• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    212
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Fuck off, Missouri. You don’t get to interfere with another state’s internal judicial procedures and it’s outrageous of you to try.

    The Missouri AG ought to be ejected for this ridiculously basic gross incompetence.

  • eran_morad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The decision by the justices came in response to Missouri’s lawsuit claiming that the case against Trump infringed on the right of voters under the U.S. Constitution to hear from the Republican presidential nominee as he seeks to regain the White House

    What the fuck did I just read? The voters’ rights, whatever the fuck they are, have zero bearing on Trump’s rights as an individual. He would have broader rights to talk shit, within legal limits, if he wasn’t a convicted felon. Now that he’s a felon, his rights are curtailed. That’s how it fucking works, idiots.

    This is akin to me claiming that I have the right to hear someone lay out a specific, actionable plan to shoot trump in the face, at a predetermined date and time, described in exquisite, premeditated detail, during a fucking CNN interview or whatever, and that person can do so without violation of the law. Because that is, after all, my right. As determined by me.

    • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Lock him up. If you can’t do the time don’t do the crime. His cultists can hear from him again once he gets out, or if he texts from a cell phone smuggled up his arse.

  • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Am I misreading the article? This seems like good news that means that sentencing can proceed, but the comments are all negative.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 month ago

      My negative comment, at least, was about how ridiculous it was that the court even had to rule on this issue in the first place, not that they (somewhat miraculously) got it right.