301
‘I don’t recall’: Ivanka Trump testifies in father’s New York fraud trial
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
301 points (97.2% liked)
politics
18134 readers
3501 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
In civil trials out didn't work like that. If they can at all prove you knew or should have known the answer you can catch contempt.
Yeah and if you act like a baboon then you also get contempt yet here we are - Trump has not been found in contempt. Anyone else in the entire world would be locked up for attitude alone
They don't have to charge contempt at the time it can be added concurrent to sentences. Doing it now could spark a riot so they'll wait.
Oh Bullshit if any other person acted that way they would be in jail.
The legal system is not tied to 'what will unrelated crazy people do' because you know what - they're gonna fuckin do whatever they want anyways.
If we succumbed to that then we should've stopped the count when they oh so politely asked. Allowed Congress to refuse to certify. Allowed them to hang Mike Pence because shit - they're gonna riot some more.
Likely yes.
Unfortunately when it effects due process it does, he deserves a fair trial just like why other asshole.
In criminal cases, the charges must be proven true beyond any reasonable doubt; probably == innocent. In civil cases, the bar is only more likely than not; probably == guilty.
Yes, that doesn't at all change what I've said.