Former President Trump on Monday formally demanded the recusal of the federal judge overseeing his 2020 election subversion case in Washington, D.C.
Trump’s attorneys cited statements U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan made while sentencing two previous Jan. 6 defendants that appeared to reference Trump, arguing the comments create a perception that Chutkan prejudged Trump’s guilt before he was charged.
Judges that are going to recuse themselves do so before they take on the case. This is both a stalling tactic and a fundraising technique. He probably already has the fundraising emails ready to go decrying the rigged liberal judge that refuses to recuse.
Yup. These meritless motions are done just to make news headlines. Habba, one of Trump’s lawyers, was previously fined $1,000,000 for filing frivolous motions for the purpose of political grandstanding.
Habba the jutt?
The very same.
I do have to say…I’m loving Lemmy just for the crowd. Normally on Reddit, I’d be sorting through a mass of racist shitheads defending their shithead leader for an article like this, but most people here are just having conversations, whether they agree with the position of the linked content or not.
It’s nice.
Yeah on here you just have to avoid anything that says hexbear.
Now you done it
Rent free
Why do people always do this? Just because you mention something you don’t like doesn’t mean you’re thinking about it all the time.
Someone did this to me the other day on Lemmy. It was a post about something I thought of years ago and people laughed at me at the time and then I saw the article about it and commented, “fuck those people” and some person told me I should let go of the anger I’ve felt over this for years. I was like, “I haven’t even thought about this for years.”
Some people on Lemmy take your every post as a reflection of your personality and the truest part of your subconscious; whereas most of us are just wasting some time on the can…
Add “regular_human” to the pile
Looks like so far, only 4 racist shitheads have found your comment. Only here, they’re too cowardly to refute your point.
There are a few shitheads on lemmy.world.
Certain subreddits were alright.
Mostly they are on other servers
So um…bets on how detailed she goes in her “fuck no” statement? Think it’s going to be simple like a sentence or just a “no” or something extended?
No in whatever the shortest way to say no in legalese is
No
Legalese needs more words, something like “motion denied” would work.
Removed by mod
It would be nice if they could respond in giphys or video clips. I suggest something like this:
The judge should say, “sure. As soon as Clarence Thomas starts recusing himself.”
Oh, gawd, I’d love to see that.
As fun as that would be, it would achieve nothing good.
Somebody needs his diaper changed!
I imagine the ketchup cleaning crew has been stepped up a notch in the past year or so…
Trump demands a lot of things.
Who the fuck is this orange shitstain to demand anything?
A US citizen with rights. Among them a right to a fair trial and as this judge clearly already believes he’s guilty.
I tend to agree, and I hope this seditious cheetoh rots in a jail cell, but that doesn’t change the objective nature of his request.
Things what live under rocks think he is guilty.
It’ll be hard to find someone who is impartial who doesn’t have a preformed opinion about him. He has the right to a fair trial, he has no right to a judge who likes him.
Chutkan: Recuse myself? No, I don’t think I will, thank you.
Lol Clarence Thomas first
You have no power here! 😅
He’s in no position do demand anything from anyone. He should be begging for mercy.
This.
Oh course he is trying to make demands. Obviously it’s damaging to his case so he wants the recusal.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former President Trump on Monday formally demanded the recusal of the federal judge overseeing his 2020 election subversion case in Washington, D.C.
“Although Judge Chutkan may genuinely intend to give President Trump a fair trial — and may believe that she can do so — her public statements unavoidably taint these proceedings, regardless of outcome.”
In October 2022, Chutkan chided Ohio Jan. 6 defendant Christine Priola during her sentencing that she and other rioters offered “blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day,” according to a hearing transcript.
Trump has publicly criticized Chutkan before, claiming she “obviously wants me behind bars,” and is “very biased and unfair.” He has also speculated that there is “no way” he will receive a fair trial under the federal judge and previewed he would file the recusal motion.
“Public statements of this sort create a perception of prejudgment incompatible with our justice system,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.
“In a case this widely watched, of such monumental significance, the public must have the utmost confidence that the Court will administer justice neutrally and dispassionately.
The original article contains 537 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I mean, it sounds like he has a point? Perhaps another judge should sentence him to prison instead, just so they don’t have grounds for an appeal on this.
The issue is all Judges from the available pool have heard Jan 6 cases and Chutkin is one of the “nicest” of the bunch.
Removed by mod
“… cause when you’re a star, they let you do it…”
