The judge in Trump’s current case plaintively suggests that it’s not appropriate for Trump to try to litigate via social media. Fat lot of good that will do.

…the judge in the case, Lewis A Kaplan, rebuked Trump for an “entirely inappropriate” statement on his social media platform, Truth Social, shortly before proceedings began.

Kaplan warned the former president’s lawyers that such statements about the case could bring more legal problems upon himself.

Why “could”? Why isn’t it a legal problem now?

Trump, who has not attended so far, called the case “a made-up scam”. He also called Carroll’s lawyer “a political operative” and alluded to a DNA issue Kaplan has ruled cannot be part of the case.

“This is a fraudulent and false story – Witch Hunt!” Trump wrote.

Lawyers for Carroll, whose suit includes claims Trump previously defamed her by publicly calling her case a “hoax”, “scam”, “lie” and “complete con job”, mentioned his new statement to Kaplan.

The judge told Trump’s lawyers: “What seems to be the case is that your client is basically endeavoring, certainly, to speak to his quote-unquote public, but, more troubling, the jury in this case about stuff that has no business being spoken about.”

He also called Trump’s post “a public statement that, on the face of it, seems entirely inappropriate”.

No kidding.

The Trump attorney Joe Tacopina noted that jurors are told not to follow any news or online commentary about the case. But he said he would ask Trump “to refrain from any further posts about this case”.

“I hope you’re more successful,” Kaplan said, adding that Trump “may or may not be tampering with a new source of potential liability”.

Why all this caution and hesitancy? Why “ask”? Why “hope”? Why “may or may not”? Aren’t people normally just told not to try to litigate outside the courtroom?