BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

justan

Wrote in message:r
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:07:30 -0500, Wayne wrote:On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 02:27:33 -0500, wrote:On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 20:12:56 -0500, Keyser wrote:On 1/24/21 5:42 PM, wrote: On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 09:43:52 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/24/21 9:10 AM, wrote: On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 08:26:27 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/24/21 12:18 AM, Bill wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: ...new entry on "Storming of the Capitol..." Interesting read. Justan, of course, will have to wait until a family member of his can get her hands on the Classic Comics version... https://tinyurl.com/y3pnyv89 I notice there are already complaints about the article and under revision. Duh...that's how Wiki works, dummy. As it stands, though, it is a pretty complete article on the Republican-Trump Insurrection, with lots of cites, and much of it will be brought up in Trump's second impeachment trial, if there is one or, better, perhaps his criminal trial(s). I suspect in a real trial anything Trump said would fall under 1st amendment protection. It was ambiguous enough to be held as political speech. That was affirmed in National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 In a politically driven witch hunt like an impeachment circus it just depends on who can whip the most votes. In a trial it only takes one to hang a jury. So, my posit was correct: there is nothing Trump can do or say that you won't support. The First Amendment has its limitations, to wit: 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103?322, title XXXIII, §?330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.) How many successful prosecutions have there been for speech alone? That wasn't what you asked. You implied incitement to insurrection was protected free speech. It isn't. And Trump isn't a sitting POTUS anymore.I am not really sure that is true. The Burger court made anythingremotely political, "protected speech".If walking around with swastikas saying "kill all the Jews" ispolitical protected speech, I doubt anything Trump said is actionable.The impeachment is not really about the law tho, it is a purelypolitical bill of attainder from congress and it gets by Art 1 Sect9(3) by limiting the scope to purely political things. You just said he doesn't have a chance of winning an election ... whythe impeachment?===To keep him from running for office, and also as a basis for ejectinghim from republican party leadership. Trump's campaign style ofworking mobs of supporters into an emotional frenzy is dangerous as wehave already seen. He richly deserves to be in jail but that'sprobably not going to happen.I doubt he would end up running again anyway but if the Senate votesto convict, unlikely, I expect to see an appeal and he has grounds. Then it will depend on just how "constructionist" the current Robertscourt is. If the democrats really had a case, they would have the DoJ bring itbut I doubt they do.

I doubt he would run again as well. He'd be Bidens age then and
possibly just as senile. look at all the errors Biden has made
already; and he's only been in office a few days.
--

----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazon...net/index.html