Donald Trump Gag Order Upheld

[TNHarley]

It’s definitely not easy explaining things to you.

My point is that people facing criminal charges who are awaiting trial can have their constitutional rights temporarily suspended

Thats what happens when you keep someone in jail before trial, isn’t it?

So they could lose their due process? Right to a jury trial? Cruel and unusual punishment?
Where does the constitution say all that?

 

[Marener]

So they could lose their due process? Right to a jury trial? Cruel and unusual punishment?
Where does the constitution say all that?

They can only lose rights that would conflict with a public interest.

In this case, Trump’s rhetoric is a threat to the fairness of the judicial system. The competing public interest outweighs his first amendment right. Holding someone in detention before the trial is to protect the public safety even though they may not have broken the law.

 

[Road Runner]

So they could lose their due process? Right to a jury trial? Cruel and unusual punishment?
Where does the constitution say all that?

The only thing I remember is that people charged with a crime have the right not to speak, but it doesn't say anything about not having the right to speak if they want to.

 

[Road Runner]

In this case, Trump’s rhetoric is a threat to the fairness of the judicial system.

There it is! You find Trump to be the threat. It isn't the other way around.

 

[TNHarley]

They can only lose rights that would conflict with a public interest.

In this case, Trump’s rhetoric is a threat to the fairness of the judicial system. The competing public interest outweighs his first amendment right. Holding someone in detention before the trial is to protect the public safety even though they may not have broken the law.

Where does the constitution say that? I dont remember reading about that.

 

[Blaster]

A gag order for a presidential candidate should be illegal.

 

[WEATHER53]

They can only lose rights that would conflict with a public interest.

In this case, Trump’s rhetoric is a threat to the fairness of the judicial system. The competing public interest outweighs his first amendment right. Holding someone in detention before the trial is to protect the public safety even though they may not have broken the law.

There is no such exclusion for speech that most of the public may not want to hear.

 

[TNHarley]

The only thing I remember is that people charged with a crime have the right not to speak, but it doesn't say anything about not having the right to speak if they want to.

Thats because the govt just made that shit up. And bootlickers like marener defend it SMH

 

[Captain Caveman]

Let me know when being mentally deficient is illegal.

Salary fraud, taking payment for pretending to be a President.

 

[WEATHER53]

Where does the constitution say that? I dont remember reading about that.

Yeah he’s making the safe space argument. If libs don’t want to hear it then it’s prohibited to be uttered. Constitutionally so they feel and wish

 

[Marener]

Where does the constitution say that? I dont remember reading about that.

Where in the constitution does it say you can keep someone in jail before trial?

The constitution doesn’t say a lot of things but I doubt anyone would want a serial killer running around before trial.

 

[TNHarley]

Where in the constitution does it say you can keep someone in jail before trial?

The constitution doesn’t say a lot of things but I doubt anyone would want a serial killer running around before trial.

It mentions bail.
Try harder.

 

[Marener]

There is no such exclusion for speech that most of the public may not want to hear.

Where does the first amendment say you can’t express displeasure about a judge in front of their house?

 

[Marener]

It mentions bail.
Try harder.

Some offenders aren’t offered bail.

 

[Marener]

A gag order for a presidential candidate should be illegal.

I thought you guys were opposed to two systems of justice?

 

[eagle1462010]

Some offenders aren’t offered bail.

Tell me how after the votes are in challenging them equates to murder cases?? Huh

Need a Back Hoe to shovel that bs

 

[Road Runner]

A gag order for a presidential candidate should be illegal.

Or against anybody for that matter. Oh wait, it already is.

Where in the constitution does it say you can keep someone in jail before trial?

The constitution doesn’t say a lot of things but I doubt anyone would want a serial killer running around before trial.

Where does the first amendment say you can’t express displeasure about a judge in front of their house?

Why do you keep changing the subject?

 

[Marener]

Tell me how after the votes are in challenging them equates to murder cases?? Huh

Need a Back Hoe to shovel that bs

You guys really aren’t that smart.

It doesn’t take a genius to know that judges being threatened is bad for justice.

 

[TNHarley]

Some offenders aren’t offered bail.

The constitution mentions you cant have excessive bail. Not that you have a right to bail.
But the constitutionality of denying it is worthy of a discussion.
Try harder.

 

[TNHarley]

You guys really aren’t that smart.

It doesn’t take a genius to know that judges being threatened is bad for justice.

Yeah, denying an innocent persons right to speak freely is worth it because some judge is a fcukin pussy.