubt, that Trump was actively disregarding the law, in his campaign to hang onto power. Also, it's not going to win him points with the judge, who will be deciding in his sentence, if he is convicted.

Lastly, in a courtroom, the judge is king-- cross that sovereign, at your own risk, and with little hope of success. Most judges do not stand for disruptive behavior, in their courts-- particularly, if the trial is being watched by untold millions. I highly doubt that, instead of being able to sleep in hotel at night, Trump will want to spend his hours after court, in a jail cell, or be escorted into court in the morning, in an orange jumpsuit (and perhaps even handcuffs). My prediction is that Trump will be stoic, and behave.

 

Which is as phony as the rest of his gold plated life. If someone snuck up behind him and went BOO he’d fart and piss his pants.

TRAITOR tRump is the epitome of a bully. All you have to do is get them one on one and make a face and they run home to their mommy.

 

While that is clearly the intent, it may well wind up stripping the cloak of righteousness off the scheme behind this, and leave them naked- expose the degree of corruption they are willing to sink to because of their fear of what Trump stands for. That's the real issue- the concepts of freedom that terrifies them. Trump is just the spokesman for it. Regardless of the show they put on, it's not going away. Every time they try another play, he gets stronger- and they never learn. Give them the rope, they are hanging themselves. These are stupid people.

 

I don’t think that he will misbehave.

He is a bully and a coward, and bullies are meek in the face of real authority. The judge has real authority over him. He doesn’t have the courage to misbehave.

 

Most recently, the Murdaugh murder trial a couple of months ago.

 

Trump is currently being charged for a myriad of crimes he committed that he knew were wrong and you can't see him doing something that might hurt himself? Are you thinking the guy acts logically instead of purely on emotion and ego?

He probably wouldn't like sleeping in jail but you seem to be underestimating just how important the attention and love is to the man. He does not think things through and act logically. He runs purely on emotion.

 

I think you underestimate him and where he is emotionally. It won't just be his freedom riding on these trials. If his devoted followers see him wimp out, it will lessen him in their eyes. They think he's some kind of hero and he's a man who desperately needs that hero worship. I'm not saying you're dead wrong, but I think folks are not fully understanding just how devoted Trump is to the narratives he's created and the character he plays. Regaining the White House is the only thing on his mind. His ego requires it to heal the wound. If he thinks playing the martyr in the courtroom will help him do that more than being meek and behaved will, there's a pretty damn good chance he will choose the former over the latter.

 

Of what "corruption," in trying Trump for his alleged crimes, are you speaking? I think that is DA Fani Willis's intent: holding accountable someone who broke Georgia law, trying to corruptly change the result of its citizens' votes. The Republican governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, has said that he has seen no evidence that Willis has acted unlawfully, in his rejecting calls for a special legislative session, to impeach her.

As for the televising of the trial, that is the practice, in Georgia. Also, as should be obvious, Trump's trial would be of important, national interest, and would be vital to be seen as a valid prosecution, so that transparency, in the eyes of all, should be seen as a must.

LOL-- Donald Trump is the spokesman for "freedom?" Do you mean, freedom from law? That is known as anarchy, fyi. Or, as that freedom pertains to the person at the top, I suppose it could also represent dictatorship.

"Standing for" a Tyrant's Freedom-- it makes a catchy campaign slogan.

 

You underestimate his deviousness. He hasn't stayed out of jail this long, by not understanding how to game the system, while insulating himself from major liability.

 

Thou speakth too much. The reason I don't separate it block by block is that it's not necessary(plus, it'd make it longer then it is already.). I simply accept in good faith that you're able to follow along. You can assume my motives whatever you will(because you won't accept my words at face value anyway, so even if I defend from these absurd claims it doesn't matter.). But for the record of everyone else:

I have said from the very beginning that I'm one of the few, who don't cling to the existence of Donald. J. Trump. That's the problem as a collective in this country. Instead, I laugh at the collective who do so. Well, it was funny when it was just politics. But now we've gone from politics, to a matter of national security(and I might be the only one who recognizes and understands it to be a matter of national security)

Why is it a matter of national security? Multiple fronts. I hold that if the government makes a big stink out of it being some sort of 'rebellion' or 'insurrection', the people will begin to question: Why was there a rebellion or insurrection? And sure, the government can try to give an 'official' reason for it, but the people are never going to accept the government's reason for why a rebellion happened against it(the same reason you don't accept my statements now.).

Rebellions/insurrections, by their nature question the legitimacy of the government. By calling it an insurrection, the government would be saying that the government is worthy of being questioned in such a manner.

