Gag Order Lifted

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,564
6,072
64
✟337,533.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Yep. And slander or libel have never been protected by the constitution, either.

Seems a valid comparison to me.
Slander and libel is protected to a point by the first amendment. There is established law guiding how slander and libel work in conjunction with the first amendment.
For that specific instance, I'd agree with you. But Trump's case is different. Judge Engoron is trying to ensure Trump gets a fair trial, and his using social media to personally attack members of the court staff could impede that, so he imposed a gag order. This isn't a blanket restriction on criticizing government officials, but a specific one, and only on those specifically and directly involved with the trial in which he is the defendant.

Trump getting a fair trial is the goal here. And, let's face it, a fair trial is the last thing Trump wants.
Well that's the judges excuse anyway. His gag order has been overturned. Which means at least another judge disagrees with him. We'll see how it all turns out in the end.
I think Trump want a fair trial, but he also wants to speak his mind when he doesn't feel like he's getting one. Let's face it, Trump wants to be able to speak his mind on everything. And he will use his wild bombastic approach that so many can't stand.
do. And the gag order doesn't prevent Trump from criticizing the president or any other government officials. Just the specific court personnel involved in the trial for which he is the defendant.
So he can't criticize THIS public official. Well gee then we can can certainly extrapolate that it would be okay to punish anyone for criticizing the president. AND our answer would be, the order doesn't prevent you from criticizing any other governmental officials just THIS one involving his decisions on THIS particular issue. Yeah I'm not seeing your logic here.
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,576
2,435
Massachusetts
✟98,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I can sum it it up like this. Just like any right they are not absolute. I think you know this.
Sure.

Slander and libel is covered in the first amendment to a certain point. The courts have consistently ruled that under narrow circumstances it is not covered. In others it is. However the courts have been clear that criticizing public officials and public proceeding are not covered the same way. You are much more free to criticize them and shouldn't suffer penalties for doing so due to their public service.
Sure. Public figures are generally exempt from libel or slander protections, to a point anyway. The gag order, however, did not apply generally to any public figures or public proceedings, only to specific court personnel directly involved in the trial for which Trump was a defendant. So I doubt a first amendment argument would cause a full reversal. Perhaps an adjustment, maybe allowing criticism of the judge himself, but not his clerks. But that's for the appeals court to decide.

Thus punishing someone for criticizing you is limiting their free speech, because it's no longer free. Free means free from repercussion from government punishment. But you know this because you admitted you would feel it would be a violation of your right if Trump punished people for criticizing him for how he delt with CoVID.
Trump lacks the authority to impose that kind of restriction, and he never had it as president either. A judge, however, does have that authority, within the scope of the trial he's overseeing.

This gag order was against Trump for being critical of a government officials and proceedings. Which in my mind is a violation of his Constitutional right. But we'll see.
No, it was against Trump for personally attacking court personnel. But, again, since it has been stayed pending appeal, we'll see what happens when the appeals court rules.

-- A2SG, the goal here, for the judge, was a fair trial. That is NOT what Trump wants, however....
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,576
2,435
Massachusetts
✟98,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Slander and libel is protected to a point by the first amendment. There is established law guiding how slander and libel work in conjunction with the first amendment.
Yup. But, per your argument, they do impose penalties on the use of free speech, just as the gag order does. So the comparison is valid. Neither are unconstitutional.

Well that's the judges excuse anyway. His gag order has been overturned.
Not overturned. Stayed, pending appeal.

Which means at least another judge disagrees with him. We'll see how it all turns out in the end.
We don't know how any of the other judges will rule yet.

I think Trump want a fair trial,
I highly doubt that. He's already been found guilty in this trial, let's not forget.

but he also wants to speak his mind when he doesn't feel like he's getting one.
He can still speak his mind. He just may have to pay if he personally attacks court personnel. But he's a rich guy, surely he can afford it, right?

Let's face it, Trump wants to be able to speak his mind on everything. And he will use his wild bombastic approach that so many can't stand.
Sure. He'll do anything he can to disrupt the proceedings and get a mistrial declared. Then he'll continue to delay, delay, delay.

SOP for him, really.

So he can't criticize THIS public official.
He can now. The appeal is still pending, so we'll have to see how it turns out.

Well gee then we can can certainly extrapolate that it would be okay to punish anyone for criticizing the president. AND our answer would be, the order doesn't prevent you from criticizing any other governmental officials just THIS one involving his decisions on THIS particular issue. Yeah I'm not seeing your logic here.
The difference is the scope. General criticism of government officials or proceedings is protected. But, the gag order specifically applies to specific individuals in a very specific court proceeding, one in which Trump is a defendant, let's not forget. Judge Engoron's goal is a fair trial, and he felt Trump personally attacking his court personnel would impede that, so he imposed the gag order. Trump's appeal stayed the order, but it was not overturned. At least, not yet.

