Below is my column in The Hill on the imposition of a gag order on former President Donald Trump by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. Despite my long-standing criticism of Trump’s personal attacks on judges and critics, this gag order should be curtailed or struck down on appeal. While the odds tend to favor the lower court in such orders, there is ample reason to object to the scope and language of the order. The ill-defined bar on criticizing the prosecution or witnesses (including one of Trump’s opponents in this election) raises serious free speech concerns. It is also unlikely to have any appreciable impact on the heated public debate over this and other prosecutions of the presidential candidate. Much of this campaign will focus on the alleged weaponization of the criminal justice system. While Trump is still allowed to criticize the case generally, the vague order cuts too deeply into his right to criticize the prosecutor, the judge, and witnesses in the case in this election.
Here is the column:
The imposition of a gag order on former President Donald Trump was overwhelmingly applauded by pundits and press alike. Journalists described the order from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan as “narrow” and “limited.” Most of them lionized Chutkan as an “unflinching” and “no-nonsense” judge who would not tolerate Trump’s penchant for personal attacks and reckless rhetoric.
However, this order should concern everyone who values freedom of speech. While the odds may favor Chutkan on appeal, this order should be overturned as overbroad and dangerous.
For years, many of us have criticized Trump for his personal attacks on judges and opponents alike. Undeterred, Trump has continued such inflammatory attacks on “deranged” Special Counsel Jack Smith and the “biased, Trump-hating Judge” Chutkan. Smith has pushed aggressively for a gag order, even though one of the major issues in Trump’s campaign is whether the Biden Administration has weaponized the criminal justice system against him and other Republicans.
This week, Chutkan issued a partial gag order and stressed that she will not allow Trump to conduct a “smear campaign” in which he seeks to “vilify and implicitly encourage violence against public servants who are simply doing their jobs.” She stressed that “no other criminal defendant would be allowed to do so, and I’m not going to allow it in this case.” Chutkan reflects this trend in stating categorically that these are the limits that must be imposed regardless of the defendant.
These orders come at a great cost — limiting both parties and counsels in raising objections to alleged abuses of the government. The First Amendment was written in the aftermath of such abuses, including the infamous prosecution of publisher John Peter Zenger 290 years ago in 1733.
Some polls show that a majority now believe the Trump prosecutions are “politically motivated.” Tens of millions oppose the prosecutions, and this will be the single most-discussed issue of the campaign. Yet, one candidate would be both the subject of this national debate and a gag order barring full participation in it.
Chutkan steadfastly refused to recognize that either this case or this defendant are far from typical. Her order bars Trump from making statements against Smith, his staff, court personnel, and potential witnesses. That last category could include one of Trump’s opponents in the presidential election, former Vice President Mike Pence.
If Chutkan had simply barred statements targeting court staff or jurors, there would be no controversy. But she has imposed a vaguely worded court order that could turn campaign speeches into criminal contempt.
While appellate courts have largely ruled in favor of lower courts’ gag orders, there have long been constitutional concerns over these limits on not just the free speech rights of defendants but also their zealous representation by defense counsel.
It is not surprising that Smith dismisses such concerns. Smith has long adopted extreme legal positions that ignore constitutional values. This includes his prosecution of the former governor of Virginia, Robert McDonnell (R), which was reversed in a unanimous 8-0 decision by the Supreme Court in 2016.
The courts remain divided on the standards for curtailing the free speech rights of a defendant. A closely analogous case is the corruption trial of Rep. Harold E. Ford Sr. (D–Tenn.). The district court barred Ford from making any “extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication” that included criticism of the motives of the government or basis, merits, or evidence of the prosecution.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected the gag order as overbroad and stressed that any such limits on free speech should be treated as “presumptively void and may be upheld only on the basis of a clear showing that an exercise of First Amendment rights will interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial.”
There remains a division on the courts of what showing is needed, but there is little evidence of any true balancing in Chutkan’s decision. This and the other trials will remain the focus of heated debate in this campaign. Her order will only silence the voice of the man who many feel is the victim of politically motivated prosecutions. This order will do little to reduce the criticism or the coverage.
