Republican pushing bill to ban gag orders dubbed 'Let Trump Speak Act'

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: The Hill

05/20/24 3:55 PM ET


Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) is touting a new bill that he says would prohibit judges from issuing gag orders on defendants in most civil and criminal cases.

The bill, called the “Let Trump Speak Act,” comes as former President Trump continues to fight against his gag order in the ongoing hush money criminal trial in New York.

In an interview with Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo on Monday, Ogles said the bill aims to target gag orders “that are clearly politically motivated.” The bill would also establish a right of action, which Ogles said would provide a basis for the defendant to sue “because his rights are being violated.”

Ogles, who attended Trump’s trial last week, sharply criticized the prosecution in the hush money case and said in the interview, “You can tell that this trial is nothing more than a political witch hunt.” “And so enough is enough,” Ogles continued. “Trump should be acquitted. He should be back on the campaign trail and that’s it. They’re trying to keep Trump off of the campaign trail and keeping him tied up in court.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4675385-republican-ogles-let-trump-speak-act-ban-gag-orders/

[hlthe2b]

1. Separation of powers, jerks.

[TomSlick]

2. "Clearly politically motivated?" Decided by whom?

Who would be the defendant in a lawsuit filed under such a law? A judge is largely immune.

No such lawsuit would get to trial before a criminal case in which an order was entered was long over.

This bill is performative. It means nothing.

[Beartracks]

15. "Decided" by the deeply politically motivated.

[barbtries]

3. should be "Let TSF Lie"

"let TSF engage in stochastic terrorism"
"Let TSF throw tantrums like a baby"

omigawd, who the fuck are these people

[LiberalFighter]

4. I doubt it can be applied in state courts.

[Diamond_Dog]

5. Oh brother

((eye roll))

[LiberalFighter]

6. He lied about his education.

[SCantiGOP]

7. This would be fully endorsed by several others:

Mob bosses, drug cartel leaders, sex traffickers - anyone who would like to send out signals to potential witnesses that they better keep quiet.

[LeftInTX]

8. Oh jeez!!!

[apnu]

9. Why? The case will be over this week, then Donnie Small-hands can say what he wants.

Well, we know why, to make Trump feel good about himself.

[sakabatou]

10. This is clearly an illegal bill, and the repukes know it

[slightlv]

19. And funny, but I bet the only

cases deemed "political" would be those against Repugs! Democrats and common criminals aren't important enough to have political witch hunts going after them, per Repugs. To any Repug who had two brain cells to rub together, that concept ought to cause them to think critically about the basis of the theory. But then, they don't have two brain cells to rub together - and they can only follow the leader like sheep to a shearing.

[John Shaft]

11. Perverted and demented

[sheshe2]

12. Oh for FFS!

[greatauntoftriplets]

13. It'll die a well-deserved death in the Senate.

If it somehow squeaks through, President Biden can veto it.

Just more stupid games from the House designed to make life better for the CMF. Forget about doing anything for the people.

[prodigitalson]

14. good luck with that

[Beartracks]

16. Red ties, yellow bellies, brown noses. n/t

[Aussie105]

17. What other country . . .

would want to give their ex-leader, a dethroned wanna-be dictator, a voice in a court of Law?

This says it all:
“And so enough is enough,” Ogles continued. “Trump should be acquitted. He should be back on the campaign trail and that’s it. They’re trying to keep Trump off of the campaign trail and keeping him tied up in court.”

Really?
Not going to happen! Dream on! Your sad moment isn't shared by too many people.

The gag orders are a consequence of TSF mouthing off too much. Self inflicted.

TSF is a private citizen now and subject to the same legal processes as anyone else would be in the same circumstances.
(Not that anyone else could dig a hole as deep as TSF has managed to do.)

[Talitha]

18. Yet another sycophant on parade.

[jmowreader]

20. Well...you know what would happen

Any defendant who needed a gag order to prevent him from denigrating the court system with the filthy sewer he calls a mouth would simply be tossed in jail for the duration of the trial.

[Grins]

21. You want to speak? Take the witness stand!

And the reason you won’t - the cross examination, to use your word - would be Carnage!

[mwb970]

22. Oh for god's sake.

Just when you think these aholes can't possibly get any worse, they get worse. How appalling.

[Rhiannon12866]

23. You mean ""Let Trump attack anyone he feels like to incite his "followers" to seek revenge on them" Act

[electric_blue68]

24. Oh, you mean the "Let Trump SPEW Act"?

[Aussie105]

25. This is an example of:

Someone saying Trump is a good guy, and the normal rules shouldn't apply to him.

Or more accurately:

"I love Trump! Youse is all picking on him! Not fair! NOT FAIR!"

Like we should suspend normal political and legal processes because some schmuck loves Trump? In a word, 'NO!'

[Oopsie Daisy]

26. Showboating and grandstanding. "Look at me!" I hate it when any politician does that.

[Martin68]

27. I'd be surprised if any court would find this consitutional because it would undermine their own safety, as well as

the system of checks and balances. It is an egregious overstep by the legislative branch on the judicial branch.

[Baitball Blogger]

28. Oh, the irony.

One of these court cases will deal with whether Trump should be held accountable for stoking the Insurrectionists with his provocative speech. So, how do we get through that court case reasonably, when his provocative speech is meant to interfere and undermine that process?

[happy feet]

29. It's so disappointing,

sad and outrageous to know people elect such idiots with zero understanding of how congress and our democracy works to Congress.