- cross-posted to:
- nyt_gift_articles@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- nyt_gift_articles@sopuli.xyz
You must log in or # to comment.
“We’ll wait a bit before not upholding a legal, moral, or ethical standard.”
MILQUETOAST
Such a cool word.
Not cool that the media has abandoned its duty. Thanks, owners.
Under capitalism their Duty has always been to their owners. We simply used to rely on there being enough diversity of voices that no one owner or owners could control the media and thus the perception of the population.
Now Almost all mass media Is owned by the same small group of people. And they very much use it to their benefit to warp and shape the perception of the public. Because no one is going to speak out loud enough against them.
Chomsky would talk about how a lively debate between very narrow ranges of acceptable opinion was permitted, nay, even encouraged.
Now that “lively debate” is mostly between the maga-funders and enablers and bootlickers such as Elon and the extremely rabid zealots within maga - so there is a “debate” about whether to have H-1B program so the uber-wealthy can add more billions to their wealth or if the H-1B should be canceled because of all the racists in the base.
I guess Bernie is allowed to say his piece because they know full well that even if he’s right and highly popular, they know he is next to powerless in the scheme of things and if someone like him runs in a primary, they can kneecap them with propaganda (“Bernie Bros! so racist and sexist!”) in order to throw it to the next Kamala or Hillary…
Oh, they absolutely were friendly to Sanders because they knew it was divisive. Had Sanders won the primary they would have slandered him as easily as anyone else. All Things Considered however. I think Sanders understands this. And has parlayed it into a success for himself and his agenda which is good. Unfortunately for many people they’re still letting it keep them divided against the fascists. Which is what the fastest one. So in that respect it’s a move that will continue to pay dividends for them for decades on.
Here’s a link to the judge’s 17 page ruling.
It’s basically a smackdown of all of Trump’s legal arguments against being found guilty and sentenced. Unfortunately it ends with the judge basically saying, despite all that, it’s not practical to throw this chucklefuck in jail. So we’ve got no choice but to let him go free.
So we are ok with a convicted felon to be president because “it’s not practical”? Lmfao. Man, this country is such a clusterfucker. If it were me or you, we would have been in prison since yesteryear.
His deplorable followers get nearly the same treatment. If “antifa” or BLM was openly planning, for months, on descending on the Capitol to overturn an election, I think they’d be ready with turret-mounted guns.
As it was, donvict’s “peaceful protesters” were allowed the run of the place. They did nothing to try to even get most of them. Took years in some cases to track down these terrorists, and they still haven’t gotten all of them yet. The terrorist(s) that planted those bombs - still unpunished.
But a person doesn’t magically stop being president just because they are in prison.
Do do we just have a prisoner that hapoens to be president?
What if this prisoner/president just orders the military to break him out?
Yea this doesn’t work, any attempt to imprison a president will lead to an invocation of the insurrection act and martial law, and trump would declare anyone who tries to imprison him an enemy and order for their arrest. And if in prison, the military will get him out. (remember, the military leans right wing, most of the military voted trump)
That’s why the judge is saying it’s “impractical”. Its not necessarily the judge being a bootlicker, the judge just knows its futile.
In a perfect world where laws actually apply to everyone equally, this person wouldn’t be president to begin with. The fact that you’re talking about a prisoner being president is insane in and of itself. Dude should’ve been banned from running/impeached whenever a conviction happened. End of story. You’re a felon, nope, you can’t run. You can’t even reach the white house.
The man insulted the judge and did a series of things that would hold anyone else in contempt of court. And despite all that, the judge bends over backwards to give him a most lenient sentence.
judge bends over backwards to give him a most lenient sentence
That’s because the judge doesn’t really have any real power compared to a president-elect
Attempting to give a prison sentence would result in the judge dying of mysterious circumstances once Jan 20 comes.
Also, its gonna get overturned in higher courts, Supreme Court has the final say, and we all know how “fair” this court is…
Feel free to let out a long curse in the comfort of your home reading this:
Page 17:
“While this Court as a matter of law must not make any determination on sentencing prior to giving the parties and Defendant an opportunity to be heard, it seems proper at this juncture to make known the Court’s inclination to not impose any sentence of incarceration, a sentence authorized by the conviction but one the People concede they no longer view as a practicable recommendation. As such, in balancing the aforementioned considerations in conjunction with the underlying concerns of the Presidential immunity doctrine, a sentence of an unconditional discharge appears to be the most viable solution to ensure finality and allow Defendant to pursue his appellate options. Further, to assuage the Defendant’s concerns regarding the mental and physical demands during this transition period as well as the considerations set forth in the 2000 OLC Memorandum, this Court will permit Defendant to exercise his right to appear virtually for this proceeding, if he so chooses.”
What is “unconditional discharge”? Exactly what it sounds like:
- Sentence. When the court imposes a sentence of unconditional discharge, the defendant shall be released with respect to the conviction for which the sentence is imposed without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision. A sentence of unconditional discharge is for all purposes a final judgment of conviction.
The judge is literally giving him no imprisonment, fine or penalty, and the entire crux of the decision is that Trump’s rights to exercise his appeals needs to be ripe. So Trump gets all opportunities to clear his name, while the people whose rights he violated by criminal conduct get nothing except maybe the ability to call him a convicted felon, pending appeal.
This is NOT the finding of unconditional discharge. The judge explicitly says he is allowing an opportunity for Trump and the prosecution’s team to make their arguments before sentencing on 1/10/25. But his putting the above paragraph in is certainly going to severely limit what the prosecution will demand by signaling ahead of time that the judge will likely reject any imprisonment, fine or probation.
Yeah if you read the whole thing from the start to finish, it’s like the most disappointing ruined orgasm ever. 17 pages of telling Trump and his lawyers that they’re a bunch of fuckwits and their arguments are trash. Then “but none of that matters, I ain’t doing shit about it”.
Corporate dictatorship, doing corporate dictatorship things, because it’s a corporate dictatorship.
So pretty much the Mueller report result again?
Seems like it.
a smackdown
Backbreaker!
Suplex!
Off the ropes Epic Smackdown!
Unfortunately it ends with the judge basically saying, despite all that, it’s not practical to throw this chucklefuck in jail.
Classic WWE ending. Nobody ever really loses because it’s all for show.
I’d be 100% on board with the sentencing being The Undertaker throwing Trump off Hell In A Cell, and having him plummet 16 ft through an announcer’s table.
Throw the judges in jail too.
Try him for treason. Upon conviction, no jail time for that either: Straight to the gas chamber.
