Robert Costa

The statement involves an elected official, specifically the House Speaker, commenting on an ongoing criminal trial, labeling it as a 'travesty of justice.' This statement is a form of public discourse as it involves a public figure addressing a matter of judicial proceedings, which is a significant public issue.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement could potentially harm the integrity of the judicial process by influencing public opinion and possibly the jury, given the speaker's high profile and authority. [-2]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The statement respects the dignity of the individual it supports, but could be seen as undermining the dignity of the judicial process.
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The comment does not promote understanding or empathy towards all parties involved in the trial, as it unilaterally declares the trial a 'travesty of justice' without a balanced consideration. [-1]
4. Principle 4:

   I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.

   The statement engages in a form of dialogue but does so in a manner that could be seen as confrontational rather than constructive, as it pre-empts the trial's outcome. [-1]
5. Principle 5:

   I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.

   There is no indication of acknowledgment or correction of mistakes, as the statement is assertive and one-sided.
6. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   Using influence to label an ongoing legal process as unjust could be seen as not using one's platform for the betterment of society, as it might undermine trust in judicial processes. [-2]
7. Principle 7:

   I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.

   The statement uses the platform of a public figure to speak on public matters, but it may not be with integrity if it unduly influences or biases public perception of an ongoing trial. [-1]