My logic isn't at issue here, frankly. I'm just stating the facts as I see them. Personally, I feel Trump should be free to put his foot in his mouth as often and as loudly as he likes. That aids the prosecution's case immensely.

-- A2SG, he really is the prosecutor's best friend here.....
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,576
2,435
Massachusetts
✟98,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out.

Is it? It's supposed to be, but I'm not convinced.
Seems to me the court has bent over backwards to accommodate Trump. I'd even to so far as to say Trump has been treated a heck of a lot more deferentially than any other defendant would have, had they acted as Trump has acted.

Yeah, Trump got a gag order. Anyone else would probably have been held in contempt and jailed by now.

-- A2SG, and if you think a gag order impedes his rights, well.....
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
33,295
36,611
Los Angeles Area
✟830,378.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
1700758458093.png
 
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
38,086
17,558
Finger Lakes
✟212,659.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I guess we'll see. Facing a penalty for using your legal right is without any doubt a restriction on that right. You said it yourself. If a court out a gag order on someone preventing them from criticizing Trump for a specific issue you without a doubt consider it a violation of free speech. And you'd be correct.
It depends - if you are a co-defendant of his or a witness against him, then for the duration of the trial he is gagged (maybe, pending appeal).
 
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
38,086
17,558
Finger Lakes
✟212,659.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
He is a character that's for sure.
We know that the law clerk has received death threats after Trump posted scurrilous lies about her. Law clerks in NY are civil servants - which is different from public officials who are either elected or appointed. They are working a job. Sure, you can pretend that there is no correlation between Trump naming people as villains and certain of his most vociferous stans subsequently targeting them, but it is just pretense: "Oh, who will rid me of this troublesome priest?"

The concept of a fair trial not only applies to the defendants in a case, but also to the People who also need the trial to be fair.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,657
10,467
Earth
✟143,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Looks like it wasn't unconstitutional after all.

-- A2SG, well, so far....we'll see if this goes further up the chain.....
The NY Supreme Court?
Or will President Trump kick it over to the Federal Courts where he has at least some pull?
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,576
2,435
Massachusetts
✟98,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The NY Supreme Court?
Or will President Trump kick it over to the Federal Courts where he has at least some pull?
Isn't that his usual MO?

-- A2SG, anything to delay, delay, delay.....
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Site Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,614
3,614
Twin Cities
✟734,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Because, of course, human rights and all that stuff...


Former President Trump attacked a clerk of the judge overseeing his New York civil fraud trial after a gag order was temporarily lifted Thursday.
Judge Arthur Engoron has just been overturned (stayed!) by the New York State Appellate Division (Appeals Court), for the 4th TIME (on the same case!),” Trump posted Thursday evening on Truth Social.
I'd say it's weird that the judge in this case keeps getting his rulings overturned...but it's not really that weird if this is a purely political witch hunt.
I can't imagine why any US citizen would be deprived of the right to defend themselves publicly against civil or criminal accusations. You have a right to remain silent, and a right to free speech, but the government needs something along the lines of a "threat to national security" to justify silencing someone.
Hopefully the other gag orders are similarly dropped. If Trump is found guilty....it should be because he's guilty....not because he wasn't allowed to defend himself.
For someone who claims they are not a Right Winger, you pretty much think that Donald Trump can do no wrong. I don't know if it's because of his white power stance or your own white victimhood stance but you would be more credible if you weren't trying to kiss his lips and promote his agenda no matter what it is. Do you honestly think that Trump is not a criminal with his dealings with Russian banks and his attempt to overthrow a legitimately elected government? Don't you remember that not one of his cases about voting wasn't thrown out of court? Look at who you seem to love, a zero-tax paying billionaire inappropriate contentstar sexing cheater who dog whistles racist platitudes. You have no credibility when it comes to seeking an honest non-criminal for your president. Just stop pushing this agenda, it has no legs to stand on. Then you claim to not be a right-winger when every single thing you post is in support of the right wing? Absolutely ridiculous. It's time to ask yourself "what do I actually believe?" That a nontax-paying purchaser of sex and bragging about it is somehow moral? Get a grip dude. Mot even to mention him grandstanding about nuking who he doesn't like. What do actually stand for?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,583
11,398
✟437,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
For someone who claims they are not a Right Winger, you pretty much think that Donald Trump can do no wrong.

I don't see how you got that from the OP.


