Shouldn’t Kamala Harris be Indicted for Encouraging BLM riots?

[Skylar]

I said all, why are you so dense? Are you corrupt dishonest or just stupid?

Kamala Harris Called BLM Protests ‘a Movement’ Last Summer, Said ‘They Should Not’ Stop

Violence is never the answer to resolving conflict, but it’s hard not to see the hypocrisy of

pjmedia.com

And which riot did her statement incite....specifically. What statement did she make, specifically, that incited the riot?

Also, are you familiar with the 'imminent lawless action' standard? If no, you should be. When you're levying charges against folks, you'll want to aquaint yourself with protected 1st amendment speech.

 

[Blisterfinger]

And which riot did her statement incite....specifically. What statement did she make, specifically, that incited the riot?

Also, are you familiar with the 'imminent lawless action' standard? If no, you should be. When you're levying charges against folks, you'll want to aquaint yourself with protected 1st amendment speech.

I said "all" (riots) what about that dont you understand? She said "they should not, would not let up"
Violent democrats

 

[Skylar]

I said "all" (riots) what about that dont you understand? She said "they should not, would not let up"
Violent democrats

That's not how incitement works nor has ever worked. In order for incitement to stick, you need strong evidence of incitment to imminent lawless action.

Her advocating SPECIFIC lawless action that is carried out pretty much immediately. Advoacy of lawless action at some undefinite time in the future simply doesn't qualify.

Says who? That would be the SCOTUS in the Hess ruling.

There's no such thing as 'general' incitement. It has to be specific statements to incite specific and imminent lawless action by specific people at a specific time.

Otherwise, its just free speech.

You....you have no idea about the caselaw surrounding this issue, do you?

 

[Blisterfinger]

That's not how incitement works nor has ever worked. In order for incitement to stick, you need strong evidence of incitment to imminent lawless action.

Her advocating SPECIFIC lawless action that is carried out pretty much immediately. Advoacy of lawless action at some undefinite time in the future simply doesn't qualify.

Says who? That would be the SCOTUS in the Hess ruling.

There's no such thing as 'general' incitement. It has to be specific statements to incite specific and imminent lawless action by specific people at a specific time.

Otherwise, its just free speech.

You....you have no idea about the caselaw surrounding this issue, do you?

**** man I didn't know we were in court here. Maybe you are in your mind. I'm just sharing my opinion of the dishonest dishonorable lying ass violent Democrats. If you don't like it take a hike. You seem kind of stupid anyway
How to steal an election

 

[Skylar]

**** man I didn't know we were in court here. Maybe you are in your mind. I'm just sharing my opinion of the dishonest dishonorable lying ass violent Democrats. If you don't like it take a hike. You seem kind of stupid anyway
How to steal an election

If we're talking about charging someone with actual crimes, you're gonna have to take the law into account.

Any attempt to charge Trump with incitement would likely fail for the same reason: its a long walk from the white house to the capitol. That break makes the 'imminent' part of 'imminent lawless action' hard to prove.

Kamala Harris making some comment that days, weeks or MONTHS later supposedly resulted in a riot? Not a chance in hell of meeting the imminent lawless action standard.

 

[Blisterfinger]

If we're talking about charging someone with actual crimes, you're gonna have to take the law into account.

Any attempt to charge Trump with incitement would likely fail for the same reason: its a long walk from the white house to the capitol. That break makes the 'imminent' part of 'imminent lawless action' hard to prove.

Kamala Harris making some comment that days, weeks or MONTHS later supposedly resulted in a riot? Not a chance in hell of meeting the imminent lawless action standard.

If we're talking about charging someone with actual crimes, you're gonna have to take the law into account.

Any attempt to charge Trump with incitement would likely fail for the same reason: its a long walk from the white house to the capitol. That break makes the 'imminent' part of 'imminent lawless action' hard to prove.

Kamala Harris making some comment that days, weeks or MONTHS later supposedly resulted in a riot? Not a chance in hell of meeting the imminent lawless action standard.

