Almost human…
That’s actually scary. He looks much more like a Mafia boss in that picture than he usually does. With his normal extreme combover he looks more like a simian creature of the jungle, possibly related to the orange marmoset – a creature that may indeed be dangerous, but just judging from its appearance is more funny than scary.
Brendan Gleeson, if he forgot how to smile.
… West Virginia …
[sorry. Earworms are meant to be shared]
RIP John Denver
Moderating:
Let’s be done with this hijack now. Thanks.
Ack! You too for that earworm?
ETA – oh, sorry, didn’t see mod note.
Back on topic, have there been any reports yet of grand jurors being harassed?
Moderating:
Please note the mod note directly above your post. This hijack is done. Thanks.
Nothing specific has been reported, but the FBI has become involved in investigating threats to the DA, the court clerks, the judge, and the jurors.
Gift link.
Just read this Washington Post article (gift link) which goes into detail about the threats being made and law enforcement’s responses.
Ah, jeez, ninja’d by MulderMuffin.
I’m glad it’s being taken seriously but I fear there will be killings nonetheless, or at least some firebombings and direct harassment of some jurors.
I too am glad that it’s being taken seriously because you never know, but I don’t expect much action. MAGA folks really love to talk tough, but don’t often back it up. That might be why they like him so much, they identify with his style.
We’ve seen some real damage done when people take it too far, but most often these are just threats. Again, threats themselves are serious because the damage caused by terrorizing people is real. But I can only think of a couple of times where people devoted to Trump have actually acted in his name.
Just read about this at Salon and then checked to see if it was previously discussed on the thread. It was, but maybe there is more to be said.
Here’s the law:
Georgia Code Title 17
By itself, if the above quote is in context, it seems a slam dunk. Even if you bending over to give Trump a chance, at best you can imagine he might follow the judge’s cautions. You can’t reasonably think there is no significant risk of witness intimidation.
However, in googling I found 1993 Georgia case law that could tie the judge’s hands:
The way I read that, it is effectively up to the prosecutors to say there is a witness intimidation risk. If I was the prosecutor, I’d be thinking that jailing Trump to stop witness intimidation is pointless because he is going to attempt it from jail as well as from anywhere. So I wouldn’t make the intimidation risk case to the judge when Trump presumably surrenders next week.
What do folks here think? Is that 1993 Supreme Court of Georgia decision still valid, or have small changes to the wording of the law, since then, invalidated it?
If it is up to the judge, does the judge have to literally go by the Georgia Code, or can he ignore that part when he thinks it would be too draconian?
Because of the large number of defendants and charges, and with there being a big backlog in Fulton County courts, Trump may not get his day in court there until 2025. I think it would grossly unfair to lock up anyone that long without a trial. But taking the Georgia law literally, it sounds like they can do that stuff, and maybe they are supposed to.
The likely way the Georgia court will handle Trump’s propensity to witness intimidation would be an order tightly restricting what he can say pretrial, with the threat of bail revocation if he violates the order.
That’s what most states would do, and somehow I think you are correct. But the law says something else. And we are talking Georgia here. This was in the news last month:
A hung jury means a Georgia man jailed for 10 years must wait longer for a verdict on murder charges
Just to be clear, I do NOT want Trump treated unfairly on grounds that others have been punished without a trial, or on any other grounds.
Correct. It would be easy to shave and would look better (to those who can stand to look at him at all.)
Damn it, I think I violated the Cease Hijacking order. Honest mistake, I apologize!
You can take it to the bank that Trump will not be treated unfairly. You can also take it to the bank that he will cry like a baby that he was treated unfairly.
But, if he believes he is being treated unfairly, doesn’t that make it true? 
Trump’s new lawyer once donated to Fani Willis and usually represents rap artists. He’s also been called “ a “Robin Hood with Jesus swag”. They’re really going to push the “free speech” defense. I hope he’s also ready for a “free work” defense.
It occurs to me that if he wins every nincompoop who’s got a chance will be blurting “Aspirational ask” 24/7.
For seven years and counting, I always do this, too! I’m sure we’re in good company, but this is the first time I’ve read someone spell it out clearly.
/hijack