A Texas woman has been charged with threatening to kill the judge overseeing a criminal case against Donald Trump.
Abigail Jo Shry, 43, allegedly called US District Judge Tanya Chutkan a “stupid slave” and used another racial slur in a voicemail message she left at the Washington courthouse.
She is reported to have said: “You are in our sights, we want to kill you… If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you, so tread lightly, b----.
“You will be targeted personally, publicly, your family, all of it.”
The article also includes an expectation meeting mugshot. For people that talk about violence, I’ve never been less intimidated.
Good, now do the same to the turds threatening violence to the jurors
I’m sure they will. It just takes a little time to drive all the way out to bumblefuck and figure out which cousin was using the trailer park communal Commodore 64 at the time.
Don’t disparage the Commodore 64. It was actually a TI-99/4a.
Hey, be nice to the TI 99/4A. It was obviously a 1 kb Sinclair ZX81.
Don’t drag the Sinclair into this American mess!
TRS-80 has entered the chat.
A TI-99/4. The extra “a” at the end was too expensive.
That shouldn’t be hard just turn up with cardboard cutouts of the various jurors and see which one is fooled and runs out with a shotgun.
Republican officials, even after the insurrection, are using violent rhetoric. This is deliberate. They want the crazies from their party to engage in terrorism.
This is a party who wouldn’t even impeach and remove Trump after a violent coup.
It’s insanity that we’re not treating these people like the full-blown fascists they keep showing us they are.
That entire party needs to be purged from every level of government.
People who still call themselves Republicans after the coup are a disgrace. They are traitors.
Republican officials, even after the insurrection, are using violent rhetoric.
Stochastic terrorism.
My favorite part,
“The 43-year-old said she had no intention of going to Washington to carry out her threats, before adding: “If Shelia Jackson Lee comes to Alvin [a city in Texas], then we need to worry.””
How fucking stupid can you be to say this AFTER you’ve been arrested?
30% of Republicans believe violence may be necessary to “save” the country.
They legitimately don’t think it’s an issue to threaten violence against anyone who impedes Donald Trump. In their deluded minds, he’s an innocent victim who only wants what’s best for the country and all these evil judges and persecutors and federal employees are trying to take him down and literally destroy the country.
This is what you get when you allow people with power and influence lie all the time
Yes, we need freedom of speech, blah.
You don’t have true freedom of speech, not even in the US, this article literally shows that
We need more restrictions on speech. If you’re a politician and you obviously lie then you need to be at least called out on that, and be forced to correct yourself publicly. Maybe some naming and shaming will make politicians slightly more honest.
All politicians lie up to some point and it’s been tolerable and tolerated for a long time but Trump weaponised disinformation and lying. This needs to stop, those in power need to be held accountable. If you’re the president and you startte spouting proven conspiracy theories then you need to either be forced to correct yourself and say you were staying dishonest information or you need to leave.
Freedom of speech, but not freedom from consequences of said speech. If you go and say some ish then you better be able to handle the consequences of saying the things you’re saying.
So, like, what do you have then?
What is there to be ‘free’ from?
That’s an interesting question and highlights the gap between use of the phrase. The question is: who is free? The individual absolutely free from all consequence, or society to be free from dangerous, damaging, and intolerable behaviour?
Does it mean freedom from impediment? Are you are allowed to say whatever you want, but the community has a right to discourage, deplatform, and criminalise the effects of those words have in breaking the social contract (e.g. attempting to cause panic, promoting a riot, trying to over throw democracy, racial intimidation, etc)?
Or does it mean freedom from consequences? Are you allowed to say whatever you want and the community has no right to recourse for the effects of speech on the community (i.e. you can say literally anything and the without fear that it will negatively impact your standing within the wider community and social contract)? Does that mean we should allow people to promote ISIS? Or send direct threats to you and your family, if they never intend to act upon them? How about promote your family be seen as animals to be driven out or killed? Should those speech actions be free from consequences? Even if it escalates to a wider group or is given from a position of authority?
I do not believe the latter is a tenable way of maintaining any form of contract and only enhances the power of bad faith actors. It’s also only ever selectively employed.
The same people that tend to promote the latter in cases that suit their cause, threaten officials, promote hate, and drive division are the same group banning history books in schools. We cannot let people in bad faith muddy the waters of what free speech mean.
So then why call it ‘free speech’.
Perhaps some other name should be used to better explain the concept.
I disagree.
Free, in this context, means not captive (i.e. not controlled by a single entity). Speech is free. It just isn’t free from consequences in the wider standing of society. And most people do know that (my examples highlight it - should I have no consequences for inciting a lynch mob to kill your family if I didn’t string the noose?).
