543

Finally, a Judge Steps Up and Denies a Trump Trial Delay Bid (newrepublic.com)

submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Donald Trump’s first criminal trial is officially on the books—and it starts before the election.

GOP front-runner Donald Trump is officially headed to court next month—the first of his four upcoming criminal trials expected sometime this year.

On Thursday, Trump headed to New York for a court hearing on his hush-money case. Judge Juan Manuel Merchan ignored his requests for a delay and determined the trial would start on March 25, when jury selection will begin.

Trump is accused of using his former fixer Michael Cohen to sweep an affair with porn actress Stormy Daniels under the rug ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

As a result, he’s facing 34 felony charges in this case for allegedly falsifying business records with the intent to further an underlying crime. Trump has pleaded not guilty on all counts.

all 48 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ryrybang@lemmy.world 165 points 9 months ago

Trump's attorney said it was "unfathomable" that Trump would be ready to balance his legal obligations with his campaigning.

I can't believe this stuff is even allowed in open court. Campaigning isn't even a job. It's a 100% optional thing somebody chooses to do in running for elected office. It can be stopped at any moment for any reason, completely and willingly.

A court date for multiple felonies is an obligation. It's much higher priority. There's no comparison.

If it is a fair excuse, then I guess we should all be campaigning.

Sorry boss, it's unfathomable to work today because I need to campaign. Sorry your honor, jury duty is unfathomable because I'm working the crowds. Sorry IRS, can't file my taxes this year because I'm busy raising money on social media.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 43 points 9 months ago

Trump is a sovcit in all but name. He'll never acknowledge that any court has authority over him.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 20 points 9 months ago

That's the thing about Sovcits. They don't have to acknowledge the authority of a higher entity to face the consequences.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 4 points 9 months ago

Yeah but he may turn out to be the exception, then we're fucked.

[-] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 41 points 9 months ago

This is all completely ignoring the absurdity of allowing an individual who has been indicted for election interference to participate in an election in any capacity.

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Indictment does not mean guilty. Though I bet he could still run when he’s found guilty.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

He’ll run from prison if he ever finally gets a real sentence.

[-] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 22 points 9 months ago

Or just the obvious.

'Sorry I can't come to my court hearing because I have to work'

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the court cares.

[-] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 9 months ago

You mostly can't get out of jury duty with that one. (Exceptions happen)

[-] NABDad@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

You certainly can't get out of your own criminal trial because you have to work.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Sorry your honor, my client is too busy committing other crimes to attend this trial.

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 18 points 9 months ago

Does this mean if you're employed, you could just commit countless crimes and then postpone the trials indefinitely? "Sorry I can't have a murder trial right now, I'm scheduled to open tomorrow at MacDonalds."

[-] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

If you're poor enough to need a job, that rule isn't for you.

[-] TrippaSnippa@aussie.zone 6 points 9 months ago

Just announce that you're running for office, then the charges become election interference.

[-] littlebluespark@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

Do game campaigns count? Because I have a serious backlog!

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

My mind went there too. Lol

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes we have to remember the things that are important. 😋

[-] Gimpydude@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 9 months ago

He is legally required to do this. He is not legally required to campaign.

[-] mPony@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

The attorney is saying that this jerk shouldn't have to face legal obligations. He is far too busy for things like due process.

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 84 points 9 months ago

Let's go alreaaaddyyy!

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 109 points 9 months ago

Also

“We have been faced with compressed and expedited schedules in every one of those trials,” Todd Blanche, an attorney also representing Trump in his classified documents case, told the judge. “We—meaning myself, the firm and President Trump—have been put into an impossible position.”

Will then maybe your client shouldn't have committed so many crimes...

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 43 points 9 months ago

Maybe the RNC needs to pony up more cash for legal costs. Spend everything keeping that motherfucker out of prison. Mortgage everything at the altar of Trump.

[-] ApathyTree@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 9 months ago

Stop, stop! I can only get so moist!

[-] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 5 points 9 months ago

Sploosh!

[-] RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 9 months ago

That's how Trump gets the ladies all horny, by repeatedly hitting himself and his rabid army in public.

I need to buy popcorn.

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

He was trying for three Stooges syndrome, but for crime.

