Winning Legal Advice For Donald J. Trump

Ok we all know Trump spoke to a large crowd, and convinced the crowd to put pressure on legislators not to certify the election results, because Trump was really the winner.

Now because Trump lost 62 lawsuits, claiming election fraud, the court of law had spoken. Trump did not have the right to make those claims to a crowd to ask them to pressure on legislators to not certify the election.

Therefore he can be convicted of insurrection, and the 14th Amendment clearly applies to the ballot ban.

But… is there anything that could overrule this and give greater precedent to Free Speech?

How about Freedom of Religion?

Why doesn’t Trump’s legal team make the claim that Trump believes it was an act of God that he lost the election?

Is it an issue of ego? Trump would have to say God made me lose!

a reply to: IgorMartinez

So you don't think that people should have the right to free expression.

Um, kay.

Odd, but what ev's.

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Due process says the 14th cannot be applied yet.

50+ actual rebels being allowed to serve the nation politically after the civil war (house, senate, and appointed positions) also suggest that the 14th doesnt quite have the punch some people think.

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Why doesn’t Trump’s legal team make the claim that Trump believes it was an act of God that he lost the election?

As the majority of Americans are not sure if God exists, i don't think that claim would hold much credence.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: IgorMartinez

Why doesn’t Trump’s legal team make the claim that Trump believes it was an act of God that he lost the election?

As the majority of Americans are not sure if God exists

news.gallup.com...

a reply to: PorkChop96

Right.

A majority of Americans now say they are not sure about the existence of God, according to a new survey.

www.independent.co.uk...

originally posted by: IgorMartinez

Therefore he can be convicted of insurrection

Then do it! For the love of all thing holy do it or STFU!!

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IgorMartinez

So you don't think that people should have the right to free expression.

Um, kay.

Odd, but what ev's.

From the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"Despite the broad freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment, there are some historically rooted exceptions. First, the government may generally restrict the time, place, or manner of speech, if the restrictions are unrelated to what the speech says and leave people with enough alternative ways of expressing their views. Thus, for instance, the government may restrict the use of loudspeakers in residential areas at night, limit all demonstrations that block traffic, or ban all picketing of people’s homes.

Second, a few narrow categories of speech are not protected from government restrictions. The main such categories are incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, child pornography, fighting words, and threats. As the Supreme Court held in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the government may forbid “incitement”—speech “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and “likely to incite or produce such action” (such as a speech to a mob urging it to attack a nearby building)....."

www.britannica.com...#:~:text=The%20main%20such%20categories%20are,%2C%20fighting%20 words%2C%20and%20threats.

How many of those forbidden categories has Trump checked off his to-do list? I would say incitement, defamation, and fraud for sure, just based on all the lawsuits he's facing. Possibly fighting words and threats in the future, if he really puts his mind to it.

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Therefore he can be convicted of insurrection, and the 14th Amendment clearly applies to the ballot ban.

K.

So where's the charge among the 90 some currently.


Put it simply, how many times does this argument need rehashed before you come to the logical conclusion?

a reply to: Boomer1947

Yet none of those things are being charged.

They are empty, like your posts here on this forum.

Lots of bluster, no bite and certainly nothing to back it up.

a reply to: Boomer1947

Yet none of those things are being charged.

They are empty, like your posts here on this forum.

Lots of bluster, no bite and certainly nothing to back it up.

a reply to: Boomer1947

It's funny.

The left calls violence free speech, but also calls free speech, violence.

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Trump did not have the right to make those claims to a crowd to ask them to pressure on legislators to not certify the election.


You really need to cite those claims with verified sources and transcripts and video. And then how those could get a conviction in court. 😃

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Therefore he can be convicted of insurrection, and the 14th Amendment clearly applies to the ballot ban.


The Colorado case is in The SCOTUS.

27 States have filed an Amicus Brief in favor of Trump being on the Ballot.

It cites dozens of cases as precedent examples and has good reasons for The Scotus to overturn.

The 14th may not even apply at all!

😀
File 697067200-Indiana-West-Virginia-Amicus-Brief.pdf

a reply to: IgorMartinez

I have an honest question for you. If Colorado and Maine are allowed to remove Trump from the ballot due to their belief he caused an insurrection, do you foresee any red states removing Biden for his aid and comfort to the enemy? I think it's totally childish, but it's sadly a necessary step if this is the new normal.

What do you think?

originally posted by: IgorMartinez
Trump did not have the right to make those claims to a crowd to ask them to pressure on legislators to not certify the election.

I dunno. I'm not a Trump fan ... but doesn't he have the right to have the opinion that there was cheating and to call on people to help prove it and to not certify something that he thought was illegal?

Kinda murky there ....

He didn't call for an overthrow. He said that the election wasn't legitimate. Kinda different I think.

originally posted by: network dude
do you foresee any red states removing Biden for his aid and comfort to the enemy?

I see a tit for tat starting and growing.

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Why doesn’t Trump’s legal team make the claim that Trump believes it was an act of God that he lost the election?


How would "an act of God" be proven in court? 😀

Why can't Biden be removed for being a pedophile? Isn't pedophilia illegal in the U.S.?

a reply to: IgorMartinez

Trump did not have the right to make those claims to a crowd to ask them to pressure on legislators to not certify the election.

If he had no "right", what law(s) make(s) those claims illegal? 😃