For proof of that, look at every other hellhole country and yes, those countries are hell holes. Then there's the second matter of national security: Reactions to Trump's fate.

Him being a pariah aside, the response to future lawbreakers will be crucial, as will the surrounding danger to the citizens. If the order and stability is undermined, that will mark the second in as many times. And no matter how much the administration will finger Trump as responsible, the responsibility lies with the government. There's only so much the government can point the finger at others and not have citizens(who don't care one way or the other) go 'WTF'.

It's in the government's best interests to have this all die down, as quickly as possible.

 

That's the point, my friend.... what happens between gavel in and gavel out every day is 100% out of his control... His only decision will be which butt cheek he will rely on to sit and watch for hours on end...

 

If it weren't for corruption and the denial of it- the left would be totally lost.

 

Well if this is truly a witch hunt and the evidence is faked, you will get to see Trump's lawyers prove this on television. It would pave the way for his victory.

I'm just happy that all Americans will be able to see the evidence and make up their own minds rather than Trump and his lawyers grabbing the first microphone they find outside the courtroom each day and telling the American people 'their side'.

 

Well, it wouldn't be a show trial without the show, would it?

 

And how many hardcore haters do you think their are out there. The internet has brought us the phenomenon of "A/H with a loud keyboard" effect. Most people apolitical and are mainly aware of how the cost of living and government fumbling are affecting them, not the spit ball fight here on PF and other sites.

I keep waiting for seriousness befitting a world dominant nation to step in and fix it all, but we just can't help being a beacon for what happens when your own countries idiots go score settling.

 

Which behavior is more normal for you?

1-Hate a criminal.
2-Loving a criminal.

 

Then it really will be a cult. There's nothing good that's going to come from this kind of event.


Yes it will. Expose the disease to exterminate them.
If they frighten you then you let them take the democracy away.

 

IF this were truly a legitimate trial with legitimate cause and prosecution, things would be different. But it is clearly a dog & pony show designed to damage opposition's candidacy and prevent the loss of control of the existing administration. That alone taints it to a point far beyond any legitimate claim- which by comparison has virtually no impact on the state of the nation. But the trial is an exercise in the legal process being used for illegal motives, and allowing that for any reason is destructive to the freedom of the entire nation. What's at stake when we tolerate these things is pretty much the future of all America.

 

It'll be regarded historic when it's on. But maybe in 10 years from now it's like meh. Since it all could have been so obvious he's guilty that it's like "what case? oh the case about the total idiot. Yeah okay whatever" You never know.

 

Hilarious! Not you're writing of that line-- but all that comes after that accusation, that my writing is excessive: because everything in the next quoted block, is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. You are talking about it being unjustified, or unwise, to call the January sixth riot, an "insurrection." But this thread-- if you haven't caught on to this, yet-- is about Trump's Georgia trial. The U.S. Capitol, is not in Georgia. Hence, there will be no charges, over anything done in DC. This is a State trial. Therefore, the jurisdiction ends, at the state line. Actually, I expect that all of Willis's charges, will be tied to Fulton County.

I would like to add, here, that none of what I just contributed to the length of my post, should have been necessary. Anyone would expect you to understand those things. And yet, here comes your long passage, that is all meaningless to this debate-- which is not about the actions of the J6 rioters:

And what does that have to do with the televising of Trump's Georgia trial, which will have to do with illegal acts in Georgia, like trying to get the Georgia Secretary of State to illicitly change their vote count, or like Georgia fake electors? Are you seeing the theme, yet, to the charges? So then, what part of your post, is applicable to this debate?

I will make a correction. I had said that the above section of your post was irrelevant. It turns out, that your entire post, misses the mark. Your second "national security" argument, seems to also revolve around the idea of calling what happened in DC, a "rebellion," or some such term. Granted, it is not always clear, what you are saying, since (as I have previously noted) you don't always explain your meaning, very well.

For example, to what is the bolded part, in your second sentence, below, supposed to refer? "If the order and stability is undermined, that will mark the second in as many times?" That is gibberish, not English. To what do you refer, even, by saying "if the order and stability are undermined?" Do you mean, by this trial? Because of "reactions to Trump's fate?" So what, then, would be the first, of these "times," to which you refer? Do you mean the first time, that Trump's followers rioted, because he lost the election? If so, and your argument would then be that we should not prosecute Trump, because his fans might present a danger, if we upset them, then that same rationale would warrant that we should have allowed Trump to remain in office, even though he'd lost the election, but for "national security" reasons.

