I’d prefer Cheech and Chong: “Bailiff, whack his pee-pee!”
I found a link that reports his exact words:
…let me give you the exact words because this is the provision that the court has to find to release someone on bail in Georgia.”
Weissmann continued:
Which is that the ‘defendant poses no risk of intimidating witnesses, or otherwise obstructing the administration of justice.’ That poses no risk of intimidating witnesses. To me, that is going to be for a judge, who is going to treat Donald Trump or anyone else like any other defendant, that could be a problem.
Yes, as has been said, No Shit Sherlock. Trump just tried to intimidate a witness for the Grand Jury TODAY.
“…And I just got my indictment tie cleaned!”
Multiple co-defendants are particularly entertaining when they start trying to throw each other under the bus to save their own skins:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/13/politics/coffee-county-georgia-voting-system-breach-trump/index.html
…“Rudy Giuliani had nothing to do with this,” said Robert Costello, Giuliani’s attorney. “You can’t attach Rudy Giuliani to Sidney Powell’s crackpot idea.”…
Thanks for digging up that exact quote. 
It’s obvious to me Trump is baiting the various judges tasked with preventing witness tampering/intimidation, daring them to put him in jail pending a trial.
He always reminds me of the 4-year-old brat who visited my place quite a number of years ago. We had electric fencing to keep livestock in the pasture and warned the child not to touch live wires as we made our way down to the barn. Naturally, the kid had to touch the wire to find out.
It was a hot, dry day and he didn’t ground, avoiding a nasty shock. I was silently annoyed.
On the way back up from the barn visit, kid went all in and gave that wire a good grab. This time, he grounded. I’m sure he will never forget the result.
I like to think it will be the same for Trump. Go ahead. Suck it and see.
This gave me a belly laugh!
I presume you mean this:
My legal question here is undoubtedly naïve, but isn’t this clear obstruction of justice, or some similar offence, in the Georgia criminal code? If so, shouldn’t they arrest Trump today? Well, I know one reason why not – he’s not in Georgia today. But shouldn’t they make a call to some authority in Florida and ask them to grab him for immediate extradition? As for trial on this one simple charge, I don’t see why it shouldn’t happen in a day or two after he’s removed to Georgia on the KISS principle. Discovery? There’s nothing to discover that isn’t in my last link and, tomorrow morning, the Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC). I would think the AJC is a local paper their courts trust to put legal notices in, and that would quickly print a correction if needed.
I suppose Trump might delay things by asking for a jury trial. So just charge him with a misdemeanor and get him off the street with a quick bench trial.
Of course there could be a defense, as in any case. Maybe Trump’s defense would be that Truth Social was hacked. But even if the prosecution spends months of investigation to disprove that on the off chance it would be claimed at trial, it still would come down to the court deciding if the unlikelihood of the AJC getting it wrong raised reasonable doubt. Even an acquittal (or, more likely, a probation sentence) would establish the principle that Trump can’t tell people not to testify. If he does it again, he could be re-arrested, and a second claim of hacking would truly be false beyond a reasonable doubt.
Of course, this post goes beyond Trump to the whole approach to criminal law in the U.S.
Defendants in Georgia get a jury trial for misdemeanors.
I hate to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but “he shouldn’t” isn’t the clearest example of witness tampering or obstruction. Trump likes to live in legal grey area, and has done so here. Personally, I think it crosses the line, but it’s not as open and shut as you imply.
The judge told people to get food, so sounds like it maybe a long night if the jury wants to keep going.
Beverage is at the ready.
Yeah. Trump could easily say, “I was just advising him that it would be bad for his political future.”
They’re probably worried that given the Reuter’s leak there is a high probability of witness intimidation either by someone directly associated with the principals or by their followers. Better to get the voting done now rather then have to call them in tomorrow through a sea of angry and potentially armed protestors.
I guess I jumped to the conclusion that it’s illegal to ask someone to ignore a subpoena, to testify before a grand jury, when you yourself are the likely target. Googling a bit on this, I guess it may be that you have to make a threat before it becomes illegal in Georgia. And then it’s a felony.
If that is the case, then maybe every Georgia defendant should exercise their freedom of speech to contact all prosecution witnesses and politely ask them not to show up in court in front of a jury, whether petite or grand. Apparently, it can’t hurt to try 
Up to number 7 now, 7 started testimony at 6:30 atlanta time.
This sounds right to me, too. Whatever happened there, it appears it was a flub and they want to get out ahead of the problems it could cause.
from cnn about 12 minutes ago:
Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney, the presiding judge overseeing the grand jury that’s currently hearing the Donald Trump 2020 election subversion case, told reporters in his courtroom that he’s expecting to stay for about one more hour tonight.
I’m (almost) sure it is – but Trump’s post is plausibly not asking (nor threatening) Duncan to not testify. You and I and everyone with three brain cells knows what he means, but I’m guessing it’s ambiguous enough to skate.
Of course, I’d love to be wrong and see him jailed for contempt tomorrow.
The talking heads on the teevee are saying that the grand jury is voting.
On whether to order Chinese, Korean or Pizza?
Am I reading this correctly that they’re letting reporters into the Grand Jury room? I thought Grand Jury deliberations were always secret.
I believe that 3 hours at close of day is a reasonable deadline. It might be that they would get through the witnesses and vote fresh in the morning.
Looks like the jurors want tomorrow off. This is a wild night.
The amount of defendants and charges are staggering. This reminds me of the wild scramble right before the dc charges.
I may need to limber up.
I’m hearing from msnbc’s threads account that the gj is voting now.