Slow news day?
Comments
-
Indictment is fantasyland. He threatened Pence with the crowd? That's funny.
-
-
Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
Any answer would be speculation, but I'd guess Smith was trying to take away the argument that his prosecution was intended to disqualify Daddy under the 14th Amendment.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
You mean why Ray Epps who was on the ground saying "We need to go into the Capitol" wasn't indicted? Ask the dazzler. Why weren't antifa/blm leaders indicted for inciting and funding violent protest during Trump's inauguration? I have no problem with indicting people who entered the Capitol as long as that it also applies to dem groups who invade the Capitol and that the sentences are proportionate. The summer of love riots had the full support of almost every dem Congressman and Blue State governors and city mayors.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
Your answer gets to basically what I think the reason is. Charge him for incitement in relation to the riot and the riot itself is on the table for actual examination.WestlinnDuck said:
You mean why Ray Epps who was on the ground saying "We need to go into the Capitol" wasn't indicted? Ask the dazzler. Why weren't antifa/blm leaders indicted for inciting and funding violent protest during Trump's inauguration? I have no problem with indicting people who entered the Capitol as long as that it also applies to dem groups who invade the Capitol and that the sentences are proportionate. The summer of love riots had the full support of almost every dem Congressman and Blue State governors and city mayors.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
You need to prove incitement. Asking for a peaceful protest with no mention of going into the Capitol Building isn't incitement and is protected as free speech. Where is Ray Epps? Complaining because you think the election was stolen (it was) can't be incitement if it's okay for major dem politicians to make the false claim that every Republican presidential victory since 2000 was stolen.Bob_C said:
Your answer gets to basically what I think the reason is. Charge him for incitement in relation to the riot and the riot itself is on the table for actual examination.WestlinnDuck said:
You mean why Ray Epps who was on the ground saying "We need to go into the Capitol" wasn't indicted? Ask the dazzler. Why weren't antifa/blm leaders indicted for inciting and funding violent protest during Trump's inauguration? I have no problem with indicting people who entered the Capitol as long as that it also applies to dem groups who invade the Capitol and that the sentences are proportionate. The summer of love riots had the full support of almost every dem Congressman and Blue State governors and city mayors.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
And yetHHusky said:
Any answer would be speculation, but I'd guess Smith was trying to take away the argument that his prosecution was intended to disqualify Daddy under the 14th Amendment.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
You suck at this -
Then frame it as inciting a riot and not an insurrection. We had a whole committee last summer that thought this was a big deal and that did a criminal referral over the capitol riot incitement.HHusky said:
Any answer would be speculation, but I'd guess Smith was trying to take away the argument that his prosecution was intended to disqualify Daddy under the 14th Amendment.Bob_C said:Curious for the legal scholars on this thread, why wasn't he indicted for incitement of the events on J6 that the committee told us were really really bad and he did it? Was that an illusion? Thanks in advance.
-
Question #1
Wasn't Trump acquitted by the Senate in the second impeachment concerning Jan 6 insurrection.
Question #2
Are we crossing into double Jeopardy with this new indictment?
(Asking for a fren)