[-] DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz 11 points 9 months ago

"You mean I'm indestructible?"

"No, not at all. Even a slight breeze could-"

"...Indestructible."

[-] Juvyn00b@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I just picture Jim Carey in liar liar "Stop breaking the law asshole!"

[+] bleistift2@feddit.de -22 points 9 months ago

Will then maybe your client shouldn’t have committed so many crimes…

Even Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 47 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

He's presumed innocent by the legal system. Those of us not involved in the cases against him have no obligation to pretend we don't see his obvious guilt.

And he has already been inducted, which means he's obligated to stand trial regardless of his guilt or innocence.

[+] bleistift2@feddit.de -24 points 9 months ago

no obligation to pretend we don’t see his obvious guilt

You don’t seem to get the point of presuming innocence. It is a guardrail against vigilantism. When people start making up their own minds about “obvious” guilt, it’s only a tiny step to dole out “righteous“ punishment, which, of course, it never is.

Basic rights are for everyone, not just those on your own political team.

By the way, you do have the obligation to not “see his obvious guilt”. For instance, you cannot call someone a rapist just because you feel like it. That would be slander.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Nah, fuck that. My opinions are not subject to legal restraints.

And it's not about preventing vigilantism at all. It's about preventing people from being wrongfully convicted. The thing that prevents vigilantism is that vigilantism involves commiting crimes.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 19 points 9 months ago

Basic rights are for everyone, not just those on your own political team.

No one has a right to my presumption of innocence. I'm not obligated to let my daughters hang out with OJ or anyone on the Pedo Island list. Fuck those people. Maybe they deserve to be in prison and maybe they don't. And maybe the justice system will get it right, but even if they were found not guilty in court that doesn't mean they are innocent or that I'm obligated to treat them that way.

They have rights as far as the government impugning their freedom goes, and they have a right to me not depriving them off life or liberty, but I owe them nothing least of all my trust or loyalty.

[-] agentsquirrel@sh.itjust.works 16 points 9 months ago

you cannot call someone a rapist just because you feel like it

What if someone is convicted for slandering someone they raped, but not actually convicted of rape?

[-] medgremlin@midwest.social 12 points 9 months ago

We watched him instigate a goddamn coup on live television. There were hundreds of millions of witnesses. Trump's innocence is not the question here...the extent of corruption of the system is what's really on trial.

[-] Promethiel@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

By the way, you do have the obligation to not “see his obvious guilt”. For instance, you cannot call someone a rapist just because you feel like it. That would be slander.

Before the beloved 2nd amendment, is the first. Courts are bound by the presumption of Innocence for the good reasons you were told already.

But your argument falls flat right at free speech; This is still fucking America, and no one is bound to believing or saying whatever another thinks by force of the government.

As always, the boundary is the consequences of your own actions (words) when taken by another.

Also, that's not how slander works you rapist of the time spent reading your drivel. Prove those damages to your reputation.

[-] fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 9 months ago

That's just not true. The presumption of innocence merely frames the roles of court participants - the prosecution must produce sufficient evidence to prove the defendant is fully beyond reasonable doubt.

Vigilantes are going to judge the accused regardless.

Additionally, if a legal system I'd unable or unwilling to try a case then IMO the public can form their own conclusions. Perhaps one day Trump will face judgement, but it's undeniable that he's received special treatment during these proceedings.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

Slander isn't a crime, it's a civil issue. Nor is calling someone a rapist slander if they are an actual rapist. The people who witnessed Brock Turner don't need to wait for a criminal trial to conclude to determine he is a rapist. The people who witnessed Donald's endless string of pathological lies and fraud don't need to wait for a trial to determine he is a fucking crook.

[-] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

That's a hilariously ironic example you gave, considering Trump is a rapist, although I do agree with you in general.

[-] DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz 13 points 9 months ago

Nah, we all saw him do the shit.

[-] Lemmygizer@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

"allegedly"

Better?

[-] SidewaysHighways@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Shut up baby I know it.

[-] Evia@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago

Imagine being selected for jury on this case. It'd be so surreal

[-] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

I'm still amazed there isn't a prostitution charge to go with the fraud charge.

this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024

543 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19120 readers

2067 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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