Former President Donald Trump suggested Saturday that he has very little interest in abiding by the protective order filed a day earlier by Judge Tanya Chutkan.
As previously reported, Chutkan — the judge presiding over his latest indictment — issued a protective order on Friday severely limiting what he may say publicly about his case and warning him to abstain from “inflammatory” rhetoric.
The following day, a reporter asked Trump about the order while the former president was walking around the Iowa State Fair.
“Do you plan to comply with the judge’s order regarding the latest indictment?” the reporter asked.
Trump replied by neither saying “yes” nor “no,” but certainly implying “yes.”
Listen:
“I’ll have to take a look at the order. The whole thing is a fake. It was put out by Biden. And they put it out because they can’t win an election the fair way,” he said.
“It’s all called election interference. Biden put it out because he can’t win the fair way. He’s way down in the polls,” the former president added.
When word of his non-answer answer spread, leftists began celebrating on the basis that he’ll soon wind up in jail for violating the order.
Look:
FAFO!
— christine Murphy (@christineM80417) August 12, 2023
He does not understand this judge is not playing with him and will have no problem putting him in jail
— Joseph Pace (@jpace125) August 12, 2023
lol It’s cute that he thinks compliance is optional. Especially after he committed in court to comply.
— Dragool (@dragool6) August 12, 2023
That’s not an answer. It’s either yes or no. If he won’t, he’s going to jail.
It’s that simple.
— Joe (@rockytech) August 12, 2023
— B̷̡̛ợ̶ō̵͕s̶̢͂t̵̼̐ȏ̵̦s̸̟̀ḫ̴͒ḯ̷̞ (@Boostoshi) August 13, 2023
Later Saturday afternoon, Trump was also asked whether he intends to accept a plea deal.
“Is there any chance you’d take a plea deal?” a reporter asked.
“We did nothing wrong. We don’t ever take a plea deal. We don’t take plea deals. It’s a wise guy question. You’re just a wise guy. We don’t take plea deals because I did nothing wrong. It’s called election interference,” the former president replied.
Listen:
This time the left reacted with mockery.
Look:
GITMO DON’T care who lives there!
Plea deal that!— dareone61army (@dareone61army) August 12, 2023
Trump: Biden can’t even put two sentences together.
Jack Smith: It’s okay, I’m putting two sentences together for you.
— Zero Dark Twenty-Nine ️ (@herotimeszero) August 12, 2023
The biggest partying you will ever see will happen across the world when he goes to jail. Watch.
— Jarrett Holmes | SEO Agency Founder (@JarrettHolmes) August 12, 2023
The eight stages of Trump’s guilt:
1. “I didn’t do it”
2️⃣ “I didn’t do anything wrong”
3. “I didn’t do anything illegal”
4. “The people accusing me are guilty”
5. “The law is illegal”
6. “Prove it!”
7. “What happened didn’t happen”
8. “It’s fine, I did it and I’ll do it again…”— Luke Zaleski (@ZaleskiLuke) August 12, 2023
Wow pic.twitter.com/F8yd07bMMB
— ✨ Ed ♂️ ✨ (@eddluxe) August 12, 2023
The left is clearly certain that Trump is guilty and headed to jail/prison for a very long time. Since most, if not all, of the cases against him are being tried in Democrat jurisdictions, they may have a point.
But on the other hand, were Trump convicted, he’d likely appeal — and the appeal would no doubt eventually make its way to the Supreme Court. The question then would be whether or not the high court would accept the case. Some “experts” who spoke with The Hill theorized that the high court wouldn’t accept the case.
Take Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University.
“I don’t think it’s actually likely that the Supreme Court would intervene, because it seems like most of the purely legal issues are … about statutory interpretation points that have already been decided by the Supreme Court in the past, and the Supreme Court has a pretty strong presumption about overturning statutory interpretation,” he said.
Somin did acknowledge that “every once in a while the court does take up a case which may not have much broader legal significance, but it’s important because of the specific litigants involved.”
“But in general I think it’s not likely that this case will end up in the Supreme Court,” he added, noting that even if it does, Trump “generally does not actually have a good record in winning those [SCOTUS] cases.”
Laurence Tribe, a Harvard University constitutional law professor, said for his part that he can’t imagine the high court taking up Trump’s latest indictment.
“I can’t imagine what legal issue the Supreme Court would think worthy of consideration in the four-count indictment, which doesn’t even arguably contain any legal flaws on the face of it, whatever legal or factual defenses Mr. Trump as the defendant might try to advance at trial,” he said.
Writers and editors can be contacted at [email protected] with feedback, tips, or corrections.
V. Saxena is a staff writer with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University. Saxena also contributes to BizPac Review.
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.