-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
suspicious voting pattern of votes..fix algorithm in place?
- Thread starter grizghost
- Start date
grizghost said:
Huh?
So fellas how was the DC trip, did you get to beat up any of our congressmen? What’s up for the 20th, same same? Lock and load patriots more forever Trumpers coming to town again to kick some ass and take more names?Jesse said:
Ps. How did that 12 amendment thing work out for you? Yeah I was thinking that your reading of it wasn’t supported by pretty much every constitutional scholar in the country accept for Trumps guy Eastman. I think Rudy is gonna a need a pardon asap his “trial by combat” speech was will, dangerous as it turned out. What a fucking train wreck, while the insurrection was going on Trump was watching on TV phoning Tommy Tuberville and acolytes in congress to keep objecting what a dumbass, but It did overshadow the worst covid death day of the pandemic so there’s that. Winning
Jesse said:
You may want to check the law on this point, or consult a real lawyer.
"Are those incitement to the violence that erupted almost immediately afterward? That’s the Brandenburg question, in which the Supreme Court declared that rhetorical fury cannot be considered incitement unless it meets a very narrow test. The First Amendment protects all speech except “where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Prosecutors have to distinguish between “mere advocacy” and incitement.
This matters in the aftermath of the riot yesterday, because four people died in the melée and law enforcement wants to round up the ringleaders to press charges. Calling for “trial by combat” puts Giuliani in a tougher position than Trump legally, although it’s probably not enough in either case to put them in real legal jeopardy. It would likely take a more explicit call for violence than either Trump or Giuliani said to cross the line into prosecution. Morally speaking, however, they own what happened yesterday."
https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2021/01/07/giuliani-demanded-trial-combat-totally-meant-non-violence-guys/
Jesse said:
I don't know, but I say he won't get one. Doesn't need one for this. See below.
A Journal opinion piece. By a former US prosecutor in Wash DC. He prosecuted protestors.
No, Trump Isn’t Guilty of Incitement
Inflaming emotions isn’t a crime. The president didn’t mention violence, much less provoke it.
"The president didn’t commit incitement or any other crime. I should know. As a Washington prosecutor I earned the nickname “protester prosecutor” from the antiwar group CodePink. In one trial, I convicted 31 protesters who disrupted congressional traffic by obstructing the Capitol Crypt. In another, I convicted a CodePink activist who smeared her hands with fake blood, charged at then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a House hearing room, and incited the audience to seize the secretary of state physically. In other cases, I dropped charges when the facts fell short of the legal standard for incitement. One such defendant was the antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan.
Hostile journalists and lawmakers have suggested Mr. Trump incited the riot when he told a rally that Republicans need to “fight much harder.” Mr. Trump suggested the crowd walk to the Capitol: “We’re going to cheer on brave senators and congressmen and -women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.”
In the District of Columbia, it’s a crime to “intentionally or recklessly act in such a manner to cause another person to be in reasonable fear” and to “incite or provoke violence where there is a likelihood that such violence will ensue.” This language is based on Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), in which the Supreme Court set the standard for speech that could be prosecuted without violating the First Amendment. The justices held that a Ku Klux Klan leader’s calls for violence against blacks and Jews were protected speech. The court found that Clarence Brandenburg’s comments were “mere advocacy” of violence, not “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action . . . likely to incite or produce such action.”
NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.
PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBE
The president didn’t mention violence on Wednesday, much less provoke or incite it. He said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
District law defines a riot as “a public disturbance . . . which by tumultuous and violent conduct or the threat thereof creates grave danger of damage or injury to property or persons.” When Mr. Trump spoke, there was no “public disturbance,” only a rally. The “disturbance” came later at the Capitol by a small minority who entered the perimeter and broke the law. They should be prosecuted.
The president’s critics want him charged for inflaming the emotions of angry Americans. That alone does not satisfy the elements of any criminal offense, and therefore his speech is protected by the Constitution that members of Congress are sworn to support and defend.
Mr. Shapiro served as an assistant attorney general of the District of Columbia, 2007-09. He is a White House appointed official at the U.S. Agency for Global Media.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-trump-isnt-guilty-of-incitement-11610303966?mod=mhp
I think Trump will pardon his close friends, like Rudy, and his immediate family and I’m hearing he might issue a blanket pardon to the Capitol rioters like carter did to Vietnam draft dodgers in Canada and last I’m thInking trump issues a pardon to himself. What do you think? We will know by January 20. LolPlayerRep said:
GrizWhiz
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
Just Google Giuliani and FBI. I think Giuliani only need ask trump and he will get a pardon. Trump's self-pardon may not be legal. I can't imagine Pence will cooperate on this though (e.g. trump resigns then Pence pardons him) given trump turned his rioters loose on him and some of them were chanting hang Pence!
GrizWhiz said:
..how to hell would you know anything... everything is being censored!...if that doesn't tell you what's going on you should
probably get out of your basement once in awhile!....doesn't matter what side you are on this should be alarming to all
Americans that love freedom and a free press!...welcome to the New CCP America! Cheers guys is this what you wanted!
Jesse said:
Just a few applicable quotes from the looney left. What goes around, comes around. If they can advocate it, so can I. Just change from Trump to Biden, or whomever takes his place.
Johnny Depp: 'When Was The Last Time An Actor Assassinated A President?' | NBC News
14,736 views•Jun 23, 2017
"I've been thinking about blowing up the white house"| Madonna Speech at Womans March| MLG VERSION
285 views•Jan 23, 2017
Trump in office is a 'clear and present danger': Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez | ABC News
775,850 views•Jan 10, 2021
argh! said:
oh cut me a break!...just look at the crazy Dems is early signs of CCP influence.... yes it call control and censor and than kill the people
..is there anything I'm missing? ....maybe harvesting organs along the way and other despicable acts towards people who oppose you!... .
your wife should see the signs of familiarity of oppression that's happening....many other see early signs of Nazi Germany doesn't matter
its all the same...I followed 12 people on twitter got up and log in ...disappeared!....GONE!.....and than we wonder how votes disappear?.
.
..wake up people we've been taken to the cleaners!
grizghost said:
this is just some report. try living there and seeing the endless surveillance, censorship, and propaganda yourself (of course, you need to understand mandarin). watch the ccp goons, armed to the teeth, rolling down the street. see for yourself how people shut down when the topic of the government comes up. meet some people who have been detained for weeks because of their viewpoints, even their religion. talk to a ccp member or two, the ones who are in-laws. hear the experiences of the family black sheep, who left that shit as fast as she could. who still won't talk with chinese people she doesn't know well about the country or the government, because "you never know" (even though she is an american now). the one who, despite not being able to stand the ccp, believed in the 'one china' policy with taiwan, until she went there, and is now for taiwan independence (she said "the brainwashing sometimes takes a long time to erase). then get back to me about your level of understanding
not really trying to pick a fight, but sometimes you have to experience something. otherwise it is just words on a piece of paper, so to speak.