Ironically, it is a level of restraint that Judge Chutkan herself has failed to show in the past. For example, in sentencing a rioter in 2022, Chutkan said that the rioters “were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.”
She added that “[i]t’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.”
That would seem to imply the guilt of an individual who was not even charged. Yet Chutkan has refused to recuse herself in now trying the very man she was referencing as responsible for the crimes of that day.
As has long been the case, many are turning a blind eye to the implications of this order. They cannot see beyond the name at the top of the caption page. But this order would allow any judge to effectively strip a political candidate of the ability to contest the merits and motivations involved in his own prosecution, including challenging the veracity of prosecutors or witnesses.
In some of these cases, there is ample reason for such criticism. While I have long said that the Mar-a-Lago prosecution by Smith is well-supported in both law and facts, other prosecutions currently ongoing are clearly politically motivated. The most obvious is the prosecution brought by Alvin Bragg in New York — a case that contorts existing law in an attempt to bag a political figure unpopular in his jurisdiction.
While the Chutkan gag order does not extend to the other cases, they constitute a daisy-chain of trials that will have Trump running between courts before the election. There is much to criticize in Smith’s second indictment, which will be tried before a judge who previously denounced Trump in a district where 95 percent of the voters opposed Trump.
After Chutkan ordered a trial just before Super Tuesday, she is now gagging only one candidate — the very candidate who is campaigning against the weaponization of the criminal justice system. You do not have to like or support Trump to recognize the serious problem inherent in such a gag order.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
Jim “The Man From Bucky Russ” Jordan loses his Speaker bid to treasonous RINOs who spoke ill of their fellow Republican and who are bizarrely hell-bent on Republicans losing.
To “The Man From Bucky Russ”:
“Those who stay will be Champions.”
– Bo Schembechler
_____________________
11th Commandment
Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.
– Ronald Reagan
“Those who stay will be Champions, as will those who help steal signs from the opposition.”
– Bo Schembechler
I should add, skepticism of the NCAA is in order. But I’ll wait and see.
Lawyer Sidney Powell pleaded guilty to reduced charges Thursday over efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election in Georgia, becoming the second defendant in the sprawling case to reach a deal with prosecutors.
Hillary Clinton lied voluminously to the FBI, illegally and for Hillary’s benefit, the FBI fraudulently and corruptly conducted “Crossfire Hurricane,” Hillary destroyed evidence and obstructed justice when she destroyed 30,000 e-mails, etc., etc., etc.
Obama’s crime was essential as he will never be a “natural born citizen” and he will never be eligible for the presidency – a monumental and egregious crime against the Constitution and America.
And so on…
Lawyer Sidney Powell pleaded guilty to reduced charges Thursday over efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election in Georgia, becoming the second defendant in the sprawling case to reach a deal with prosecutors.
Donald.
I would further note the entire basis of this case is that it is a crime to challenge an election.
You may come to regret that in 2024.
Trump is a clear and present danger to the citizens of the United States, and it’s government. He has no allegiance to the law or it’s citizens. If someone was to be killed or hurt by his actions, Trump could care less, as long as it served Trump. And that example turned fact on J6.
You want extant clear and present danger to the American thesis, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Americans and America?
The entire communist American welfare state is unconstitutional including, but not limited to, admissions affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, EPA, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax ONLY for debt, defense, and “…general (all, the whole) Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor or charity. The same article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY the value of money, the “flow” of commerce among nations, tribes and States, and land and naval Forces. Additionally, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification, and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of security and infrastructure only.
Lawyer Sidney Powell pleaded guilty to reduced charges Thursday over efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election in Georgia, becoming the second defendant in the sprawling case to reach a deal with prosecutors.
US.
Lawyer Sidney Powell pleaded guilty to reduced charges Thursday over efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election in Georgia, becoming the second defendant in the sprawling case to reach a deal with prosecutors.
Trumph.
That would be interesting if Powell had actually done anything wrong.