I don't know if it's because of his white power stance or your own white victimhood stance

I'm not exactly sure what this refers to...

His white power stance?


but you would be more credible if you weren't trying to kiss his lips and promote his agenda no matter what it is.

The post you wrote this in reply to has nothing to do with "his agenda" and everything to do with "a fair trial".



Do you honestly think that Trump is not a criminal with his dealings with Russian banks

What exactly are you referring to here?



and his attempt to overthrow a legitimately elected government?

I would agree he plotted to stall the election until fraud was found...

I don't know if he didn't think fraud happened and he could, as you put it..."overthrow a legitimately elected government".


Don't you remember that not one of his cases about voting wasn't thrown out of court?

I do recall that.


Look at who you seem to love, a zero-tax paying billionaire inappropriate contentstar sexing cheater who dog whistles racist platitudes.

I don't know what you're saying here? Inappropriate contentstar? Zero tax paying? Dog whistles?

It's odd how everyone on the left talks about dog whistles as if they don't have a ton of them they blow all the time.


You have no credibility when it comes to seeking an honest non-criminal for your president.

I don't recall saying Trump was honest or a non-criminal. I wouldn't call any politician honest....and all presidents are criminals.

Let's be honest though...you don't really care about honesty or criminality.


Just stop pushing this agenda, it has no legs to stand on.

The "fair trial agenda"?


Then you claim to not be a right-winger when every single thing you post is in support of the right wing?

I doubt you read everything I post.


Absolutely ridiculous. It's time to ask yourself "what do I actually believe?"

I know what I believe. It's not something chosen like a fashionable set of clothes I throw on to impress my peers or receive praise.



That a nontax-paying purchaser of sex and bragging about it is somehow moral? Get a grip dude.

Again, I don't recall claiming Trump is "moral". I can see I didn't say that in the post you replied to.

Also...are we talking about Trump here, or the Biden family?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Site Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,614
3,614
Twin Cities
✟734,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
His white power stance?
Yeah, bragging about his German heritage luke he is an official Aryian ready to stand up for white power
The post you wrote this in reply to has nothing to do with "his agenda" and everything to do with "a fair trial".
I might be the case that you don't understand anything based on reality but Republican propaganda.
I doubt you read everything I post.

I know what I believe. It's not something chosen like a fashionable set of clothes I throw on to impress my peers or receive praise.
No, it's somethigs much more distrous like being blind to the propaganda that your party of choice pushes.
Again, I don't recall claiming Trump is "moral". I can see I didn't say that in the post you replied to.

Also...are we talking about Trump here, or the Biden family
I don't see how you got that from the OP.
I think I got it from you.



I'm not exactly sure what this refers to...

His white power stance?
yes



The post you wrote this in reply to has nothing to do with "his agenda" and everything to do with "a fair trial".
What's wrong with a fair trial.....Oh I remember your Republican stance is that only billionaires can have a fair trial.


I would agree he plotted to stall the election until fraud was found...

I don't know if he didn't think fraud happened and he could, as you put it..."overthrow a legitimately elected government".
So why do you support him?


I don't know what you're saying here? Inappropriate contentstar? Zero tax paying? Dog whistles?

It's odd how everyone on the left talks about dog whistles as if they don't have a ton of them they blow all the time.
At least they don't blow them for racist followers



I don't recall saying Trump was honest or a non-criminal. I wouldn't call any politician honest....and all presidents are criminals.

Let's be honest though...you don't really care about honesty or criminality.

I think that's you who claims to not be a right winger but defend everything they do


The "fair trial agenda"?
There is no such thing as "fair" when you are dealing with a billionaire who pays 0 taxes.



I doubt you read everything I post.
No, not everything but your responses to me have been heavily right-wing and I'm wondering what turns you on about elitist who are 1% of the population but control 90% of the money in this country and many others



I know what I believe. It's not something chosen like a fashionable set of clothes I throw on to impress my peers or receive praise.
No it's something chosen by an elitist Fed agenda

Again, I don't recall claiming Trump is "moral". I can see I didn't say that in the post you replied to.

Also...are we talking about Trump here, or the Biden family?
That's some other right-wing agenda to put Joe Biden on trial for the crimes of his son. Is that how the justice system should work or should we be tried for our own crimes? I guess not in a Federalist Republican agenda scheme. Are you a part of that or do you believe in the laws that are actually on the books? Would you want to be put on trial for your son's crimes or make him deal with it? Not only that, they still haven't really proven anything yet. Should we just throw people in jail or impeach them when a crime hasn't been proven? Typical Republicans to shirk due process.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,583
11,398
✟437,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, bragging about his German heritage luke he is an official Aryian ready to stand up for white power

I don't recall this...can you provide an example?

