I am implying that he was prolly tweeting ot truthing, could be in his own self defense. So, I suppose I am picking on the choice of words. I don't think Trump was speaking.
Unless the judge was onjecting to a rally. That's the problem then, because rallies are protected political speech. I don't think that a judge can interfere with what is said by politicians at rallies. I don't think judges would make such a blunder, So, I think this is about a tweet. Could you clarify?
Of course, the gag order should not exist at all, given that saying something in one's own defense, in public, should still be allowed. Hell, have it out in the media then. But the Dems would lose.
There were 9 specific "truths" posted to truth social that the judge deemed violated the gag order because they were about jurors/witnesses/family members.
This information is easy to find, you should make yourself aware so that you can convince people who aren't informed of what what's happening with actual facts.
You're right that I shouldn't have used such a prescriptive tone, especially after you told me that you didn't appreciate it, sorry about that.
Please take it as a suggestion instead.
The reason I feel strongly about it is that I believe people, here especially, should be informed about exact details so that if they enter debate, or try to "awaken" someone, they have all the facts and can do so confidently. It gives a lot more credibility in these circumstances.
I am implying that he was prolly tweeting ot truthing, could be in his own self defense. So, I suppose I am picking on the choice of words. I don't think Trump was speaking.
Unless the judge was onjecting to a rally. That's the problem then, because rallies are protected political speech. I don't think that a judge can interfere with what is said by politicians at rallies. I don't think judges would make such a blunder, So, I think this is about a tweet. Could you clarify?
Of course, the gag order should not exist at all, given that saying something in one's own defense, in public, should still be allowed. Hell, have it out in the media then. But the Dems would lose.
There were 9 specific "truths" posted to truth social that the judge deemed violated the gag order because they were about jurors/witnesses/family members.
This information is easy to find, you should make yourself aware so that you can convince people who aren't informed of what what's happening with actual facts.
There you go again telling me what to do.
I have been obliging, but you are being rude.
Why?
You're right that I shouldn't have used such a prescriptive tone, especially after you told me that you didn't appreciate it, sorry about that.
Please take it as a suggestion instead.
The reason I feel strongly about it is that I believe people, here especially, should be informed about exact details so that if they enter debate, or try to "awaken" someone, they have all the facts and can do so confidently. It gives a lot more credibility in these circumstances.