But much like Flynn who she successfully defended against exactly this kind of criminal conduct by DOJ
Powell is being destroyed by a a left that has politically weaponized government against its enemies.
There is virtually no one outside those of you on the left – that had already convicted her, that beleived Powell would get a fair trial.
She has already been bankrupted by left wing lunatic judges.
She had no ability to afford a defense.
And though she nearly certainly would have won on appeal. – she would have had to survive financially and otherwise to get there.
I would also note that Flynn plead guilty too – until he did not. He agreed to cooperate – tell the truth, which he did – and
NO ONE was convicted based on his testimony.
Then LATER when the evidence of the corruption of the prosecution surfaced – which is near certain to occur, he withdrew his plea.
The deal Powell managed constrains willis far more than Powell. It is for cooperation and probation only. While I have not read the details – it could easily include provisions for appeal of the constitutionality of the underlying charges. Powell is an excellent attorney. Far better than Willis ever will be.
If you think you are getting anything of value out of this – your not very good at critical thinking.
She didn’t successfully defend Flynn. Trump pardoned Flynn, which mooted the case.
The DOJ wanted to dismiss the case, but corrupt Clinton Judge Sullivan wouldn’t allow the DOJ to dismiss the case. THEN Trump pardoned Flynn.
And you know this – how?
Another TDSer. Take your meds!
Its
So what actual laws has he violated ?
Has he actually sold public office to the highest bidder – often hostile foreign powers ?
This crap is tiring.
Someone is not dangerous because you disagree with them.
They are not even dangerous if they are wrong.
They are not dangerous if you do not like what they say.
They are not dangerous because you do not like their polices that the courts have deemed constitutional.
The Lawlessness we have seen universally has been by those on the left.
Pro palestinian protestors disrupted congress a few days ago – none of them were arrested for tress pass, for insurection – that is depite the fact they are supporting an actual armed insurrection.
Portland protestors used bombs, firecrackers, lasers, rocks, to disrupt the portland federal courthouse – few were arrested despite the fact that thousands were involved.
The FBI mounted an illegal and unconstitutional investigation into a sitting president, One where they KNEW from the start that the allegations were false and manufactured by his political opponent.
No allegation against Trump is a tiny fraction as egregious.
Your upset because he challenged the legitimacy of your corrupt election.
Hillary not only challenged it – in nearly all the same ways. but illegally conspired to criminally investigate her oponent for crimes that she made up.
That is your idea of following the rule of law ?
It is increasingly evident that Biden and his minions not only illegally possessed classified documents for Years before he was president, But that the – we cooperated when that was discovered claim was entirely MALARKEY. Biden did not “accidentally” remove classified documents from the senate Sciff. Nor did he “accidentally” move them from his VP’s office to a long list of other places and multiple moves with lawyers reviewing these documents at each step of the way without ever discovering that there were classified documents.
All that and there is no broad VP right to declassify, no broad VP right to whitehouse documents after they leave office. No 250 years of history tradition and law to support BOTH of those rights that presidents have.
We now have AG James foolhardily trying to claim MAL is worth 16M – when There is 20 acres of land – less than MAL for sale within a mile for nearly a Billion dollars, and where Forbes appraised MAL at 700-800M BEFORE james filed her lawsuit – and all this ignores the FACT that The LAW requires that buyers and especially lendors conduct their own due dilligence.
We have Braggs case which litterally makes no sense. We have Willis and Smith essentially claiming that challenging the results of a horibly badly condicted and already established as rigged election is somehow a crime.
Sorry, but the lawlessness, the threat to democracy is YOURS. Not Trump.
The left is terrified that Trump will be re-elected – which increasingly seems likely.
They are terrified at the prospect that President Trump will do to them – what they have done to him.
To which I say “Turn about is fair play” Those who live by unconstitutional acts should die by the same unconstitutional acts.
The Biden administration is striving vigorously to displace Pres. Buchannon as the worst president in US history. Further while Biden is not likely the most corrupt US president.
He is by far the most OVERTLY corrupt american president. And certainly the most incompetent.
