Ringside regulars and those who followed me elsewhere won’t be surprised to read that I agree completely with Barr’s comments about Trump. In my view, he is not fit for the presidency. At the same time, I cannot defend an order that limits Trump’s ability to respond to attacks against him, however accurate they might be.

Chutkan’s order strikes me as a blatant case of election interference. It allows some of Trump’s enemies to take free shots at a leading presidential candidate without the possibility of him responding.

And for what purpose? I doubt Chutkan believes Barr, Milley, or Pence will be intimidated.

Maybe she fears that Trump’s attacks will endanger their physical safety. But what basis is there for such a belief?

[Even if that were the case, though, that’s outside the scope of the authority for gag orders. If Trump actually crossed the legal line into incitement, *then* law enforcement can deal with that issue separately. Gag orders on trials are supposed to be limited to issues of the trial itself, mainly to prevent the disclosure of genuinely sensitive information and muddying up jury pools. Chutkan’s attempt to gag Trump is clearly aimed at silencing him politically, which is a complete offense to his First Amendment rights — even if he weren’t running for president. — Ed]