• Jax
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 个月前

    Because if Trump can get them to act emotionally his lawyers can argue that this is a witch hunt.

    They have to go through this painstaking process. If the don’t they embolden his base and suddenly those definitely-not-calls-to-action are much more threatening.

    • rebelsimile
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 个月前

      I disagree. The reason that we have gag orders is to protect the integrity of the process. The integrity of the process doesn’t have anything to do with Donald Trump, it has to do with literally everyone else. And we learned a long time ago that it’s not possible to have a fair trial when a loud defendant can manipulate the press, attack jurors and inflame the public. It’s time for him to shut up and spend some time in jail.

      • Jax
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        8 个月前

        So what happens then? Do you think Trump supporters are just going to allow that to happen?

        I understand why you say what you’re saying, you need to think about the people you’re actually dealing with.

        • rebelsimile
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 个月前

          I don’t know what happens then. You seem to? I know what happens to societies who erect separate rules for emperors, kings, pharoahs and I guess presidents than for the rest of us serfs.

        • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 个月前

          If the few folks who would come to Trump’s aid after witnessing the failure of the insurrection and subsequent imprisonment of so many of the participants want to storm a jail belonging to one of the most violent police forces in the U.S., well… it’ll be interesting.

          The NYPD doesn’t really half-ass beating the shit out of people.

          • Jax
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 个月前

            Crazy, one one hand they’re a burgeoning nazi force and on the other they’re bumbling idiots behind their great orange god.

            Which is it? Are they a credible threat or not?

            • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 个月前

              I’m not sure if you’re being honest or argumentative, but my take is that it’s both.

              The folks to be concerned about aren’t really the die hard Trump supporters, but more the ones smart enough to see his popularity as a means to an end. These folks have other goals, and see Trump and his supporters as useful idiots.

              I believe there is a small subset of his supporters who would do dangerous things to support Trump. But I also believe these people lack organization (or organize under the previously mentioned dangerous people - so if they get an idea that their actions are for other aims, they may bail), or are incapable (physically, capability, or motivationally) of performing the acts they are willing to do.

              And I believe the vast majority of his supporters are people who, despite their rabid support of Trump, draw the line at physical actions.

              Taken together - the smart ones know they can’t take on a jail, and don’t want to risk exposure for what is on the cusp of becoming a fad.
              The violent ones might try something, but without clear leadership and like, a plan, they’ll just do some stupid protest. Maybe some loudmouth will shove a cop - that’s the ‘interesting’ scenario I’m referring to.
              And the rest will watch it play out on a Sinclair-owned TV station.

      • Jax
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 个月前

        No, what I’m saying is that when they finally throw Trump in jail the logic needs to be so ironclad that idiots can’t refute it.

        Keep in mind, these are idiots with guns that will absolutely use them on you because of what you believe/how you live. Hell, they’re just looking for a reason to use them on people period!

        I’m not advocating for Trump being given special treatment, I’m saying you have to think about the immediate backlash surrounding the “throw Trump in jail for contempt” move. It’s not going to be you that suffers, at least not immediately, it will be the people that his base perceives as responsible. Do you think it makes sense for them to rush judgements when they have actual guns pointed at them?

        Keep in mind, I am absolutely unaware of whether or not this is their reasoning. I cannot tell you what the prosecution, or anyone that finds themselves opposite Trump for that matter, is thinking. I’m only taking events as I see them and coming to, what I think is, a logical conclusion.

        Feel free to prove me wrong. I’m all ears, or eyes. Whatever, you don’t know me. I could be blind.

        • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 个月前

          No, what I’m saying is that when they finally throw Trump in jail the logic needs to be so ironclad that idiots can’t refute it.

          Have you met these people? Logic, facts, reality … they don’t mean much to them. Trump could be convicted and jailed in a case where everything is done by the book, it simply doesn’t matter to these people. They live in a bubble of their own making and only let in things that support their world view.

          Do you think it makes sense for them to rush judgements

          I don’t think anybody is calling for a rush to judgement.

          Feel free to prove me wrong.

          How can I prove an opinion wrong?