While I do not oppose every decision that he has made – most of those I agree with have still been conducted badly and likely would not have been needed at all but for the bad prior decisions.
Whether Biden’s policies and Failures are the PRIMARY causes of the global mess we are facing – is debatable.
Whether they are major contributing factors is NOT.
Biden botched the withdrwl from afghanistan, making the US and the president look weak, making challenges to U power more likely.
Biden implimented abysmal energy policy – empowering Both Russia and Iran.
He disrespected Saudi Arabia and Israel in the Mideast – empowering Iran and various terrorist groups.
He Restarted the reckless taklk of Ukraine joining NATO – which Russia has REPEATEDLY stated was a RED LINE. Putin has invaded neighbors during every prior presidential administration – all after those presidents announced NATO expansion to Russias borders EXCEPT TRUMP.
Trump is the only US president since Ford to NOT involve the U in a new foreign conflict.
The causes of inflation are econ 101 – something no one in the Biden administration appears to have taken.
Biden has F#$Ked up border issues so badly that even major democrats are now at odds with him and Biden is now looking to build 26miles of wall
Meanwhile more people have died from Opiate overdoses under Biden than Covid under Trump and 3 times as many people have died of Covid under Biden who told us that 200K deaths and he would resign.
Those of you on the left are devoid of any ability to think to reason to consider anything past its first order consequences – and even those you nearly always get wrong.
You are not only lawless, autoritarian, antidemocratic, unconstitutional – but you are also just plain WRONG – and quite obviously so on nearly everything.
The world was relatively peaceful under Trump – and getting more peaceful with each year.
The US was prosperous and improving with every year.
We had new disasters in the mideast under Obama and under Biden – because bad policies of those administrations caused food insequrities – and nothing threatens peace like people unable to afford to feed themselves.
Under Trump americans standard of living – especially at the bottom increased. And GLOBAL standards of living increased – therefore no wars, no violence and abundant food.
And you have learned NOTHING
I can not think of a time in history where those warrping themselves in claims of moral superiority have acted so incredibly immorally.
“Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.”
– Thomas Jefferson
This perfidious Jamaican turncoat and U.S. affirmative action project has no capacity to obtain or cognitively assimilate the clear meaning and intent of the American Founders and Framers, being of the not dissimilar perspective of third-world, banana republic, foreign allegiances as her political benefactor, the totally ineligible son of an anti-American, anti-Colonialist, jailed-for-six months-by-the-British activist extremist, and foreign citizen, Barack Hussein “Barry-I-Have-A-Statue-In-Jakarta-Soetoro” Obama.
This criminal of high office must be impeached and convicted for denying constitutional rights, subversion of the United States government, subversion of the Constitution, abuse of power, usurpation of power, treachery, corruption, failure to fulfill a constitutionally required sworn oath et al.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech….
Copypasta George posts his daily copypasta.
OMG! Thank you all so much for reading…again.
I appreciate you, my faithful readership.
We are living in the domain of the absurd. Where laws are written in an arbitrary manner, allowing tyrants to appoint partisan judges that can cast their weight towards their political proclivity, or of their appointers’: suspicion most assuredly has ensued. The foundation of any civil society of man must have laws that apply to all individuals equally and be viewed as proportionate to the charges. When administers of existing statutes twist meaning(s) to support their political propensity all law then become suspect, formulating conjecture that deepens distrust.
There so many examples of divisive court rulings or enforcement of written laws it has now become standard for all sides to question if any law applies. The citizens of America have whithered into their protective councils, beating their drums of righteousness when the appointed adjudicator rules favorably or protests loudly when not, demonstrating the utter lack of respect for the law and those appointed to enforce or judge the law.
God help us all!!!!
@George
Yes, we are. Holding onto hope these days, ever since the dems took the White House again, is like holding onto smoke. The chaos in the House is such that my cynical self either has to accept that this was orchestrated, or that yes, the alternative to ‘The Party’ (and that is what the dems are in 2023, only older readers will even know what that means or why it is important) is that irretrievably stupid. Either way, we are all going to pay for it. How we can repeat this after the 30s/40s is mind numbing. We have raised our children very, very poorly, and we have gotten addicted to our comfort.
