this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
247 points (97.7% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4259 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This isn't the best live update, but the only one I could find.

all 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Four_lights77@lemm.ee 73 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

These are probably the first times in his entire life that consequences have been progressive, swift, and clear. Every good parent knows how this works. Too bad he comes from a family of malignant narcissists. Emotionally, this man is a toddler.

Edit: comma

[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 52 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It's a shame just how utterly pointless a $10,000 fine is to him. Literally just putting a price tag on ignoring court orders, and it's one he can easily afford even with his flagrantly inflated financial reporting.

[–] 108@kbin.social 24 points 10 months ago

Fines are for the poor. They do nothing for the rich.

[–] ZhaoYadang@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Exactly. He’ll never care until he goes to jail. Fining him is a farce. Especially since he’s on trial for fraud. If he pays the fine, it won’t be with his money.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

Yep, this was nice to see that confirmed.

"When you looked him in the eye, Michael, what did you see?" ABC News reporter Aaron Katersky asked him.

"I saw a defeated man. I saw somebody that knows that it's the end of the Trump Organization," Cohen said.

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 47 points 10 months ago

"Using imprecise language as an excuse to create plausible ambiguity about whether defendant violated this Court's unequivocal gag order is not a defense; the subject of Donald Trump's public statement to the press was unmistakably clear," Engoron wrote.

Damn, that judge is a badass. Trump has been talking in codewords for decades in order to escape real consequences. Cohen testified yesterday that Trump speaks in code like a Mafia boss to imply what he wants done without explicitly saying it. Glad the judge saw the exact same thing and shut that shit down real quick.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 21 points 10 months ago (3 children)

This gag order is playing out how I thought it would. Trump doesn't stop and no meaningful action happens, but the media gets more Trump stories.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

He lost this case, this is all about the consequences. This judge already ordered the businesses shut down. I think another judge stalled that, but I'm not positive. We are seeing actual things in this trial which is why I post it.

Edit: They appealed the case and they put a temp ban on breaking up the businesses until they make a ruling, which could take a year. https://www.reuters.com/legal/new-york-appeals-court-pauses-breakup-trump-businesses-during-civil-fraud-trial-2023-10-06/

[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It was stalled because the first Judge didn't have a full list of Trump businesses.

Part of the fraud was the Trump org hiding assets all over the place, and the judge who halted the disbandment wanting to get them all.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

That's excellent news.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So you're saying trump could lose the election and his businesses next YEAR AND THEN WE STILL HAVE XMAS TO LOOK FORWARD TO?!?!

2024 GON BE LIT!

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Depending on the rico charges, he could also be in jail. He'd probably get the same conditions as Epstein did when he was sent to jail the first time (not the last one), but still.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Trump will never be put in general population, his Secret Service detail will not allow him to be anywhere they can't maintain control.

Trump is going to end his days on house arrest in a shitty military barracks with no internet connection. Same if he's actually jailed for contempt. There is already precedence for this w/ Nixon's lawyer.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I honestly don't know if you're correct or not, I don't think this has been tested before since he's a former president.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. You're right, he won't be put in the general population. Even if we don't care about actually protecting him, we, as a country, do have an interest in protecting the secrets that he knows. Even if he rarely read and barely listened, he still managed to pick up some of our most sensitive secrets and we don't want those getting out.

If he's convicted, he's going to be on some form of house arrest, not to protect him but to protect everyone else.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works -3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The case has consequences, the gag order is and was dumb.

[–] Yaztromo@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I disagree — the gag order was smart. It’s vastly easier for the judge to immediately punish someone for violating a gag order with one in place than without — as we’ve seen, the judge has been able to levy penalties with only a 10 minute hearing.

Yes, so far those penalties have been minimal — but they build and increase. It’s certainly not unusual for a judge to ramp up the penalties to give the defendant time to clean up their act — but every judges patience eventually wears thin if their orders keep getting violated. These orders are only meaningful if they’re backed up by something, and I don’t think any judge wants to be known as the one that lets defendants safely ignore their orders.

The judge is playing it smart, and is using a scalpel instead of a sledgehammer. If Trump continues to decide to try to skirt the order I suspect the penalties will start ramping up into serious territory (including incarceration) very, very quickly.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

The judge is just hoping he stops. Trump got plenty of warning before the gag order and now knows it's just fines for violations. Maybe at some point actual consequences happen, but it's been awful slow.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Violations of this gag order also lends credibility to other judges' orders regarding gag orders and their penalties. If Trump has a documented history of violating gag orders in this case, judges in other cases can levy harsher penalties with less likelihood of them being scrutinized and overturned.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I disagree, he had to do something and didn't want to be the first judge to put Trump in jail which would probably trigger his followers to do stuff. I think they're walking that thin line. I wish it was more, but it it's something and all of the judges that aren't corrupt will build on it.

[–] books@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

He'll fundraise of this. IMHO a ten thousand dollar investment to make millions is actually solid business. For once in his damn life.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

James, speaking separately to reporters outside court, downplayed Cohen's importance to the case.

"It's also important to know that Michael Cohen is not the main witness," she said.

"His evidence has been corroborated by the mountains of evidence, enough evidence to fill the courtroom," the AG said, echoing a phrase Engoron used earlier.

and

An underwriter who worked on a Trump Organization insurance policy to cover legal expenses incurred by the firm's executives is scheduled to testify this morning.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

Fucking crime insurance?