Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.world

15 replies

Arotrios
kbin.social

I'm loving this bit of info:

In this case, Trump is also facing a serious Washington, D.C., federal judge with years of experience, Tobias said. The case has been assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan.

According to The Associated Press, Chutkan stood out for her tough punishment for Jan. 6 rioters. In at least seven cases examined by the AP, Chutkan imposed harsher penalties than what federal prosecutors sought for those rioters.

The AP wrote, "Chutkan, a former assistant public defender who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, has consistently taken the hardest line against Jan. 6 defendants of any judge serving on Washington's federal trial court, which is handling the more than 800 cases brought so far in the largest prosecution in Justice Department history.

This is Trump's worst nightmare - on trial for the crime of the century before a judge appointed by his nemesis, who just happens to be a black woman from Jamaicia. I betting you could make a Jackson Pollock painting out of all the ketchup on the walls at Mar A Lago right now.

75
DocMcStuffinreply
lemmy.world

I love Wikipedia. Her article has already been updated.

She is the judge overseeing the criminal trial of former U.S. president Donald J. Trump over the events leading up to the January 6, 2021, United States Capitol attack.

17
moistclumpreply
lemmy.world

I saw someone refer to her appointment on the case as random. How random is the appointment of a judge and who decides or oversees or matches em up?

4
MostlyBirdsreply
lemmy.world

I don't know if it varies by district, but yes, federal cases are randomly assigned a judge from that district.

3
Jordan Lundreply
lemmy.one

The other 800 cases means we might not get a trial as fast as we'd like. :(

0
roguetrickreply
kbin.social

Defense will be the ones dragging their feet, not prosecution or the judge. Lots of witnesses they need to interview that prosecution already did. I wouldn't expect a quick resolution.

5
Bibliotectressreply
lemmy.world

I'm worried he'll be voted president again because people are clearly insane, be found guilty, and then use the "sitting presidents can't be guilty" memo defense he used last time.

4
Arghblarg
lemmy.ca

Page 30

The Deputy White House Counsel reiterated to Co-Conspirator 4 that there had not been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that if the Defendant remained in office nonetheless, there would be "riots in every major city in the United States." Co-Conspirator 4 responded, "Well, [Deputy White House Counsel], that's why there's an Insurrection Act."

.. they were planning to use the Insurrection Act to stomp any resistance to Trump staying in office. Full-on dictatorship-style military coup and mass arrests, or worse. (Not news, but still stunning to see it in writing in an indictment.)

25
TransplantedSconiereply
lemm.ee

Eastman or Clark I think.

Edit: it's Clark. If you read the indictment conspirator #4 is "a justice dept offical"

4

You reached the end

The charges facing Trump in the Jan. 6 investigation, explained | Spyke