• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      539 months ago

      Fuck I would love to see actual consequences.

      Bit worried that the gag order doesn’t directly preclude this though. Like yeah it’s clearly not in the spirit of, but is it a contravention?

      • Nougat
        link
        fedilink
        389 months ago

        The existing gag order from Justice Engoron most certainly does not cover this. AG James is not “court staff.” There would be a very justifiable call for a mistrial if the court and the plaintiff are on the same “staff.”

        Trump would probably need to be arrested for the crime of doxxing. This can be charged in New York State, or - because AG James is both a State employee and an officer of the law - also at the federal level.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          309 months ago

          Widening the gag order sounds much more appropriate.

          Although if idiots were to show up at the home of AG James you might reconsider charging Trump with whatever crime seemed appropriate.

          • Nougat
            link
            fedilink
            27
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Widening the gag order sounds much more appropriate.

            It really doesn’t, though, because the end result is that Donald Trump, 45th fucking President of the United States, gets away with creating a substantial threat to the safety of a government employee involved in litigating against him in one of many court cases. Again.

            But they’ll say “Oh, everybody knew that already, see it was someone else’s article!” and “AG James is not court staff!” and “First Amendment!” and “Get some flypaper!” And he will get away with it, again. He’ll get away with it next time, too.

            The only way to keep him from stochastic terrorism is for one of the criminal courts to revoke his bond and put him in detention pending trial.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              49 months ago

              I mean your right. I’d love to see him in jail.

              It’s just that people with far more political and legal credibility than me are going to extraordinary lengths to ensure that the opportunities to cry foul as are minimal as possible.

              You’re absolutely correct that this behavior reprehensible and all the rest but that specifically isn’t a crime.

          • Overzeetop
            link
            fedilink
            English
            79 months ago

            The n the contrary, if doxxing is a crime and he meets the letter of the law he should be charged with that instead. And held without bond. Let him sit in jail without a phone until his lawyers successfully appeal the bond ruling.

            • originalucifer
              link
              fedilink
              109 months ago

              this is not the experience of rich people in our court system. they do not sit in cells while their many lawyers do their thing.

              if any regular people had done half of the felonious things that turd has, we’d be sitting in a cell.