The judge assigned to Trump's Jan. 6 case is a tough punisher of Capitol rioters

- “But to compare the actions of people protesting, mostly peacefully, for civil rights, to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores a very real danger that the Jan. 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”
  Yeah, Trump’s in trouble.
  
  Every time I hear a judge name a logical fallacy I cheer inside
- Here’s the quote with more context:
  “Plaintiff does not acknowledge the deference owed to the incumbent President’s judgment. His position that he may override the express will of the executive branch appears to be premised on the notion that his executive power ‘exists in perpetuity,'” U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan wrote in the ruling. “But Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President. He retains the right to assert that his records are privileged, but the incumbent President ‘is not constitutionally obliged to honor’ that assertion.”
- That's a great way to get a mistrial for judicial bias... I know you love the sound bite... But God damn that sounds stupid for any judge to say. It's almost like she is trying to be as impartial as possible.
  
  You do realize that he's basically on trial for trying to make himself a king, right? Her saying that wasn't hyperbole, it was a core issue.
  
  It’s almost like she is trying to be as impartial as possible.
  Why would being impartial lead to a mistrial?
  
  What's a greater chance of judicial bias? This judge or the judge that Trump himself appointed? Because that's who he's in front of in Florida.
  
  What is biased about stating Trump is not president and that he doesn't have presidential powers for life?
  
  She's declaring she feels no need to me EXTRA lenient for a president. She's cleaning up bias concerns in the other direction

I hope she goes to town on the orange turd.
- Ugh poorly phrased lol
  
  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
  
  mmm, nummy.
  
  And without lube. I stand by what I said.

So, if Donnie is convicted of instigating the Jan-6 insurrection, could they they hit him with Felony Murder charges? People died as a direct result of the insurrection and D.C. has a Felony Murder rule.
- He could face murder-like charges if he's held responsible for the "hang mike spence" thing, or the "tie-wraps attempt to kidbap thing, or the "death of Ashli while participating in his insurrection" thing. All of those happenned on January 6th for which he is responsible, and could be part of the conspiracy against rights charge.
  If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person [...] in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;...
  They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
- I think the chain of causation would be a step too far removed. He isn't indicted for instigating the riots, but for the conspiracy around rigging the electoral count. The riots are implicated as one tool to pressure Pence. Sicknick's death would also be another step removed in that it is not as clear that it was a direct result of the riots (or at least it could be argued). Babbitt maybe but I don't know how DC handles death of confederates which is another wrinkle in the felony murder rule.
  Source: got a B in criminal law
- I would expect "conspiracy to commit" at the most.
- Hit him with everything. Make sure he never sees daylight ever again.
  
  Unfortunately, it wouldn't be a great legal strategy. You could end up losing in the court of public opinion, and giving the cheetoh more ammunition to play the victim. A watertight, calibrated and swift prosecution that gets him the maximum amount of time in prison with the least likelihood of getting his case overturned is probably the best strategy (disclaimer: IANAL)
- Absolutely not, nor should they. People who commit homicide are charged with homicide. People who instigate riots and conspiracy are charged with instigating riots and conspiracy.
  
  Not saying this is the case with trump, but many states have homicide by association (phrasing wrong) laws.
  Be the getaway driver for a robbery, and a guy inside shoots someone? Homicide for you too.
  
  if you set out to rob a bank and you kill someone in the process you get charged with murder.
  Trump set out to overthrow the government and people got killed. That's the same thing to me.

I'm glad she is tough on the Jan 6 rioters. However, I want her to be impartial. If not then this will turn into a campaign tool for Trump. I already know he will use it as a tool anyways. But it will give those Republicans that are on the fence something to falsely claim as a righteous cause to vote for him.
- Judges should be tough on treason. A bold statement, I know.
  
  That's not bold or extreme. I want judges to treat him like anyone else that is up for treason.
- We can't spend our lives afraid of what crazy people will say when we do the right thing.
  
  I'm saying more of the crazies that will hurt others thinking they are doing "god's work."
- I agree with being impartial of course. In terms of making him into a martyr of sorts, imo that ship has sailed. They're so delusional that they'll turn any possible outcome into a narrative where they were victims of some grand conspiracy. It's baffling what he can get away with while still receiving fanatic support.
  
  That's brainwashing for you.
  
  Pretty much any result or treatment where Trump isn't getting metaphorical and/or physical felatio is going to be called out as being biased against him. These people are in a cult, nothing we say or do is going to get them out of it until they have their Waco siege moment, which probably won't be great for the country.
  
  Yeah it would be scarier if he got through this unscathed.
- What Republicans are still on the fence about this and wtf is wrong with them? Is this really a primary concern here?
  
  The less radical right. I know that sounds strange but there are some that actually believe in the religions things they say. Due to that they vote Republican. Not the ones that believe in Q or just straight up racist. Not every person on the right is a total POS but the people they vote for are.
- If not then this will turn into a campaign tool for Trump.
  We are well beyond that point right now. He has literally told his cult followers that he is being indicted for them.
  
  His cult is a smaller part of people that say they are right leaning. The rest that are like Mitt Romney will side with him if the court turns into a mockery on both sides.
- This is a very good stance to take on paper. But do you really think there will be any significant difference in Trump's campaigning regardless of outcome? The end result is completely meaningless in the grand scheme of the 2024 election, Trump supporters have already shown a dozen times over that there is literally nothing that could change their stance.
  I just want to see him get the same treatment I would in his place.. He won't.. But I at least want him to sweat
  
  I'm talking about those that will stay home bc they believe he did something wrong. I don't want the opposite of the Miami federal judge. I want judges to be impartial and fair across the board.

This fills me with warm fuzzies.
Hopefully it’s not just wishful hope.
It’s probably wishful hope
- I don't think there are too many black women out there that would be willing to be lenient on Donald Trump. Even his former friend Omarosa hates him.
  
  Eh. I’m more concerned about what ever jury gets empaneled being split on partisan lines and him walking off because republicans voted not guilty just because.
  They’re not exactly the most persuadable group (to be fair neither are ardent dems,)
- Narrator : It was wishful hope .

Very legal and very cool

How are judges assigned in the US? Is it a random selection? Like, do they pull names out of a hat? (I'm pretty sure this was the legally prescribed way in some place)
- IIRC it's rotational, and it changes after x amount of cases, or x amount of time, but the order is random.

- I think if the DC Appeals court rejects it, that's it. Otherwise every case would hit the supreme court.

I hope that this non-white female judge hands down clear and lasting damage to this sexist, racist narcissist.
- I hope an impartial judge runs a clean trail, and hands down firm justice on criminals acting on a national scale.

Good

This may be an unpopular opinion but until he actually sees the inside of a jail cell, I find news like this to be very meh.

I mean, sure, the Jan 6 rioters have been getting some jail time after all this time.
But also, the guy who tweeted in response to Jan 6 that people should take up arms and DEFEND the country against insurrection was tried convicted and sentenced to 3 years by (October) of 2021. (Daniel Baker, for reference. The Floridian veteran.)
*edit October, not May. But still: arrested in January and was in solitary for months prior to being sentenced for 44 months.

- Those aren't Trump's Justices, they're owned by the people behind the Federalist Society. They're not there to protect Trump, they're there to force Christian theocracy on all of us and make sure the oligarchs can control the country without any accountability. And Trump ain't part of their in group.

I like how they called them the "2020 racial injustice protests". No. They were the "2020 left wing demographic victory marches."