floridafan
Verified User
Donald Trump left his fraud trial courtroom during a short morning recess Wednesday – and quickly appeared to violate the gag order set by Judge Arthur Engoron.
The Associated Press reported that Trump repeated attacks on the judge as a "partisan" – but added that he has "a person who is much more partisan sitting alongside of him," quoted The Messenger's Adam Klasfeld.
The implication was that Trump was talking about the court clerk who ran for a local judgeship and had photos taken with New York lawmakers like Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
The gag order issued earlier this month forbids Trump from attacking any member of the court's staff, and it was put in place after Trump suggested that the same clerk was Schumer's girlfriend.
Engoron said he was taking the AP's report "under advisement."
“The last time this gag order was violated...I accepted the explanation that it was inadvertent,” he said. “This most recent statement, assuming the AP is correct, was intentional.
“I stated the last time that any future violations would be severely punished. Why should there not be severe sanctions for this blatant, dangerous disobeyal of a court order?”
He went on, “I don’t want anyone to get killed. We know from this trial and from our lives, that sometimes language is precise, and sometimes it’s not precise. It seemed clear to me.”
The Associated Press reported that Trump repeated attacks on the judge as a "partisan" – but added that he has "a person who is much more partisan sitting alongside of him," quoted The Messenger's Adam Klasfeld.
The implication was that Trump was talking about the court clerk who ran for a local judgeship and had photos taken with New York lawmakers like Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
The gag order issued earlier this month forbids Trump from attacking any member of the court's staff, and it was put in place after Trump suggested that the same clerk was Schumer's girlfriend.
Engoron said he was taking the AP's report "under advisement."
“The last time this gag order was violated...I accepted the explanation that it was inadvertent,” he said. “This most recent statement, assuming the AP is correct, was intentional.
“I stated the last time that any future violations would be severely punished. Why should there not be severe sanctions for this blatant, dangerous disobeyal of a court order?”
He went on, “I don’t want anyone to get killed. We know from this trial and from our lives, that sometimes language is precise, and sometimes it’s not precise. It seemed clear to me.”