All what, die down? Trump's prosecution? I thought we had already covered this, when I said that, just because we did not televise his trial, would not make people forget about his being tried. I mean, are you kidding us?

Trump's being tried, could never be kept out of the public eye. If the trial were not being televised, do you doubt that it would still be the top story on essentially every news network? So then, logically, the only difference that this would make, would be that viewers would all find out about the court proceedings, through the nation's very diverse news filters, which could not help but increase the division among our citizenry, instead of witnessing the actual proceedings, themselves.

That is what you are arguing. And your reasons, besides having mostly nothing to do with this specific trial, are poorly explained, and seem like nonsense. Trying to keep the public from seeing what is the basis of the charges against Trump, or seeing the witness testimony, is not going to make "this all die down, as quickly as possible." In fact, the opposite is true: your prescription would only provide more fuel for conspiracy belief that the trial charges had been bogus. Secrecy is suspicious. The best way to clear away any feelings of injustice, here, is to air out the government case, for all to see what a criminal, we'd had in our highest office.



P.S.-- please take note of the fact that everywhere I quote your words, they are, verbatim, what you had written. I would appreciate your striving to emulate this standard practice.

 

He's as guilty as sin and the cases are air tight......no reason why he won't push the envelope to the fullest IMO and it will also buy valuable time. Justice delayed is justice denied BUT I do hope you gents are correct. He's got buttcuss to lose as well. It's the spectacle that feeds his base and media, "The Big Show"...

 

Who is this going to stop from voting for Donald Trump? His supporters already know he's corrupt and it hasn't made the slightest difference. If anything, it'll give him a bump.

This argument sounds good on it's surface, like most poorly thought out things do, but examined even slightly makes one realize that being corrupt has not stopped people from voting for Trump, twice, and there's no reason to think it'll make any difference in the future. It's not like there's a whole host of untapped voters who've never heard of Donald Trump. Are you imagining there are voters out there that are going to go "I didn't mind when his corruption was just a foregone conclusion but now that's actually been charged, I just can't vote for him".

If this was an attempt by the Democrats to poison the well, they have clearly learned absolutely nothing about the people willing to support Donald Trump. Which I suppose, since it's the Democrats, could be entirely possible.

 

It's funny to me, you calling people stupid, after you just got done describing the character Trump plays on TV and social media and not the person he is in real life in words that make me think you genuinely believe it.

 

Are you referring to all the House inquiries into Hunter Biden, or those retreading the path of Durham's long, but ultimately futile, "investigating of the investigators?" Or, perhaps, could you be thinking about the House motions, to impeach President Biden? Your words are just too bizarrely, Republican projection: do you not realize, when you talk about "score settling," that the GOP's leading Presidential hopeful (with polls indicating that he is running away with the nomination) has *declared to his supporters, in defining his purpose, "I am your retribution?"



As for the idea of showing the "seriousness befitting a world dominant nation," or, I would call us, a world leader-- just take a look at what the GOP is cooking up for us, should we have a Republican administration, in 2025. To be specific, it is the plans of the Heritage Foundation, but not only is it in line with the radical majority of the Party's members, but Heritage notes, in its 2025 Presidential Transition Project, that "the Trump administration relied heavily on Heritage’s 'Mandate' for policy guidance, embracing nearly two-thirds of Heritage’s proposals within just one year in office." Part of the new project, is their 2024 Energy plan, "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise," which fully embraces Climate Change denialism. So you ain't the only one, waiting for a major party, to start acting seriously-- but I've stopped holding my breath.


<Snip>
Conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation recently released a 920-page blueprint to drastically eliminate, or outright reverse, many of the climate change policies and laws put in place by the Biden administration, if a Republican wins the White House in 2024.

Titled Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, the document is a sprawling, aggressive work that sets the tone all across the government to deconstruct and remake the federal government, starting with the White House and spreading to all executive departments. While radical policy shifts like these have been common in history, what makes this one different is that, coming out so far ahead of the 2024 election, its goal is for a new Republican administration to hit the ground running from day one.

And when it comes to climate and energy, the proposals are alarming. In essence, the document – spearheaded by Paul Dans and Spencer Chretien, both veterans of the Trump administration – wraps the reversal of many of the current climate agenda goals of the Biden administration (and further back, to the remnants of policy from the Obama administration) in a cloak of energy security, resiliency, and fear.
<End Snip>

https://www.ecowatch.com/heritage-foundation-climate-change-policy-biden-epa.html