Jump to content

Trump vows to keep campaigning on his criminal cases despite prosecutors seeking order to stop


Recommended Posts

Posted

image.png

 

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday blasted special counsel Jack Smith anew and vowed to continue campaigning on his criminal cases even as prosecutors seek a protective order to limit the evidence that he and his team can share.

In the early voting state of New Hampshire, Trump assailed Smith as a “thug prosecutor” and a “deranged guy” a week after being indicted on felony charges for his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

 

The former president lobbed the insults at Smith just days after the Department of Justice asked a judge to approve a protective order stopping Trump from publicly disclosing evidence. Federal prosecutors contend that Trump is seeking to “try the case in the medi rather than in the courtroom.The judge overseeing the case has scheduled a hearing over the protective order for Friday morning.

Trump’s lawyers have argued that the prospective order is too broad and would restrict his First Amendment rights of free speech, something Trump echoed on stage Tuesday.

 

FULL STORY

independent.png

Posted (edited)

Obviously in the light of today's shooting, the Judge will strictly enforce Jack Smith's protective order on Friday......

 

Man who threatened President Biden shot dead during FBI raid

 

The man also posted death threats on social media including Truth Social, to Alvin Bragg. Kamala Harris, Letitia James, and Merrick Garland.

 

 'Robertson allegedly wrote, “The time is right for a presidential assassination or two. First Joe then Kamala!!"

 

The FBI said it had been warned about Robertson’s activities in March after he posted on the platform Truth Social about wanting to “put a nice hole in his [Bragg’s] forehead”.

 

Online, Robertson described himself as a “MAGA Trumper”, referring to the acronym for Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again”'.

 

 

Man who allegedly threatened US President Biden shot dead during FBI raid | The Far Right News | Al Jazeera

 

 

Edited by LosLobo
Posted
38 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

From NYTimes:

 

The judge described Mr. Trump’s candidacy as “a day job,” like another defendant.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/trump-judge-protective-order.html

 

https://archive.is/yOhZN

From the linked article:

 

"Mr. Trump’s legal team could show him the sensitive materials, but under the proposed order they would not be allowed to give him copies." ????

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, 2baht said:

Keep flapping that loose tongue Donny boy, the prosecution love you!

Oh don’t worry old Donnie will keep flapping his yap he can’t help it!

  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted

Spiraling Legal Bills Threaten Trump With a Cash Crunch

By Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman
Aug. 11, 2023, 5:01 a.m. ET

 

... Mr. Cheung accused Mr. Biden and the Justice Department’s special counsel, Jack Smith, of using the government’s “unlimited resources” to try “to force the Trump campaign to spend, spend, spend to defend innocent Americans who have been targeted.”

...

His advisers — both legal and political — insist the investigations are simply an effort to broadly drain his coffers.

 

One of Mr. Trump’s many attorneys, John Lauro, said on Fox News within minutes of the third indictment being made public that the former president is “being forced to spend money on legal defense, which should be spent on the discussion of critical ideas and critical issues.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/donald-trump-legal-bills-campaign.html

 

https://archive.is/u2EAA

 

Posted
1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

Spiraling Legal Bills Threaten Trump With a Cash Crunch

By Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman
Aug. 11, 2023, 5:01 a.m. ET

 

... Mr. Cheung accused Mr. Biden and the Justice Department’s special counsel, Jack Smith, of using the government’s “unlimited resources” to try “to force the Trump campaign to spend, spend, spend to defend innocent Americans who have been targeted.”

...

His advisers — both legal and political — insist the investigations are simply an effort to broadly drain his coffers.

 

One of Mr. Trump’s many attorneys, John Lauro, said on Fox News within minutes of the third indictment being made public that the former president is “being forced to spend money on legal defense, which should be spent on the discussion of critical ideas and critical issues.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/donald-trump-legal-bills-campaign.html

 

https://archive.is/u2EAA

 

Well, if Trump's lawyers hadn't spent incurred so many expenses in filing frivolous motions, the Trump campaign would have a lot more funding still at its disposal.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted
47 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, if Trump's lawyers hadn't spent incurred so many expenses in filing frivolous motions, the Trump campaign would have a lot more funding still at its disposal.

From the linked article quoted above:

 

"His advisers — both legal and political — insist the investigations are simply an effort to broadly drain his coffers."

 

So that may be a political statement or may be a legal statement.

Posted
3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

From the linked article quoted above:

 

"His advisers — both legal and political — insist the investigations are simply an effort to broadly drain his coffers."

 

So that may be a political statement or may be a legal statement.

The fact is though, that they have been repeatedly scolded by judges for filing baseless motions. In other words, much of the delay is self-inflicted.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

The fact is though, that they have been repeatedly scolded by judges for filing baseless motions. In other words, much of the delay is self-inflicted.

From the same article linked:

 

“I talk to Republican donors all day every day, and not one has called to express frustration that their money is being spent on legal bills,” said Caroline Wren, a Republican fund-raiser who works with candidates and groups aligned with Mr. Trump. “They are as disgusted with the political weaponization of the D.O.J. as millions of Americans and more than willing to stand and defend these folks with their dollars.”

 

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

From the same article linked:

 

“I talk to Republican donors all day every day, and not one has called to express frustration that their money is being spent on legal bills,” said Caroline Wren, a Republican fund-raiser who works with candidates and groups aligned with Mr. Trump. “They are as disgusted with the political weaponization of the D.O.J. as millions of Americans and more than willing to stand and defend these folks with their dollars.”

 

 

 

Which makes them chumps. But says nothing pertinent about the issue of how filing baseless motions has affected the Trump campaign's finances.

Posted

I don't know that there is any legal challenge to the amounts the prosecution is forcing the current defendant to spend on defense.

 

But chumps have a vote and at least, barring some train wreck, Trump is well on his way to the nomination

Posted
2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I don't know that there is any legal challenge to the amounts the prosecution is forcing the current defendant to spend on defense.

 

But chumps have a vote and at least, barring some train wreck, Trump is well on his way to the nomination

Are you claiming that the Trump campaign was forced by the prosecution to expend funds on  filing frivolous delaying motions?

And whether or not chumps have a vote, or the strength of Trump's lead, have no bearing on the question of why the trials have been delayed.

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Are you claiming that the Trump campaign was forced by the prosecution to expend funds on  filing frivolous delaying motions?

And whether or not chumps have a vote, or the strength of Trump's lead, have no bearing on the question of why the trials have been delayed.

Doesn't make any difference. I would say that the above statement was political far more than possibly legal.

 

The vast majority of criminal cases end in plea bargains, a new report finds
February 22, 2023

 


A new report finds that the vast majority of criminal cases end in a plea bargain. 


In any given year, 98% of criminal cases in the federal courts end with a plea bargain ...

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/22/1158356619/plea-bargains-criminal-cases-justice

 

So my interpretion is that, in those 98% of cases, if someone indicted says I don't have the money to contest this, the Feds say:

 

Fine. Let's make a deal.

Edited by jerrymahoney
Posted
12 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I don't know that there is any legal challenge to the amounts the prosecution is forcing the current defendant to spend on defense.

 

But chumps have a vote and at least, barring some train wreck, Trump is well on his way to the nomination

More fool Republicans.

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...