Nothing has Changed (George W), it has always been that way. It has just become more Visible, Transparent as they say.
Adjudicated Weaponization has been the “Practice that shall not be named” of the profession for millennia.
Take it with a grain of Salt, be a ‘Good Ole Sock’, Face the Wind.
James & Anonymous
Daily I’m just amazed at the short slightness, disrespect for the constitution, morality and laziness of leadership coming out of D.C.. It’s a wonderment that the United States hasn’t fallen off the cliff so far. Their lack of knowledge, historically, politically, militarily, economically and socially is very worrisome for a solid future. They seem to care not for our survival let’s just do what feels good now, damn the future (like a couple Trillion $ here or there really doesn’t matter). We have elected spineless (effete) fools full of mush for brains and promoted educators who are no more than socialists to educate our children.
I’m sorry for such downtrodden words but this seems to me the course that America is headed.
May God help us all!!!!
Jonathan: Well, another shoe has just dropped. As I predicted, Ken Chesebro, the architect of DJT’s fake elector scheme, has just flipped–right at the beginning of his trial. In the last minute plea deal Chesebro has agreed to plead guilty to a single felony count and will receive 5 year’s probation and a $5,000 fine. He will agree to testify for Fani Willis. So now Chesebro joins Sidney Powell in turning against their leader. Not good news for DJT.
Now I don’t want to gloat. But when Fani Willis brought her vast RICO indictment of DJT and the other co-conspirators I predicted a number of the co-defendants would flip. But some on this blog said it wouldn’t happen and DJT would ultimately win the case. With the Powell and Chesebro plea deals are you now having second thoughts?
LOL — the misdemeanor charges to which Powell pleaded Guilty (1) are NOT the felony RICO charges that were brought against her, (2) do not involve Trump, and (3) are in relation to Powell’s own conduct occuring in Coffee County.
https://technofog.substack.com/p/prediction-sidney-powell-wont-be
There is, as yet, no indication I’m aware of that Powell will “flip” on Trump or that she CAN “flip” on Trump, since she may not even possess first hand knowledge about anything that Trump did relative to the charges against him. The Trump campaign had disavowed Powell in December of 2020, long before any of the alleged RICO conduct occurred. And so far I’ve not read about what Chesebro pleaded Guilty to or whether it involves Trump.
Both Powell and Chesebro have direct knowledge of things Trump did. Chesebro was the architect of the plan to pressure Pence to reject electors, and Powell was at the November meeting with Trump where he seemed to settle on the J6 plan. Moreover, they have info about other defendants, so we now see whether others also flip.
Re: Chesebro’s guilty plea:
– it’s a felony
– Trump is a named co-conspirator in the same charge
– the fake elector allegations are also central to Jack Smith’s DC case
– unlike Powell, Chesebro should be a very credible witness
Turley says: “Much of this campaign will focus on the alleged weaponization of the criminal justice system.” Also: “Tens of millions oppose the prosecutions, and this will be the single most-discussed issue of the campaign. ” Really? Is the most-pressing issue facing American voters in 2024 Trump’s “poor little me I’m the victim of evil Democrats”? Not at all. With everything going on in the world right now, Trump’s “victimization” trope is low on the list of issues for American voters in 2024. Turley also ignores the effect Trump’s whining has on the most-extreme elements of his fan base–he knows and we’ve all seen what some of these people are capable of. According to Slate, Mitt Romney has had to pay $5,000 a day for security for his family since the insurrection because he stood up against Trump. Letitia James, Fani Willis and Jack Smith all have received death threats, as have court staffs in various venues where Trump has been charged. Trump doesn’t just deny his criminality or claim that his prosecution is unfair–he attacks prosecutors, the justice system and judges personally and viciously–and not just immature insults, either. He posted Letitia James’s home address–what valid reason would there be for him do this? None whatsoever. The fact that Trump has a fan base of fanatics who make credible death threats only makes all of the difference in the world when balancing free speech against the risk of Trump continuing his childish tirades unchecked. And, it’s not like he wasn’t warned beforehand. Turley also says: “Chutkan steadfastly refused to recognize that either this case or this defendant are far from typical.” I submit that it’s TURLEY who refuses to recognize the dangers of allowing Trump to try his case in the media, to viciously attack the judicial system, prosecutors, court staff., which is his effort to try to bully and intimidate them. HE”S the one trying to “weaponize” our court system.
