If Donald Trump cared about his impact on the people he attacks, he would have stopped after seeing the 275 pages of single-spaced threats just one staffer in the New York court received. Speaking to MSNBC about the matter on Sunday, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, who co-hosts the "Sisters …

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately the legal system from the Attorney General to the fbi to judge are scared of him.

      This is a person who a judge found to have committed insurrection but decided he should not face the loss of eligibility clearly specified in the constitution because “the president is not an officer of the United States”.

      If they’re willing to just make shit up like that, he’s already won.

      • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve read that was actually a good strategy. She ruled that he absolutely did so an insurrection. Then she said the law doesn’t apply because a weird easily reversible interpretation. So it’s going to get appealed and easily reversed in a higher court based on a review of the law’s inclusion of POTUS as an officer, not relitigating the insurrection part. She gets to skip the death threat phase for herself and alli oops this one for the higher court to slam dunk. I hope that’s the case.

        • Raine_Wolf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the fear is that the higher courts also don’t want death threats, so everyone and their mother is gonna keep trying to pass this around. Which is what Trump wants to happen until he can try to get re-elected in 2024 and then pardon himself.

        • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It lists a shitload of non-military officers as being made ineligible by the same clause. I don’t see how that’s relevant.