@GottaLaff The difficulty is that if penalties don't kick in until after the trial, he can continue to use jury intimidation and witness intimidation to assure a hung jury. I think consequences need to kick in sooner. First fine him. It it persists, and is really blatant, he can spend one of his Wednesday breaks in jail.
@GottaLaff Yes, but he said the other consequences beyond fines could wait until after the trial and I don't think it can wait, at least not if Trump keeps attacking witnesses and the jury.
@GottaLaff And any or all should be seen as punishment. Would a short stay such as 12/24 hours in courthouse lockup be feasible & lead to the desired change?
@GottaLaff Not sure either. Financial monitor seems partially effective. A physical monitor would have to be capable of controlling device use & communication to campaign without being accused of 1A violations or election interference.
@William3rd Did you watch the video I added? It’s a physical monitor… possibly one of his attorneys, so that they would be held responsible too, if he messes up.
@GottaLaff Yes, physical monitoring! Attorney might object that having to be with Trump impedes trial prep. Or attorney claims he/she being subjected to cruel & unusual punishment (joke).
Sorry took so long to reply. Loading dishwasher with mess from making strawberry cream scones today.
@GottaLaff I think the problem is that threats don't work on him. He's saying what works in the moment. I doubt threatening "we will decide the punishment when your trial is over" will discourage him from trying to bully everybody into a not guilty verdict.
A monitor would be effective, and a solution that could be used until the end of the trial.
@GottaLaff Disagree it’s meaningless. Jailing is what would’ve already happened to you or me because it is effective. Proposing jail as an option when everyone knows the timid judges will never exercise is WHY it’s ‘meaningless’.
@GottaLaff The video is irrelevant. The point is that $$ for fines in place of jail (which is what we, on a budget, would already get) allows Trump to keep attacking witnesses and siccing his scumbags on jurors, judges, etc. None of the rest of us have endless thousands to keep getting away with this shit. You and I both know he will never go to jail for these attacks.
@kristen_d The video is irrelevant? Then you didn’t watch it. Weissmann goes into more detail, and it goes beyond fines. Btw, per NY law as I’ve heard, fines are required before any other punishment, and it’s the prosecutors who have to file a motion for punishments. The judge won’t do that, as Weissmann pointed out.
And it doesn’t have to be “jail,” it can be a (very unpleasant for Trump) space in court building.
Of course he won’t. We both know that. That’s not the point of my Weissmann post
@GottaLaff I absolutely watched it. The rules enable the entire justice system to be cowards in the face of a murderous bully and his flying monkey Nazis - and that is being discussed by bloggers you and I are both boosting here. And FTR, I am not disputing the point of any of your posts, but as a reader here, I am weighing in on them from my vantage point. No one is required to agree with me or like what I post but it doesn't mean I am wrong or didn't read or watch what you posted.
@kristen_d I didn’t accuse you of being “wrong,” I wondered if you watched it. From your comments, it seemed as if you hadn’t.
I honestly don’t know if it’s cowardice (I’m referring to the stronger judges) or caution. If they’re overturned or there’s a mistrial as a result (remember, it ends up in appeal… SCOTUS), then there would be no trial, and hence, no option to jail him ever.
@kristen_d What I keep saying to you is, you keep screaming LOCK HIM UP, which as we both agree, is pointless. He won’t get locked up, at least not any time soon.
He can, however, be punished in ways that would be (potentially) effective.
@GottaLaff I know you are probably correct in that, but I will keep promoting what the sane response is. Because that is the only sane response to this.
@MarkRDavid@GottaLaff I came here to say that. His social media posts are quite closely monitored already. It's not like he can post stuff on Truth without anyone noticing. If there were a court-appointed monitor, then one more person would notice, but that doesn't address the question "so, then what?"
Got it. I didn't understand that a monitor stood BETWEEN his attempted posting, and whether it got out to to the public. 👍
However, the prosecution, I think has also caught violations in his public speeches in NYC, which a monitor wouldn't. And he's got rallies next Wed, where he will (presumably) violate again...
@MarkRDavid Weissman was saying his monitor could be his own lawyer, who would then be held accountable too... which means all kinds of limitations in the courtroom: A real disadvantage. @jonberger
Add comment