Turley, a criminal defense lawyer, has yet to write about the Sydney Powell plea deal. So I will.
I don’t like using the likes of Powell for the backdrop of this. But the dearth of commentary on it simply boggles the mind.
There’s no way out for the prosecutor here: Either Powell is guilty of the 7 felonies she is charged with, in which case a resolution involving probation is totally unacceptable, and the prosecutor needs to be hauled before an ethics review board. Or, the prosecutor overcharged in preparation for the plea bargain, to induce the defendant to avoid huge legal fees and bankruptcy and possibly getting the book thrown at her if convicted of one of the charges — in which case the prosecutor needs to be hauled before an ethics review board.
Now folks, we can’t have this. Of course, it happens thousands of times a day in this country. Mainly to poor people — disproportionately minority. It is always the latter of the two scenarios mentioned above. Overcharging to induce a guilty plea regardless of guilt. As the Supreme Court has determined that a “speedy” trial is anything under 1 year, pray tell, what is a poor person to do — particularly if they have children.
So we don’t have a legitimate criminal justice system in this country. We haven’t had one for many years. And nobody’s doing thing one about it. Just ask the Georgia Bar association what they are going to do about the prosecutor’s ridiculous behavior in this particular situation. Bupkis.
Your assumption is that the goal of our criminal justice system is to convict each individual of each crime he/she commits.
That is not its purpose. The efficient administration of justice is a factor that weighs heavily against that idea. This is how some justify letting nonviolent drug offenders off. We just don’t have the resources to try, convict, and jail everyone.
Also, Pleas deals for role players in a criminal conspiracy operation are standard practice. The goal is to take down Al Capone, not the henchmen. Viewing the Kraken’s (or Cheese bro’s) guilty please in a vacuum is wilful ignorance.
The way the plea bargain is being used now has no relation to justice. One way to ensure that it might is to mandate that someone charged with multiple felonies has to plead guilty to one of those felonies. It is one thing to give a person a lighter sentence. It is quite another to have a citizen face 10 years or more, and then have a plea deal that involves probation. That is absurd — on its face. And anyone who tries to mask the absurdity of it is the one who is rationalizing.
Why is that absurd, if one of the conditions of the plea deal is testifying against the bigger fish?
How would you propose a prosecutor take down organized crime without this sort of structure? Do you really want to continue to convict the driver of the bank heist rather than its Clooney?
“Justice” is served because we value putting the mastermind behind bars much more than a role player. Are streets are safer without the drug kingpin, etc., even if it means 10 supporting role players get off easy.
Yet again, you are analyzing this in a vacuum.
More than 10 years of jail or probation? That’s a rational parameter to you? Maybe you’re just so used to it, you’ve come to accept it. And make no mistake about it, these ever-widening parameters generally don’t favor the citizen. They’re used as intimidation by the government.
In terms of a vacuum, you seem to be the one who is thinking only of Powell. As you may have noted from my above comment, I don’t consider Powell a sympathetic figure. I think Powell broke the law. But only because I’ve read up on the matter. Certainly NOT because she plead guilty in court. That doesn’t mean squat. You can’t tell who’s guilty and who isn’t based on plea-bargain guilty pleas anymore.
When could you?
About a half-century ago. If you weren’t black. When the parameters were not this ridiculous.
Very good comment Steve. The way this regime has weaponized our system of justice is not just intended to destroy Trump, it is intended to disenfranchise citizens that oppose the regimes ongoing destruction of the American way of life.
