• @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    69 months ago

    Imprisoning a former president for contempt of court, even as blatant as this, is always going to be a topic of skittishness among the judges. This is an institution that typically loathes setting new precedent when it can avoid it, and imprisoning a former president, one who is running again especially, is a Rubicon that is going to intimidate even the most tough on corruption judge you can have on that bench.

    • @SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      99 months ago

      They’re setting a precedent either way.

      Either hold decorum over the individual or abandon it.

      How Trump acts, and what he is allowed to get away with, is carte blanche for his followers paying attention.

      If you want to be wealthy, act like the wealthy, right?

      The judges either have spines or they don’t. In that same vein, we either have laws that apply equally, or we don’t have respect for the law across the board.

      This is remedial psychology.

    • @CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      59 months ago

      As much as my justice boner is deflated by this statement, I’d rather have Trump convicted by a jury while having a competent attorney making smart decisions and defending him zealously. The last thing I want is his conviction to be overturned because someone took a shortcut.

      • SolidGrue
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        And, the standards of prosecution need to be set as high as possible because if history has anything to teach us, it’s that the GOP will come after Biden as soon as that office changes hands. The precedents are there to protect future, potentially controversial leaders from (begging your pardon) trumped-up charges.