A New York judge has moved the sentencing in Donald Trump‘s hush money trial to after the election, on November 26. “The public’s confidence in the integrity of our judicial system demands a sentencing hearing that is entirely focused on the verdict of the jury and the weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors free from […]

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean, most of them probably became judges specifically to gain the power to choose who needs to follow what laws - as well as the profitable position that puts them in for rich criminals who don’t want to go to jail.

    • Tom_Hanx_the_Actor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      According to an NBC report I saw on this, Trumps legal team requested a delay and the DA didn’t reply to the request. That kind of tied the judges hands and this (non)action is the norm for this situation. A break from the norm would help trump on appeal.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    If this pisses you off, good. Because this is the legal system we have, and it’s always been this corrupt. It’s always been this unjust, this skewed, and it will continue to be until we demand a change.

  • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    2 months ago

    Watch we’ll see a headline in some future morning “Donald J Trump Dead at --” and that afternoon we’ll see "supreme court drops all extant charges on former president saying ““its time to focus on grieving””

    Fucking pitiful

    • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s actually a really interesting question. I think putting dead people on trial (for new crimes, not postmortem exonerations) is fucked up, because they can’t testify in their own favor, but it’s also such an important case for the country to learn about, to assess the breadth of collusion and depth of corruption involved in trying to overthrow the government.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This reasoning doesn’t make sense unless Trump loses. How can sentencing the POTUS be any less fraught than sentencing a candidate? The judge is a coward with at least two rulings in his back pocket depending on the outcome of the election.

  • Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    “The public’s confidence in the integrity of our judicial system demands a sentencing hearing that is entirely focused on the verdict of the jury and the weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors free from distraction and distortion”

    The public’s confidence in the integrity of our judicial system demands to see justice served you kowtowing stooge! Grow a pair and do your fucking job!

  • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    The members of this jury served diligently on this case, and their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election. Likewise, if one is necessary, the Defendant has the right to a sentencing hearing that respects and protects his constitutional rights.

    Haven’t we known the date of the election for roughly 225 years?

  • 2piradians@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    After he loses the election and gets sentenced, I hope to never again hear from this scourge.

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Okay. So. He lost in 2020, and hopefully he’ll lose again in 2024. After that, can he FINALLY HAVE SOME FUCKING CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL THE CRIMING HE DOES GODDAMN IT AAARGGGH@$#&#@!!!

      • casmael@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The year is 4199. The English language has evolved past recognition of the 21st century mind, and the country of ‘America’ is part of a strange past known only through strange ‘metallic manuscripts’, and physical archaeology. Every year at the start of winter, the tradition of the ‘turnip festival’ takes place. Children paint a grumpy face onto a turnip (or its future equivalent) and set it outside. It is traditional for the children to write a list of ‘crimes’, of which the turnip is accused, and pin it nearby. Usually the list consists of naughty things the children themselves have done in the year past. After midnight, older children dressed in traditional red and black, with amusing wigs, march around neighbourhoods to ‘postpone punishment to the new year’ by tearing down the lists of children’s crimes, and leaving candy in their place. Afterwards the adults get very drunk. Nobody remembers the origin of this tradition, but historians theorise it could be related to an unpopular leader thousands of years ago known as ‘the turnip king’ who famously evaded justice through his corrupt legal system and connections to powerful oligarchs of the time.

  • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is both cowardly and very clever. It’s very strategic.

    If trump wins, the sentencing hasn’t hurt his campaign and the case goes away. The Judge’s house doesn’t get doxxed to unstable people.
    If Trump loses, his supporters cannot claim interference. But Trump can be sentenced and imprisoned before the next change of power.

    Ugh. Fucking gross.

    • finestnothing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’ll still claim interference because he has ongoing court cases, maga cult followers may not be good or smart people, but they are skilled at mental gymnastics around why them losing was unfair or justifying Trump’s actions

      • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean. Yeah. There’s only so much planning you can do to contain stupid.

        A number of years ago a colleague wanted to download a song for a presentation. The site was blocked by our firewall, so they downloaded it to their phone, and transferred it from their phone to their work computer, then asked for my help to figure out why song.mp3.exe kept flashing a black screen and not playing any music.

      • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I hope that’s not the case, but he’s rapidly declining, anyway.
        I don’t really care if he’s ever imprisoned, so long as he loses and the cult that follow him and the sociopaths that fund/back him are left without their messiah/useful idiot in a position of power.

  • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Stocks in “Trump will get away with everything forever” continues to soar! What’s next, winning the presidency after calling Kamala the n-word with hard R in the debate? Stay tuned!

  • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    A major part of why Trump never seems to face consequences is because of judges (really the entire justice system) playing it safe. They tip the scales in Trump’s favor so that their decisions can’t be easily portrayed as being biased against Trump.

    In this instance, the judge could do the legally expected thing and just follow a normal timetable without worrying about the election. But sentencing Trump in the lead up to the election is very likely to be portrayed as an attempt to influence the election, and that would maximize the amount of scrutiny the decision gets both in and out of court. Trump will appeal as he always does, and there will be angry nutjobs sending in death threats at the very least, with a very real possibility of actual violence of some kind.

    On the other hand, delaying until after the election means that the decision can’t be seen as influencing the election. Instead, the outcome will either be known by everyone involved, or it will be in an extended dispute that will likely drown out any attention the sentence would receive. If Trump wins there’s probably no point in worrying about the sentence anyway since he will be above the law. And if he loses, there will probably be a lot fewer people looking to pressure the court, and the judge might even be able to give a real sentence without retaliation

    I’m not saying this was the right decision, but I think it’s easy to see why the decision was made.