I think that Trump is trying to get the judge to throw him in jail. He has calculated how much his support will increase if that happens. Plus the Manhattan jail will need to be completely cleared out in order to hold a former US president. This is all theater but I agree that gagging Trump is not right.
Jonathan: Anyone who thought you were not in the DJT MAGA camp should be abused of that idea with your latest column. You now say Judge Chutkan’s narrowly drawn gag is an attack on DJT’s “free speech” rights. You have apparently have not read the order. It does not prohibit DJT from criticizing Biden or DJT’s opponents in the GOP contest. It doesn’t prevent DJT from criticizing the prosecution in general terms. What it prevents him from doing is attacking and threatening the judge, prosecutors, clerks or witnesses–which he has consistently done. Judge Chutkan has already received a death threat from one of DJT’s supporters in Texas. In the NY fraud case DJT posted the name and home address of one of Judge Engoron’s chief clerks. He has done the same thing with AG Letitia James. He just posted her home address. These kinds of threats can’t be ignored by judges.
In your support of DJT you even bizarrely claim Chutkan “is now gagging only one candidate–the very candidate who is campaigning against the weaponization of the criminal justice system”. You don’t bother to recognize the obvious. DJT is the ONLY candidate who is also a criminal defendant!
Gag orders are frequently issued in high profile cases where criminal defendants threaten judges, prosecutors and witnesses. In this case DJT is actually being given preferential treatment. In any other case bond would be revoked and the defendant would end up in pre-trial detention. In her gag order, Chutkan didn’t do this and it is unlikely she will under the present circumstances. But this could change if DJT continues to make threats. No criminal defendant is free to say anything they please. This is where “free speech” rights end when a criminal defendant is under supervision of the court. Why should DJT be an exception to the rule that applies to every other criminal defendant?
The case law supports Chutkan’s gag order. DJT’s appeal to the DC Court of Appeals will probably ultimately fail. In the meantime Judge Chutkan will move her case along to a trial in early March 2024. That locomotive has already left the station!
1st Amedment does cover criticism of goverment employees?
Another glaring example of TDS at its best.
Meanwhile, in the NY fraud case, Trump’s lawyers claim that Trump’s failure to remove a tweet about the judge’s clerks was an accident. Judge Engoron asked why Trump shouldn’t face “serious sanctions” for his “blatant violation of the gag order,” like fines or “possibly imprisoning him.”
Jonathan Turley, I fear that this essay, with internal evidence of being written overly hastily, receives but a ‘D+’ grade.
You took a course from the philosophers on ‘Elementary Logic’, probably as a sophomore. I understand that you went to an extraordinarily fine school as an undergraduate so I can only ask “Did you sleep through all the classes?”
Were you always that stupid Dave?
If you’re looking for insipid pedantry, DBB never disappoints.
Do you really think the good professor cares what grade the likes of you give him?
He more intelligent by far than you.
So are my livestock.
Benson is a clear case of arrested development — in his case, still emotionally stuck in college, as differentiated from most of the rest of us who went to college and then entered the adult world where we applied what we learned in college and then learned new and more-advanced ways of thinking. For most of us, college was closer to the beginning than the end of an intellectual journey, but apparently not for Benson. Based upon his own words, college was the end, and an end in itself, where the only point of college is college.
Chutkan’s order should leave no doubt that this case is a rank political prosecution. ‘Crats do not (should not) want the reverse to happen to them, and yet….
Criminal trial fairness applies to the defendant, not the prosecution. Chutkan’s order is premised on the concept that it’s Smith, not Trump, that stands to benefit from a Trump gag order. On that basis alone, her order is defective.
It DOES seem odd that Judge Chutkan appears to think that the RIGHT to a fair trial belongs to the prosecution, when it is CLEARLY extended to a defendant.
This website either needs serious maintenance or a new webmaster. Comments fail to get posted or are removed, for no apparent reason, contradicting Turley’s published rules and boasted status as a “free speech advocate.”
