Posted on 11/23/2023 6:34:10 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
Newsleak. Useless liberals.
According to this section of the US Code, President Trump's speech on January 6 does not meet the definition of incitement to riot. How can it then meet the definition of
In 18 U.S. Code Chapter 102 - RIOTS, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions, is this:
(b) As used in this chapter, the term “to incite a riot”, or “to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot”, includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.President Trump spoke of his belief that he won the election, and then asked the attendees to peacefully walk to the Capitol to show the lawmakers their support for President Trump. That meets the exception to the "to incite a riot" definition.
-PJ
Trump was acquitted of incitement to insurrection in the grotesquely farcical second impeachment senate trial.
They forget SCOTUS comes up to bat at the bottom of the inning.
Strangely they ducked the Texas case that was joined by several other states. They have jurisdiction only if they decide to take it and they didn't. The Law/Constitution is so flexible when liberals are in charge, you know they are actually able to declare when a human is a human or a boy is actually a girl, they alone decide what "is" really means, not you.
Yet it seems to work fine for them when they need it to.
Exactly! And no Bill of Attainder will survive SCOTUS precisely so.
Fixed it.
Who needs trials anymore when judges can just rule out of thin air he is guilty. Like that jerk Engeron. He just waved his magic gavel and said Trump is guilty and all that is needed now is to decide the punishment.
What a joke.
If Trump was not before a judge being charged with Insurrection it would appear that Judge has a lack of standing to declare him guilty of insurrection.
Amendment No. 2
Especially not in view of the newly-released video evidence that there was, in fact, no insurrection at all.
“... I did not think the courts would *dismiss* challenges to the blatantly stolen 2020 election… so…I guess we are probably screwed.”
And every time that happened, the challenges were never HEARD in court. No “standing”
Nevertheless, the MediaDeepStateLeftists reported that the CASES WERE LOST!
Har, not lost, just filed in the trash can.
Pretty clever dirty politics...
“A lower court judge has already *agreed* that Trump engaged in insurrection”
Agreed has NO standing.
Actually it was a Pelosi et al insurrection.
Which was a major tactic to pull off the coup of stealing the election from Trump.
Trump being also US!
FACTS!
#BidensAmerica
#PuppetBiden
#PuppetMasterObama
#PuppetMasterSusanRice
Not by Trump or any of his supporters.
#PelosisInsurrection.
It was a coup that helped steal the election from Trump.
And us!
ESPECIALLY Us!
The rationale, thin as it was, for keeping Trump off a ballot, has died.
This will end up going to the USSC where they will actually read the section of the Constitution that deals with eligibility.
Yeah, it can’t be done
Nothing rational about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.