We seem to live in a post-truth and post rule of law Society however, so anything goes depending on who is in charge. That is the New Order of Things, sounds like you need to do a little adjusting.

 

[francoHFW]

You should switch your news sources because you sound like a total idiot. Gullible brainwashed sap LOL.View attachment 822995

your Biden lies all crap and spin out of all reality....

 

[Blisterfinger]

your Biden lies all crap and spin out of all reality....

Biden is a proven liar, Where Have You been?

 

[francoHFW]

Biden is a proven liar, Where Have You been?

Everything you know is crap propaganda, Super Duper. for example his class ranking was what he said to shut up a stupid heckler up who didn't know what he was talking about 40 years ago LOL.

 

[francoHFW]

We seem to live in a post-truth and post rule of law Society however, so anything goes depending on who is in charge. That is the New Order of Things, sounds like you need to do a little adjusting.

Speak for yourself, ignoramus brainwashed functional anti American treasonous dingbat lol. Change the damn channel and stop listening to Anti American crap from the big orange con man and the biggest PO S Mediaman of the last 80 years at least...

 

[Blisterfinger]

Everything you know is crap propaganda, Super Duper. for example his class ranking was what he said to shut up a stupid heckler up who didn't know what he was talking about 40 years ago LOL.

Man you need to get off the dope. The only reason you like Biden is the free crack pipe program the instituted. What a shill of the left you are, imbecile. Put down the the dope dumbass

 

[Blisterfinger]

Speak for yourself, ignoramus brainwashed functional anti American treasonous dingbat lol. Change the damn channel and stop listening to Anti American crap from the big orange con man and the biggest PO S Mediaman of the last 80 years at least...

Says the stupid ass who believes everything the Democrats cram down his throat! What a dumbass, put down the crack pipe LOL

 

[Faun]

View attachment 822942

What a loser he is, huh? Most corrupt president in U.S. history and thrown out of office after just 1 term.

 

[Faun]

Kind of funny, huh? You want to get Trump without your being able to show a quote of him inciting the riots while with Kamala your defense is sure she tried to incite riots but no one listened to her because she's not worth listening to, LOL Democrats just constantly redefine everything to say you win, we lose. People are tired of it, and you're going to start paying for it

Easy. The answers to 2 questions reveal that...

1) Why did many in that crowd go from liking Mike Pence on January 5th to wanting to kill him on January 6th?

2) Who told them that?

 

[Faun]

Looking for those quotes of Trump calling for violence. Are you or have you already looked and you know they aren't there?

Why would you look for that in a thread about Harris unless your intent is to avoid the thread topic by proxy of diversion because you know the thread topic is a complete fail?

 

[Faun]

Trump never said that.

Again, his tweet...

 

[Faun]

When did trump ever say he was going to put raffensperger in jail?

"He [Donald Trump] gave @BrianKempGA and GASecofState every chance to get it right. They refused. They will soon be going to jail." ~ Donald Trump, 12.15.20

 

[Faun]

Still, that requires a lot of assumption. There simply isn’t any evidence that he was issuing a threat…

LOL

"They will soon be going to jail." ~ Donald Trump, 12.15.20

 

[Faun]

Ok, so you have trump retweeting something that linn wood said. I get the inference, but you do not have trump himself saying he was going to take legal action. Maybe trump liked the idea of raffensperger going to jail and that’s why he retweeted it, or maybe he like that linn wood said “trump is a good man”…you can draw many inferences from it, but, you don’t have the threat from trump himself.

Trump tweeted that. You get a retweet is like tweeting a meme, right? It's the tweeter expressing support for the words they're posting.

 

[BlindBoo]

Speaking of being specific, show the quotes of Trump inciting the riots. Was it when he said to demonstrate peacefully?

Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.
.....
So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

....

Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial

The former president's remarks are being used by Democrats hoping to convict him for incitement of insurrection — and are being defended by his lawyers in the Senate proceedings.

www.npr.org