this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
801 points (98.5% liked)

politics

18966 readers
6 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It wouldn't be fair to have your felony conviction negatively impact your opportunities. This is how justice works right?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I wonder if he’s delaying the sentence because he’s planning to lock him up for a few months.

This judge has had a strong bias to not look like he’s impacting the general election, and putting Trump in Rikers for a few months would have a much bigger impact than a fine.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if he’s delaying the sentence because he’s planning to lock him up for a few months.

My cynical brain tells me otherwise... after the election Trump would win which means he will not be sentenced at all or lose meaning nobody would care when the judge sentences him to the smaller wing of Maralardo for a week of house arrest

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Hush money cases with non-violent first time offenders usually doesn’t result in prison time. So, if he got fines, house arrest and or probation, that wouldn’t be abnormal. Handling him with kid gloves would also be inline with how this judge has operated.

BUT, he also threatened the court and jury, and was constantly held in contempt. A lot of trial lawyers assume that, if he does get a few months in prison, his attempt to threaten and bully the court could be the reason for stiffer penalties.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

This judge has had a strong bias to not look like he’s impacting the general election

All this time I thought they were there to uphold the law no matter who was on the other end of it, but I know, joke's on me!