619

Former President Trump on Monday appeared to warn former Georgia lieutenant governor Geoff Duncan against testifying before the Fulton County grand jury in the state's 2020 election probe.

Driving the news: "I am reading reports that failed former Lt. Governor of Georgia, Jeff Duncan, will be testifying before the Fulton County Grand Jury," Trump wrote on his Truth Social account on Monday.

  • "He shouldn't. I barely know him but he was, right from the beginning of this Witch Hunt, a nasty disaster for those looking into the Election Fraud that took place in Georgia."
  • Duncan, who criticized Trump's false election fraud claims in 2020, said Saturday that he had been told to appear Tuesday before the Fulton County grand jury.
  • "Republicans should never let honesty be mistaken for weakness," he wrote in a post on X.

What's next: Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis appears poised to issue a charging decision on Trump's alleged efforts to subvert election results.

The big picture: Trump's Monday Truth Social post comes days after the judge overseeing a separate trial — the federal probe into his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election — warned against making "inflammatory statements" that could intimidate witnesses in that trial.

  • U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan said during a Friday hearing that any appearance of witness tampering would increase the need for a speedy trial.
  • Trump already faces three criminal trials: In D.C. over efforts to overturn the 2020 election, in Florida over his retention of classified documents and in New York over an alleged hush money payment.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Helldiver_M@kbin.social 132 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What is it actually going to take to put this fucker in jail? Does he need to intimidate 20 witnesses first? I hate that the justice system feels they need to walk on eggshells around this wanna-be dictator cry baby.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 36 points 1 year ago

Why 20? Why not 50, or 500? Why not let him stage a coup and attempt to overthrow the government of the United States of America? Oh right, he already did all that stuff and is still walking free.

[-] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

How do you provide a secret service detail to someone in jail?

Logistics and stupid wording of laws never intended to protect someone so blatantly corrupt, will keep him from ever seeing the inside of a cell. Would be nice if he could be under house arrest with no visitation/internet access though.

[-] evatronic@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

A while back I actually looked into this question.

Former presidents are afforded several things by law, including a salary, a stipend for an assistant, and office space rental, and, of course, Secret Service protection for their lifetime.

However, the protection provided by the USSS is described as a duty to protect the (former) President. It doesn't describe, what that looks like, how many agents are involved, or so on. It does allocate, though, up to $1,000,000 every fiscal year to provide that protection.

Hypothetically, if Trump were convicted and the punishment included imprisonment, more likely than not, the USSS would simply arrange for the individual to be isolated from any threats inside the prison and hand custody over to the prison. This might look like a member of the USSS being stations at the prison, essentially, as a guard, supervisor, monitor, etc.

I suspect the realistic scenario would look like the individual being put in an isolated wing or some sort of maximum-security facility, and the USSS checking in on a weekly or even daily schedule, and, in exchange, the prison would be allocated some portion of that annual $1,000,000.

[-] Octavio@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Just get one of those cages he used for the Mexican kids and put it right in the secret service office. Boom, problem solved. They don’t even have to leave their desks.

[-] PwnTra1n@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Someone’s gotta change his diapers

[-] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

ADX Florence was built for exactly this kind of situation.

Would be a dogshit posting for his detail, but Secret Service is Trumpland anyway so I assume he'll still have lackeys lining up to get the spot.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

You don't. You throw his ass into solitary confinement since he can't be in gen-pop, just like you would any other high-profile prisoner.

[-] FReddit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Depriving him of publicity woul be the worst punishment for this waste of skin.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I assure you, being in solitary confinement, wearing an orange jump suit, and eating prison food is worse. He'll still lose his publicity too.

[-] FReddit@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago
[-] Md1501@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Just regular prison guards would do

[-] designatedhacker@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

He's an old white dude with millions of dollars. He will go to "Club Fed" or more likely some kind of house arrest or probation. Honestly you don't want him in a real badass prison because that makes him a martyr. If he's just convicted and ignored that's a worse punishment as he'll slide into obscurity.

[-] Chickenstalker@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Just strip him of his citizenship and dump him at the border. Preferably next to the wall on the US side. Tell him he has 1 hour to climb the wall to Mexico or the dogs will be unleashed.

[-] TheJims@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Who cares? They can do time with him if they want I guess.

[-] markr@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

House arrest with no internet or phone.

[-] TheJims@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago
[-] markr@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

For the contempt charge that is likely to come his way, not for the felonies he has already been and soon will be charged with. But also I think it would absolutely drive him insane. He would continually violate the terms by using proxies, so the judge would have to restrict all visitors and put them under gag orders too. It would be bat shit crazy.

[-] nyoooom@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

The thing is that the prosecutors have to play by the rules to get him, which takes time, but recently the claws definitely seems to be closing in on him, and the prosecutors have bemig weapons and trump can't stop the system.

Right now it's like a tank going very slowly toward Trump, sure it takes time but if the tank operator does everything right, it will get there eventually.

[-] Marmotter@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I feel like the whole “the jaws of justice are slowly closing around trump” comment is the narrative version of that looping gif of the truck almost running into the bollard. Academically, I agree with you. But I’m pretty sure the dude is going to be dead from one of the innumerable heath issues he faces before he sees any real consequence. Time will tell I guess, but like others, I’m not holding my breath. If there were any real justice in the world, trump would have died from Covid. That would have at least been poetic justice for his role in that colossal tragedy.

[-] nyoooom@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I totally feel what you're saying and that is scary, but the big difference now is that there are trial dates, we are not in the "at some point" phase anymore.

[-] Helldiver_M@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And allowing witnesses to be intimidated is like allowing trump to have a Javelin in your tank analogy. For the cases to be prosecuted correctly, the necessary witnesses need to give their testimony without fear of retaliation. He needs to be put into pre-trail detainment.

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

We need to wait until it's normalized.

this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
619 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19240 readers
1659 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS