Trump's speech does not rise to the level of incitement

[bmw]

So says Danny Cevallos of NBC News.

Punishable incitement must "specifically advocate" for listeners to take unlawful action, give the crowd detailed instructions on how to break the law, or enlist the crowd to carry out a criminal act, the high court has said.

Under the Supreme Court's Brandenburg test, speech cannot constitute incitement unless the speaker intends lawlessness to result.

Some, including senators in Trump's trial, will point out that the rioters stormed the Capitol after hearing Trump's speech. To them, the evidence that the speech incited violence is apparent: there was violence after it.

But defining the speech by the audience's reaction, however, may be an unconstitutional "heckler’s veto," as a legal doctrine is known. The heckler's veto doctrine provides that the hostile reaction of a crowd does not transform protected speech into incitement. A speaker is not automatically liable for the acts of anyone who was at an intended peaceful demonstration. Rather, the speaker must have the intent to engage in the criminal conduct.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... e-n1254258

[Honeyman]

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and others have had a different interpretation of the law. Personally, I don't think this will ever go to trial. However, it certainly appears that Trump has already lost in the court of public opinion.

[Turkeytop]

It certainly had the effect of inciting a mob.

Trump thanked the mob afterward saying "We love you. You're very special."

[Bryce]

Another important fact. According to the Washington Post's timeline of the day. The Capitol was breached well before Trumps speech ended. Trumpsters don't leave while "the man" is still speaking.

Also, according to CNN...

Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.

Among the evidence the FBI is examining are indications that some participants at the Trump rally at the Ellipse, outside the White House, left the event early, perhaps to retrieve items to be used in the assault on the Capitol.

Lets also remember how much the "facts" have changed after the dust has settled with any number of events. Remember how Benghazi was a "protest" because of a YouTube video. Susan Rice told us so, many times. Turned out to be planned well in advance. Hands Up Don't Shoot was another.

I want to know who shot Ms. Babbitt. I've seen several videos of the shooting, from a number of angles. You all know I give law enforcement every benefit of the doubt, but this was outright negligent homicide at best. Why are they slow walking this? I swear, if Ms. Bobbitt had a slightly darker skin color, there would be protests outside the Capitol 24-hours a day. Why does no one seem to care?

[Lester The Nightfly]

Another important fact. According to the Washington Post's timeline of the day. The Capitol was breached well before Trumps speech ended. Trumpsters don't leave while "the man" is still speaking.

Also, according to CNN...

Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.

Among the evidence the FBI is examining are indications that some participants at the Trump rally at the Ellipse, outside the White House, left the event early, perhaps to retrieve items to be used in the assault on the Capitol.

Lets also remember how much the "facts" have changed after the dust has settled with any number of events. Remember how Benghazi was a "protest" because of a YouTube video. Susan Rice told us so, many times. Turned out to be planned well in advance. Hands Up Don't Shoot was another.

I want to know who shot Ms. Babbitt. I've seen several videos of the shooting, from a number of angles. You all know I give law enforcement every benefit of the doubt, but this was outright negligent homicide at best. Why are they slow walking this? I swear, if Ms. Bobbitt had a slightly darker skin color, there would be protests outside the Capitol 24-hours a day. Why does no one seem to care?

The other slam dunk would be the cop would walk...

[Motown322]

I swear, if Ms. Bobbitt had a slightly darker skin color, there would be protests outside the Capitol 24-hours a day. Why does no one seem to care?

I think another interesting question is, would YOU care as much about this had darker skin color been in play here and the cause was something you didn't agree with? I've seen more than a couple instances of "negligent homicide" by police officers in my day but it typically gets explained away with the "if the victim would've just done what they were told this wouldn't have happened!!"

There's gonna be a lot of questions that get answered about all this shit that went down last week...

[craig11152]

The problem is he spent months chumming the water. So his words that day are a small part of a bigger picture.

[screen glare]

Trump is forever F’d.

And republicans who won’t exit off his four year long freeway of lies and whitey supremacy are also F’d.

Both the inciter and his enablers are tightly bound together in the F’d “basket of deplorables.”

Justice.
At last!

Watch ‘em squirm like worms to distance and exonerate themselves.

Sorry sickos. You’ve doomed yourselves to history’s inescapable lock box of infamy.

[Honeyman]

The problem is he spent months chumming the water. So his words that day are a small part of a bigger picture.

[Bryce]

I swear, if Ms. Bobbitt had a slightly darker skin color, there would be protests outside the Capitol 24-hours a day. Why does no one seem to care?

I think another interesting question is, would YOU care as much about this had darker skin color been in play here and the cause was something you didn't agree with? I've seen more than a couple instances of "negligent homicide" by police officers in my day but it typically gets explained away with the "if the victim would've just done what they were told this wouldn't have happened!!"

There's gonna be a lot of questions that get answered about all this shit that went down last week...

Yes, yes I would. If the actions don't meet the threshold of "use of deadly force" I don't care who the person is or what the individual looks like. There are both legal and moral issues at play in the use of deadly force. I don't believe either one was satisfied in this instance. That young lady was not an imminent threat to the officer or anyone around him. The only thing he can claim, in my estimation, is "Fog of War." At the level he was working, that shouldn't be a valid excuse. It's not like this officer was some backwoods Sherriff's Deputy.

I just don't understand why I seem the only one concerned about this. There doesn't seem to be anyone questioning this or upset about it.

[TC Talks]

You seem to be in disbelief about a lot of things right now Bryce. Give TM a try.

[Bryce]

Give TM a try.

Sorry, I only say Ohm when working with conductors.

[Honeyman]

Maybe play with your dogs more then. You're going off the deep end.

[bmw]

The problem is he spent months chumming the water. So his words that day are a small part of a bigger picture.

This looks more like what Democrat governors are doing to individual rights and small businesses during COVID.

[Bryce]

Deep end?

The homicide of 13-year Air Force Veteran by a member of Capitol security doesn't warrant any attention? I'm flabbergasted.