I'm still waiting for proof that TRUMP said "storm the capital"

What did my neighbor post online yesterday? Ask your Senator who will know what every 330,000,000 Americans say, right? You could try to post a more ridiculous fake hypocritical outrage if you try - maybe.

What matters at the Capital yesterday is Nancy Pelosi's Capital Police murdered an unarmed female 14 year military veteran protester as an outright political execution.

 

This is all irrelevant diversion. Not that the coup take over is a done deal, the only thing to do is to divert from promises about covid-19, college loans, defunding the police, white supremacy, undocumented immigrants or anything else because Democrats and voters just became completely irrelevant.

All the Democratic kleptocrats, the plutocrats and Corporate News Network need to is to divert with ordering "look over there and rant about that!" and like the ultimate cultists start fake irrelevant ranting all adding up to nothing. They laugh their asses off at how stupid nearly everyone is - people they totally control down to the marrow of their bones as their free slaves and worshippers.

 

Except she was attempting to break into a place were congress members were sheltered. And she was there to get in on start of THE STORM as her social media accounts inform.

I have a distinct feeling you know all about The Storm. Seems 14 years of military service doesn't have anything to do with a persons gulliblity.

 

I don't know about that. We are talking about the words coming from the lips of the most powerful person on earth, the President Of The United States.

We are clearly on new ground here, given this fact.

Trump has been whipping up his flock to a frenzy for months, 'they stole the election' he has been pounding in to their malleable brains for months. He has 65 million twitter followers, it wouldn't take much to get 40,000 of them to go to the capitol, and a few hundred of the most ardent frothing-at-the-mouth followers to attack the capitol, which is precisely what happened. then Giuliani said "trial by combat' and Eric exclaimed 'we're coming for you'.

There are special circumstances here. WE are talking about the president of the united states whose words carry tremendous weight.

And listen to his words, many are very direct in their meaning, and his flock knows this:



So, I'm wondering if a new precedent needs to be set, because it allows the president to get away with murder, because of his actions, four people died who might well be still alive but for Trump's actions, if this is the standard.

I think there is a solid case here, given the gravity of the thing. In my view, when it comes to the President, should we apply the Brandenburg precedent? I think there is an argument, in the name of 'justice' that we don't. That we hold the holder of that office, to an even higher standard than we would hold for common citizens.

And, what about 'felony murder' in common law?

After they stormed the WH, doesn't the Prez have an obligation to rise to the occasion, TO APPEAR IN PERSON and STOP them? He didn't, after it was all over, he gave a lame tweet.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/felony_murder_rule

 

You mean like you're trying to do right now ? Divert attention from the sedition and insurrection in which you and your ilk just participated ?

Sorry, but there will be consequences for these venal acts.

Biden and his administration will get on with the business of putting this country back together after the havoc and damage caused by the Right and Dirty Donnie.

 

Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

 

You are a fool if you don't realize this is all pointless diversion leading to nothing. You don't care yourself. Just ordered to rant fake outrage. I understand in your messages you want to be an important Brown Shirt, but you are as much an irrelevant nobody as I am.

Why aren't you celebrating your old fat ultra-pure-white racial segregationist now officially becoming president-election, quoting all he said last night about keeping his campaign promises?

The only difference how the plutocrats and kelptocrats see you and I, is they laugh at you for being their chump over and over and over and over and over. Maybe Jeff Bezos is going to send you some money, but I wouldn't hold my breathe if I were you. Wait, I bet if you tell the plutocrats you are going to hold your breathe throwing a tantrum until they do then maybe they'll at least acknowledge that you exist. LOL

 

that tweet is from AFTER it happened...pleas show me his "Storm the capital tweet"...I'll be waiting.....................................................................................

 

This is how things work in the real world: First, a federal prosecutor has to indict the president, meaning, persuade a grand jury that there is probable cause to believe an offense occurred. If he gets the indictment, he takes the case to trial, and then proves (or doesn't), beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offense was committed by the defendant. Personally, I don't think he would gert an indictment in normal times, but the world has gone crazy, so who knows? In any event, this is the law:

18 U.S.C. 2101:

(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent—
(1) to incite a riot; or
(2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or
(3) to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or
(4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot;
and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph— [1]
Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.


Democrats' and liberals' mouths water at the prospect of orange man wearing orange jumpsuit for 5 years.

But here's the problem:

18 U.S. Code § 2102. Definitions

....
(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.


Now, here is what he said:


“We will never give up; we will never concede,” Trump said to thunderous applause. “We will stop the steal. We’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol…We’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones…the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

If the jury is made up of a cross section of the community (unless the community means DC), the jury will split on whether the call to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue constitutes incitement to riot.
In criminal cases, the verdict must be unanimous. Does anyone think that a fair cross section of the community will render a unanimous verdict either way?

 

I'm pretty sure he will not even be indicted. Getting people all riled up" doesn't get you there. Not even close. This is sedition:

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government ....
See 18 USC 2385

Even if one concedes every other point you make, Trump never advocated force or violence.

 

Not even Biden thinks Trump is criminally responsible for sedition or incitement to riot, not in the legal sense that I have outlined above.

You especially might benefit from reading what sedition actually is. I posted it above.

 

Sucks when an "old fat ultra-pure-white racial segregationist" is on such a higher moral and social plane than the LOSER you have been supporting for the past 4 years.

BTW, your LOSER supported racism, bigotry, ignorance and plutocracy so you shouldn't have a problem with the incoming administration.

 

Actually, the LOSER won in 2016. What political election have you ever won?

 

You're trying to debate with people whose minds are twisted with hatred.

 

It may very well be a stretch. Perhaps they can get Donnie, Rudy and the kids for "incitement to riot".
The point is, this can't be ignored. There have to be punitive consequences for this historic insurrection.

 

The LOSER promply pissed away 2016. I've never stood for election. Why ? What false equivalence are you trying to create ?

 

I was hoping you would tell us about all the elections you have won. National elections will be particularly helpful in knowing your record. After we get that, we'll be in a better position to know your record relative to Trump's in the political world.

 

Well, we certainly can ignore it for legal purposes. We don't "stretch" to convict people of crimes. We indict for probable cause. We convict upon proof of all the essential elements beyond reasonable doubt. Read the definitions of sedition and of incitement to riot I provided and make your case.

All this ignores the other important rule of law that a person is presumed innocent. You guys sound ready to string him up without trial. Or are you ready to presume him innocent?

 

Proof against Trump needs to be provided. IN A COURT OF LAW.

 

SO, still no proof i see. not surprised!

 

It will only go to court if he is indicted. That wouldn't happen in normal times. But the left has lost its mind, along with too many liberals ready for a lynching, so who knows?

 

If you don't break the law, and listen to the cops, you won't get shot. Easy.

 

I've never falsely and repeatedly claimed election fraud, lost in court 59 times, and caused a riot. In that sense , I have a fantastic record, political or otherwise.

Absolutely. In legal terms, he hasn't been charged, much less convicted of anything. So what ?
Make my case ? I'll leave that to the DOJ and the District of Columbia.

My personal opinion is, and has been for the past 4 years, that Dirty Donnie the Seditionist Superspreader Swamp Thing is a criminal on many levels.

 

LOL, a Trump supporter telling me that the Left has "lost its mind" - sure, right.

 

Far more proof than stolen election.