INDICTED (INDICATED) #3 USA v Donald Trump - Judge Tanya Chutkan - #J6 Election Interference, Fake Electors - Jack Smith

[bill_g]

Immabettin that tfg thinks using the court as a platform for his bullshit will make it all true. Then he'll be president, and he can pardon himself.

[MN-Skeptic]

For those on Twitter, Steve Reilly is live tweeting it -

Steve Reilly
@BySteveReilly
I'm here at the E. Barry Prettyman Courthouse in D.C. preparing to cover a 10 a.m. hearing regarding Special Counsel Jack Smith's motion for a partial gag order on former President Trump.

Context & background here: https://themessenger.com/politics/gag-o ... washington

Trump is not expected to be present today. But at least one of his allies is — Rep. Marjorie Tayor Greene was amid the members of the public in line to enter the courtroom a few moments ago.

[NewMexGirl]

“Judge Tanya S. Chutkan brought up the gag order issued by a state court judge in New York after Donald Trump disparaged a court clerk on social media, using her name and image.

Chutkan, who has also been repeatedly attacked by Trump in social media posts and received a death threat from one of his supporters, said she was “less concerned about shielding myself from those kinds of statements.” But she said she was “deeply disturbed” by the possibility of attacks on court employees.

“Such behavior puts court staff who are just doing their jobs at tremendous risk of harassment and it is totally unnecessary for Mr. Trump to proclaim his innocence or campaign for president,” she said.
“Would it be appropriate to post a photo of my staff?” she asked defense attorney John Lauro.

“If Trump asked for my advice, I’d advise him strongly not to do that,” Lauro responded. He went on to promise that “nothing like that will happen in this case.”



https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... OLK44XJP6E

[p0rtia]

Roger Parloff (Lawfare) live tweeting, blow by blow. Good stuff.

@rparloff

Lauro has so far said calling for Milley's execution was reasonable, and that you can't be responsible for what violence third parties might decide to carry out in your name.

What a guy.

Henry II has been mentioned several times.

[Dr. Ken]

[p0rtia]

Screenshot 2023-10-16 at 12.29.57 PM.png (92.16 KiB) Viewed 1906 times

[p0rtia]

More detail from Parloff.

Read from the bottom up.

Screenshot 2023-10-16 at 12.35.33 PM.png (111 KiB) Viewed 1893 times

[bill_g]

And so the countdown clock begins for Trump to say something that violates this order. He's not going to cozy up to the line and stop there. He's going to blow through it like a Mack truck on a picket fence.

► Show Spoiler

[p0rtia]

For fuckhead to avoid calling someone doing their job a thug or deranged seems to me to be impossible.

So I'm wondering if he has someone vetting his tweets?

What about at his hate rallies? His usual approach is to say "They say I'm not allowed to say THUG, so I won't say THUG."

[Sam the Centipede]

Bill, have a heart, please don't post large images of the Orange Shitgibbon. His likeness defiles these pages and causes

[AndyinPA]

[bill_g]

Bill, have a heart, please don't post large images of the Orange Shitgibbon. His likeness defiles these pages and causes

FIFY!

TY!

[RTH10260]

And so the countdown clock begins for Trump to say something that violates this order. He's not going to cozy up to the line and stop there. He's going to blow through it like a Mack truck on a picket fence.

► Show Spoiler

[bill_g]

Good one!

[noblepa]

Hypothetically, suppose you and Gregg are both right: TFG insists on getting on the stand and starts bloviating in ways that will bloviate-up (see what I did there?) his defense. What option does a defense attorney have at that point to shut down the questioning? Or is calling for a recess to give the client a chance to get composed the best that can be done?

I don’t know how things operate in the real world, but where I practice (the military), once the client takes the stand the attorney cannot advise him or otherwise discuss the testimony with the client. So even if the attorney asks for a break, he can’t “woodshed” the client during the break (although I’m sure it happens in actual practice).

A competent attorney would go over the testimony at length beforehand: I’m going to get you to testify about these three things, and that’s it. Don’t add details I didn’t ask about, and keep your answers short. And practice the likely cross, and prep the client about waiting a beat before answering so counsel has a chance to object. But with a client who’s a narcissistic know-it-all, you can only do so much.

If TFG takes the stand, I strongly suspect that Jack Smith, or whoever does the actual questioning, will ask pointed questions, trying to get him mad or careless and create a Colonel Jessup moment, in which Trump blurts out a damning admission of guilt.

[Flatpoint High]

well, that didn't take long:

zq45qpj02mub1.jpg (82.43 KiB) Viewed 1677 times

[raison de arizona]

I don’t see that on his timeline FWIW.

[NewMexGirl]

well, that didn't take long: zq45qpj02mub1.jpg

One must hope that trump isn’t suggesting a 2A solution.

But that is how his deranged and violent base will interpret it.

[sugar magnolia]

well, that didn't take long: zq45qpj02mub1.jpg

I have no real reason to think so, but that doesn't strike me as a real tweet or whatever the hell they call them.

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Yabbut...

It didn't target any of the verboten persons or officials.

[sugar magnolia]

Yabbut...

It didn't target any of the verboten persons or officials.

Is the Judge not considered "court personnel?"

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Yabbut...

It didn't target any of the verboten persons or officials.

Is the Judge not considered "court personnel?"

My reading of it is that, like the judge in the New York trial IIRC, the judge did not include herself on the list.

[p0rtia]

I got the impression, reading the live tweets, that she did in fact include herself. Or rather, that she will in the written order. I think I remember a reference to court personnel?

The order will be out in the blink of an eye, and then we'll know.

Checking my own post above....

Is she "court personnel"? I would think so.

Likewise "any participant in this case" seems to include the judge, by any fair reading.

[raison de arizona]

Fairly certain that is fake, FWIW. Either that, or it was posted and quickly deleted.
Here’s what his timeline has for a response.

► Show Spoiler

IMG_6022.png (143.72 KiB) Viewed 1544 times

And the official statement regarding the gag order.

► Show Spoiler

IMG_6021.jpeg (198.88 KiB) Viewed 1544 times

[Dr. Ken]