I might be the case that you don't understand anything based on reality but Republican propaganda.

It might be...it might be that you're deeply biased and struggle with confirmation bias.

No, it's somethigs much more distrous like being blind to the propaganda that your party of choice pushes.

That Republicans aren't my party of choice.


That's some other right-wing agenda to put Joe Biden on trial for the crimes of his son.

His son is a criminal...and a bagman for his father.



Is that how the justice system should work or should we be tried for our own crimes?

I would say tried for our own crimes.



Are you a part of that or do you believe in the laws that are actually on the books? Would you want to be put on trial for your son's crimes or make him deal with it?

Ironically....you want reparations. You want me to pay you for what other white people did to other black people.

I think Joe should be investigated....and it's clear he isn't.


Not only that, they still haven't really proven anything yet. Should we just throw people in jail or impeach them when a crime hasn't been proven? Typical Republicans to shirk due process.

MeToo shirked due process....ruined men's lives without a trial. BLM shirked due process...found innocent cops guilty in the public eye.

Don't lecture me.

If you want to know why I left the left....it's real simple. Race essentialism.

It's oddly difficult to find a basic definition of race essentialism online but here's a rather good if not overly complex one.


When Joe Biden solidified the left as firmly race essentialist....and therefore racist...when he stated if you don't vote for him, you aren't black. The entire left had been slowly moving that direction about 10 years earlier with ideas they adopted like "white privilege" that were undeniably race essentialism...but Biden stated it more clearly than any professor could....

The left is for racists...and thats where they can now mostly be found.

Now, I don't see that as the worst thing in the world....it's still enough for me to not defend them. Are there racists on the right? Of course. Is it part and parcel to their political doctrine? No...but we can definitely say it is on the left. We've seen the racism they want to inject into schools....the workplace....and government. That's vile in my eyes.

Why would I support it?

Edit- I just realized how confusing reading that link may be for those...with poor reading skills. I'll just copy-paste the definition.

Racial essentialism is the self-aggrandizing but
delusory belief that the obsolete, pseudoscientific categories that organize the stratification and
segregation of the American caste system -
“race,” “black,” “white,” “mixed race,” and the
like – denote empirically meaningful states of
affairs, whether genetic, biological, social, or
visual; and that in particular, the categories by which some attempt to racialize themselves and

others denote actual facts that veridically locate each in relation to the others – i.e. put everyone in
their place. Racial essentialists attempt to
racialize themselves through self-referential
announcements of their “racial” identity in terms of those outmoded categories. They thereby
attempt to racialize their audiences as well, by implication, as either conforming to or diverging

from that “racial” identity. These attempts fail systematically and by definition, because those
categories do not refer to any actual genetic, biological, social, or visual facts at all.
But then racial essentialism does not require
any evidential foundation for its ascriptions.
Rather, it reifies those crude racial stereotypes into an unconvincing simulacrum of social reality
in an obsessive-compulsive ritual of wishful thinking. That is the ritual racial essentialists invite
their audiences to reenact.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Site Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,717
14,599
Here
✟1,207,289.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
But he was. The gag order didn't prevent him from commenting on the case...only attacking court personnel.
On that we would agree... A gag order within the limited scope of protecting key person(s) identities is reasonable considering his (and his inner circle's) history of basically doxxing people.
But, that aside, how does public commentary aid his defense? The case isn't being tried in the media....though Trump sure seems like he'd prefer it were.
On that, I would disagree a bit.

One of the benefits of a speedy trial is so a case can be tried in actual court instead of first being tried in the court of public opinion (with the actual court hearings happening weeks to months later)

Living in the information age, that's becoming increasingly difficult. How do you find judges, jurors, expert witnesses, etc... that haven't already had their opinions shaped in one direction or the other? This is a concern I brought up in the lead-up to the Rittenhouse trial.

Given that the court of public opinion is an unfortunate reality that's not going away anytime soon (or ever?), it seems unfair to allow everyone else to provide public commentary on the case, but not the person who's actually on the hot seat.

...and I'm not trying to be a Trump defender here. I think life would be better if he faded away into obscurity. But my sense of "good for the goose is good for the gander" mentality holds fast even if I don't particularly like the person on the hot seat.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,583
11,398
✟437,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We know that the law clerk has received death threats after Trump posted scurrilous lies about her.

Do we?

I haven't seen any...



Law clerks in NY are civil servants - which is different from public officials who are either elected or appointed. They are working a job.

Police are civil servants....openly, and even viciously criticizing everything about their job performance is considered free speech.

You should know this...I'm certain of it.
 
Upvote 0