snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Soapbox Derby

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 21 February 2019, 10:59 PM
Psihala's Avatar
Psihala Psihala is offline
 
Join Date: 28 February 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 8,268
Judge Judge slaps gag order on Roger Stone after inflammatory Instagram post

A federal judge on Thursday slapped a full gag order on Roger Stone, just days after the longtime political operative and adviser to President Donald Trump posted an inflammatory image on Instagram that appeared to target her.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judg..._live_hero_hed
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 22 February 2019, 02:05 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,039
Glasses

"I let someone else pick the picture, but I don't know who that was" is a rather ingenious defense, and certainly shows (IMO) a lack of maturity.

The buck stopped with him, and whoever chose the picture, it was his job to make sure it was appropriate before he posted it.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 22 February 2019, 02:40 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,587
Default

Ingenious or ingenuous?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 22 February 2019, 03:16 PM
dfresh dfresh is offline
 
Join Date: 11 November 2005
Location: Oxford, PA
Posts: 4,452
Judge

I was hoping he would be put into jail, since this seems like a pretty egregious violation, but the chances of a rich white guy going to jail for something like this are fairly low.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22 February 2019, 06:26 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,039
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lainie View Post
Ingenious or ingenuous?
Both, actually.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22 February 2019, 11:15 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,374
Default

I don't think that a prior restraint of a criminal defendant from speaking publicly about his case should (or probably could, constitutionally) be based on where the buck stops.

I don't think it was based on just that, since I think it sounds more like the judge disbelieved his explanation.

I also think, though, that this judge should have recused herself from deciding the motion (at least). It's a very serious restraint to put on a criminal defendant, and it seems obvious to me that there could be at the very least an appearance of impropriety for her to rule on something that involved, potentially, a threat on her life.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seal slaps man with octopus in NZ BrianB Wild Kingdom 10 02 October 2018 11:21 AM
U.S. slaps stiff tariff on Bombardier's new jet WildaBeast Business Bytes 22 16 October 2017 10:37 PM
Trump Advisor Roger Stone Launches Into Vulgar Twitter Rant, Admits Contact With TallGeekyGirl Soapbox Derby 1 05 March 2017 09:07 PM
Judge orders 50 Cent to explain Instagram cash stacks in bankruptcy court A Turtle Named Mack Moot Court 9 10 March 2016 09:32 PM
Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU putitinwriting Questionable Quotes 6 08 December 2007 02:44 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.