If comments are removed or prevented from being posted, there should at least be a placemarker mentioning that a comment was removed, if not also stating WHY. Either that or Turley needs to issue a public rretraction of his own claims of being a “free speech advocate.” Censor until you’ve turned yourself into the Garbage Fox website that censors comments in bulk quanitity, but don’t pretend that you’re any different than Garbage Fox when it comes to censorship.
In further support of my comment (I’m the “Anonymous” that posted the comment to which I’m replying, after having been excommunicated from Turleyville for NO GOOD REASON under both my real name and pseudonym), I would direct people’s attention to this article just published at Matt Taibbi’s website:
Dismantle The Censorship-Industrial Complex: The Westminster Declaration
https://www.racket.news/p/dismantle-the-censorship-industrial
It’s telling that either Professor Turley was hesitant about signing the Declaration or no-one bothered to ask him, which would be odd if he had the repute he seems to desire with respect to free speech.
Alas, you’re overlooking a third possibility, which is that Turley WANTED to sign the declaration, but was disallowed due to the other signatoriers being aware of the Professor’s sneaky censorship. Turley’s signature on a free-speech declaration would be like Robert De Niro’s signature on a pledge to never use obscenities.
I think it’s not terribly likely the composers of the Declaration or its signatories are very familiar with others’ website comment sections; however, that would generally fall under the “not being asked” category, extended just a little to cover “not wanted.”
This is a great article that explains how a relatively “sophisticated” culture like ours would have anyone supporting and defending tyranny. This is where we are today.
It is a terrible mistake to imagine that thuggish deeds are performed only by thugs. Recalling his own early career as a revolutionist, Dostoevsky maintains that his group, which could readily have performed the most terrible acts, was composed of sophisticated people with the Russian equivalent of Ivy League educations. But despite regarding themselves as a cultured elite—or perhaps because they did—few “of us . . . could resist that well-known cycle of ideas and concepts that had taken such a firm hold on young society.” Then it was “theoretical socialism,” but it could have been anything, and there is no good reason to “think that even murder . . . would have stopped us—not all of us, of course, but at least some of us . . . surrounded by doctrines that had captured our souls.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/doestoevsky-knew-it-can-happen-here-hamas-palestine-progressive-radicalism-a7d196d6?mod=opinion_lead_pos5
Olly, the French Revolution was also inspired and powered by the educated such as lawyers.
The rude masses were used, and rewarded, for their muscle and violence as appears to be the case with BLM and Antifa and the like and their radical, mostly Democrat, handlers.
I read it 2 days ago. It was a great read. Anything by Dostoyevsky is challenging, empowering, sobering. Would that schools taught this type of literature to high school and college students, we would see very different results in America.
A man who lies to himself, and believes his own lies, becomes unable to recognize truth, either in himself or in anyone else, and he ends up losing respect for himself and for others. When he has no respect for anyone, he can no longer love, and in him, he yields to his impulses, indulges in the lowest form of pleasure, and behaves in the end like an animal in satisfying his vices. And it all comes from lying–to others and to yourself.”
– The Brothers Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoyevsky
We need more people like Estovir on this site!
Estovir, we can tattoo that quote on the Leftist’s polluting this blog.
Ditto
the
I’ll take that as an article of faith.
Definitely.
“At least 100 Israelis have been arrested for social media posts supporting Palestinians in Gaza and 70 remain in detention, according to a legal advocacy group in the country.”
https://forward.com/fast-forward/565699/dozens-of-arrested-for-posts-defending-gaza/
Will JT discuss this anti-free-speech act?
Why would the good professor discuss something that has nothing to do with The Constitution, or the 1stA?
What another country does is their own business.
He often discusses things that have nothing to do with The Constitution.
You’re not CommitToHonestDiscussion. But it’s funny that she got under your skin so much that you appropriate her name.
Turley– “If Chutkan had simply barred statements targeting court staff or jurors, there would be no controversy. But she has imposed a vaguely worded court order that could turn campaign speeches into criminal contempt.”
+++
True, and I imagine that was the intention.
This openly prejudiced judge should never have had this case.
She may win the annual Roland Freisler award.
But she has a few strong competitors among the Soros/Obama judges.