Yeah, we know Trump has powerful connections and will be treated with far more leniency than the average person because instead of holding people with power to a higher standard we do the opposite.
That doesn't contradict the fact that it doesn't matter what Trump is good with when it comes to sentencing.
Merchan hasn’t been lenient thus far. He’s been moderate throughout the trial. There’s no reason to expect otherwise at sentencing.
He didn't enforce the no phones policy on Eric.
He warned Trump multiple times without following through.
As far as I can tell what you are calling moderate is the same thing as being lenient.
He mandated a gag order, then amended it to include more restrictions. Trump was charged with 10 violations at the maximum fine, and warned of jailing for future violations. He did not violate the order again.
Moderate means providing reasonable considerations as he would to other defendants. That is how Merchan runs his courtroom.
I think their point is that you or I wouldn't get treated that lightly. How many people get 10 violations, let alone need a gag order in the first place. The sad fact is that a court acting "moderately" is a lot more lenient than what a lot of people experience.
He was issued a gag order due to public criticism of witnesses and the effect it may have on their credibility. The 10 violations were addressed at two gag order hearings. At the first hearing he was fined the maximum. At the second, he was fined the maximum and warned of jail for the next offense.
This is exactly how an impartial judge should be ruling.
He warned about jail the first time. Two separate warnings for 10 incidents is lenient.
He was informed of the potential repercussions in the first hearing. It was the second of two hearings when Merchan said while he was reluctant to put a former president in jail, but continued acts would leave him no choice. That was the end of the violations.
The goal of the gag order is to mandate compliance, not leverage a holding cell. Again, Merchan handled it by the book.
I’d love to see him in jail, or better yet, prison, but it’s not worth compromising the judges ruling into bias.
Merchan said while he was reluctant to put a former president in jai
He was biased to not put him in jail.
Sentencing is based on character and severity of crime. Being a former President speaks favorably in court. It’s not about money or influence.
Guess we just took the long road back to kings.
Eric having a phone should have been considered felony witness tampering.
Yeah, we know Trump has powerful connections and will be treated with far more leniency than the average person because instead of holding people with power to a higher standard we do the opposite.
That doesn't contradict the fact that it doesn't matter what Trump is good with when it comes to sentencing.
Merchan hasn’t been lenient thus far. He’s been moderate throughout the trial. There’s no reason to expect otherwise at sentencing.
He didn't enforce the no phones policy on Eric.
He warned Trump multiple times without following through.
As far as I can tell what you are calling moderate is the same thing as being lenient.
He mandated a gag order, then amended it to include more restrictions. Trump was charged with 10 violations at the maximum fine, and warned of jailing for future violations. He did not violate the order again.
Moderate means providing reasonable considerations as he would to other defendants. That is how Merchan runs his courtroom.
I think their point is that you or I wouldn't get treated that lightly. How many people get 10 violations, let alone need a gag order in the first place. The sad fact is that a court acting "moderately" is a lot more lenient than what a lot of people experience.
He was issued a gag order due to public criticism of witnesses and the effect it may have on their credibility. The 10 violations were addressed at two gag order hearings. At the first hearing he was fined the maximum. At the second, he was fined the maximum and warned of jail for the next offense.
This is exactly how an impartial judge should be ruling.
He warned about jail the first time. Two separate warnings for 10 incidents is lenient.
He was informed of the potential repercussions in the first hearing. It was the second of two hearings when Merchan said while he was reluctant to put a former president in jail, but continued acts would leave him no choice. That was the end of the violations.
The goal of the gag order is to mandate compliance, not leverage a holding cell. Again, Merchan handled it by the book.
I’d love to see him in jail, or better yet, prison, but it’s not worth compromising the judges ruling into bias.
He was biased to not put him in jail.
Sentencing is based on character and severity of crime. Being a former President speaks favorably in court. It’s not about money or influence.
Guess we just took the long road back to kings.
Eric having a phone should have been considered felony witness tampering.