Trump not immune from civil claims from Jan. 6 speech, judge rules

[Zincwarrior]

Federal judge is allowing civil suits against Trump to go forward arising from the equitable harms he caused by his speech on that day. Interesting. The deposition of him and others will be interesting indeed.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5811066-judge-allows-trump-jan6-suit/

Trump not immune from civil claims from Jan. 6 speech, judge rules​

A federal judge is allowing a civil suit brought against President Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021 to proceed in court, a victory for Democratic lawmakers and Capitol Police officers who brought the litigation.

The late Tuesday ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta found that Trump’s speech on the Ellipse that day was not covered by the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, determining it could not be considered a core presidential act.


He also determined the phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) asking him to “find” more votes was clearly an effort “to alter the outcome of Georgia’s election.”

The ruling is significant not only in that it allows those seeking to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 to continue the fight but because it shows the limits of a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that largely sided with the president in finding former executives immune for actions they carried out as part of their core White House role.

Mehta found that Trump’s speech near the mall could not be considered an official White House act because “nearly all the individuals who ran the nuts and bolts of the operation” were campaign-affiliated or otherwise linked to his re-election efforts.

​

 

[Meister]

Federal judge is allowing civil suits against Trump to go forward arising from the equitable harms he caused by his speech on that day. Interesting. The deposition of him and others will be interesting indeed.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5811066-judge-allows-trump-jan6-suit/

Trump not immune from civil claims from Jan. 6 speech, judge rules​

A federal judge is allowing a civil suit brought against President Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021 to proceed in court, a victory for Democratic lawmakers and Capitol Police officers who brought the litigation.

The late Tuesday ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta found that Trump’s speech on the Ellipse that day was not covered by the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, determining it could not be considered a core presidential act.


He also determined the phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) asking him to “find” more votes was clearly an effort “to alter the outcome of Georgia’s election.”

The ruling is significant not only in that it allows those seeking to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 to continue the fight but because it shows the limits of a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that largely sided with the president in finding former executives immune for actions they carried out as part of their core White House role.

Mehta found that Trump’s speech near the mall could not be considered an official White House act because “nearly all the individuals who ran the nuts and bolts of the operation” were campaign-affiliated or otherwise linked to his re-election efforts.

​

Another liberal federal judge, huh? An Obama stooge no less.

Not surprising and another trip to the appeals court.

What month is your recession going to start this year, Zinc?

 

[Muhammed]

Federal judge is allowing civil suits against Trump to go forward arising from the equitable harms he caused by his speech on that day. Interesting. The deposition of him and others will be interesting indeed.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5811066-judge-allows-trump-jan6-suit/

Trump not immune from civil claims from Jan. 6 speech, judge rules​

A federal judge is allowing a civil suit brought against President Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021 to proceed in court, a victory for Democratic lawmakers and Capitol Police officers who brought the litigation.

The late Tuesday ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta found that Trump’s speech on the Ellipse that day was not covered by the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, determining it could not be considered a core presidential act.


He also determined the phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) asking him to “find” more votes was clearly an effort “to alter the outcome of Georgia’s election.”

The ruling is significant not only in that it allows those seeking to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 to continue the fight but because it shows the limits of a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that largely sided with the president in finding former executives immune for actions they carried out as part of their core White House role.

Mehta found that Trump’s speech near the mall could not be considered an official White House act because “nearly all the individuals who ran the nuts and bolts of the operation” were campaign-affiliated or otherwise linked to his re-election efforts.

​

The 1st amendment makes Trump immune, you fuckin' disgusting dumbass.

 

[JLW]

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater just like you can't lie about election fraud to rile up a crowd to besiege the Capital building. If someone is injured or harmed you must pay.

However, don't worry about Donny his supporters will gladly pay up if he is found liable.

 

[Meister]

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater just like you can't lie about election fraud to rile up a crowd to besiege the Capital building. If someone is injured or harmed you must pay.

However, don't worry about Donny his supporters will gladly pay up if he is found liable.

I didn't know that "Donny" was in a theatre that day. Linky?

 

[Zincwarrior]

The 1st amendment makes Trump immune, you fuckin' disgusting dumbass.

Not from civil actions, remember? This is not government action, its private action.

 

[Muhammed]

Not from civil actions, remember? This is not government action, its private action.

Whatever. I guess you're right.

If I was in Trump's shoes I'd have the marines go get them, line them up and shoot them in the middle of 5th avenue.

And do it legally.

 

[JonKoch]

The 1st amendment makes Trump immune, you fuckin' disgusting dumbass.

My gawd CULT MEMBERS ARE STOOPID. The first stops GOVERNMENT from restricting speech, it doesn't give immunity to lies or criminality



''The First Amendment generally protects false speech, but it does not protect lies that cause specific, tangible harms, such as fraud, defamation, perjury, or speech inciting imminent lawless action. While deliberate falsehoods are often protected, they lose this protection when integral to criminal conduct, such as identity theft or misleading investors.''

 

[Muhammed]

My gawd CULT MEMBERS ARE STOOPID. The first stops GOVERNMENT from restricting speech, it doesn't give immunity to lies or criminality



''The First Amendment generally protects false speech, but it does not protect lies that cause specific, tangible harms, such as fraud, defamation, perjury, or speech inciting imminent lawless action. While deliberate falsehoods are often protected, they lose this protection when integral to criminal conduct, such as identity theft or misleading investors.''

Whatever the case, they are only doing it to hurt the USA.

So Trump should kill them, legally. Just make a determination that they are terrorists responsible for 9/11, and use the military to kill them under the 2001 AUMF, which was a formal declaration of war.

 

[PeanutGallery]

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater just like you can't lie about election fraud to rile up a crowd to besiege the Capital building. If someone is injured or harmed you must pay.

However, don't worry about Donny his supporters will gladly pay up if he is found liable.

You can yell fire in a crowded theater if there's actually a fire going on in the theater.

 

[Zincwarrior]

You can yell fire in a crowded theater if there's actually a fire going on in the theater.

But is you shout that the guy in the back row is setting a fire and to get him, that guy can later sue you.

 

[PeanutGallery]

But is you shout that the guy in the back row is setting a fire and to get him, that guy can later sue you.

If he's actually trying to do that, trying to stop him will lead to the arsonist suing? I think it'll be very hard to find a jury that would find the ones who did it guilty.

 

[JonKoch]

Whatever the case, they are only doing it to hurt the USA.

So Trump should kill them, legally. Just make a determination that they are terrorists responsible for 9/11, and use the military to kill them under the 2001 AUMF, which was a formal declaration of war.

First 2001 WASN'T a formal declaration of war.

Hurt the USA? How is Cheeto "the USA?