Don’t let bad faith actors force us to do…anything! They’re bad faith actors!
They’ve been doubling down on stupid their whole life.
How fucking stupid can you be to say this AFTER you’ve been arrested?
Well given what she was arrested for, I can safely assume that thinking is not her strong suit.
I’m not sure it’s necessary to question the intelligence of anyone who is part of the Trump cult. That question answers itself.
Why would they let a woman who threatened to kill a judge oversee trump’s criminal case?
(Sorry. Had to be done)
ah, the ol’ lemmy switch-a-roo.
EDIT: as it turns out, comment links are completely and utterly broken at the moment. sorry! the switch-a-roo chain will eventually work.
Hold my recycled habits from Reddit, I’m going in!
link is weirdly broken for me though, any luck?
Broken for me too.
fuck
Not before dinner and a movie.
And wine.
I like to be wined and dined before I get FUCKED!!
English is weird man
They just had to add the word “is” after “woman” and it would’ve made perfect sense, but news article titles always need to be maximally confusing
Yeah, poorly worded. Could have Saud “Judge overseeing Trump’s election case receives death threats, Texas woman charged”
I think that every article on Trump should have the article’s real title and a clear one in parenthesis, it would solve a lot of issues.
I was seriously confused for a second… Grammar matters.
I just woke up and that’s how I read it like 3 times in a row
Always good to see these dumbasses ruin their lives for some old racist grifter who wouldn’t even piss on them if they were on fire.
I don’t know how he managed to get a following of millions of people he openly hates, but somehow he has.
They hate everyone who isn’t exactly like them, Trump has a similar level of entitlement and narcissism that they do, which is why they support him - because it’s just another way to support themselves.
Narcissists live vicariously through Trump, because he’s proven all you have to be to succeed is an entitled piece of shit (and wealthy) - which is the only quality they possess (minus the wealth).
When you’re that level of narcissist, you don’t actually care about the people around you, you only care that they agree with you. Which is probably why they wouldn’t care if Trump low-key hates them, because they absolutely hate anyone below them on their social hierarchy, but they hate them less if they kiss the hierarchy ring.
When they have a Trump Rambo flag, it’s actually them on the flag - Trump’s face is just the unifying figure for their collective personality disorders.
Yep he gives off the same energy and they connect with it
I’m going to prison for an NFT salesman
–far right scumbag and unite the right organizer Baked Alaska, on being sentenced to prison for his participation in 01/06, yet another right wing rally in which people died
I’d say it’s the same mental gymnastics as anyone who defends billionaire corporations.
some old racist grifter who wouldn’t even piss on them if they were on fire.
But would happy to be pissed on.
The scary thing is she probably has zero regrets and would do it again.
I’m sure Fox is already adding her to their lineup
How’s she gonna manage a job at Fox while simultaneously being in Congress?
It says she’s been jailed 30 times so that’s probably a pretty accurate statement
No ragrets!
No rugrats.
That mugshot is the face of indignance.
My favorite part is that we have to specify which criminal case in which Donald J Trump is a defendant we’re talking about because there’s THREE OF THEM.
FOUR!
(Not mine): This is only the fourth time in the history of the United States that a former president has been indicted.
That’s what you get when you skip watching the news for a single day. Indictments come at you fast.
I think it’s still three because one of the indictments replaced an earlier one.
Federal: docs in FL, defrauding the US in DC State: hush money in NY , RICO in GA
Given that this doofus is from Texas, guessing the GA one is outside her worldview XD
Wow, that’s a rough looking 43
Meth. It’s what’s for dinner
I assume that living in constant, irrational fear that the government is out to get you and anyone who isn’t exactly like you threatens your existence causes stress, which ages you prematurely.
Pretty much the face I’d expect of someone who would do this.
Removed by mod
Those fuckers carry handguns or AR-15s with them, so probably not wise
Anyone can carry guns bro
But they do and the left generally doesn’t.
The left also allows Republicans to get into power and steal away womens rights while they sit and do nothing as always.
Remember folks, it’s not okay to (jokingly) threaten violence against things like the NRA convention or the Vatican. Please save your violent threats for judges and jury members of your favorite criminally-charged politicians. Thank you.
This is conservatism when it starts to lose
But remember everyone, it’s not a cult!!! /s
How much meth do you think she’s smoked? I don’t need an exact amount… when you make your estimate, feel free to round up to the nearest ton.
At least 3 catalytic converters worth
METH? A few tons.
