And the pigeon takes another lap.
Who is a bigger threat to our Democracy; Hunter Biden or Donald Trump?
- Thread starter ElmerMudd
- Start date
Aldo Raine
Gold Member
Says the chicken!
sartre play
Gold Member
- May 4, 2015
- 13,311
- 4,449
- 210
Having a problem equating the sale of girl scout cookies to do with anything that is important about how the running of our country should be handled.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,681
- 17,617
- 2,250
"Rhodes’ seditious conspiracy conviction suggests the jury believed, as one prosecutor asserted, that he “concocted a plan for an armed rebellion to shatter a bedrock of American democracy.” In other words, he was convicted over what he had said and written prior to the actual Jan. 6 attack – and this is where free speech comes into play.
The First Amendment guarantees that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It’s considered a sacred American right, one that sets the U.S. apart from many peer nations, some of which have stricter controls and consequences for speech that may be harmful.
Efforts to arrest and convict groups in the U.S. that have discussed violence against racial groups, politicians or others have often been stymied by appeals to the First Amendment.
Far-right extremists or other hate groups can claim they are just venting or even fantasizing – both of which would be protected under the First Amendment. In the absence of any specific plan, threat or incitement, group members may never suffer legal consequences for oral or written expressions that nonetheless create fear in those who draw these groups’ ire.
For this reason, seditious conspiracy charges have historically been hard to prosecute.
The last time this charge was attempted was against members of the Christian militia group called Hutaree in Michigan in 2009, for allegedly planning to engage law enforcement “in armed conflict.” But the judge dismissed the sedition charges, citing First Amendment protections.
What is interesting about the Oath Keepers case is that Rhodes himself did not breach the Capitol yet was convicted of seditious conspiracy. Meanwhile three of his co-defendants – Jessica Watkins, Kenneth Harrelson and Thomas Caldwell – did storm into the Capitol building, but were not convicted of that charge.
This suggests that the jury believed that Rhodes’ texts and other communications incited others to violent, undemocratic action in a way that requires accountability."
Oath Keepers Convictions Shed Light On The Limits Of Free Speech – And The Threat Posed By Militias - Honolulu Civil Beat
The convictions of Stewart Rhodes and other Oath Keepers may lead law enforcement agencies to shift their understanding of militia groups.
www.civilbeat.org
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
JWBooth
Diamond Member
**** your “democracy “
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
I can't do anything about your intelligence level.
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
"Rhodes’ seditious conspiracy conviction suggests the jury believed, as one prosecutor asserted, that he “concocted a plan for an armed rebellion to shatter a bedrock of American democracy.” In other words, he was convicted over what he had said and written prior to the actual Jan. 6 attack – and this is where free speech comes into play.
The First Amendment guarantees that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It’s considered a sacred American right, one that sets the U.S. apart from many peer nations, some of which have stricter controls and consequences for speech that may be harmful.
Efforts to arrest and convict groups in the U.S. that have discussed violence against racial groups, politicians or others have often been stymied by appeals to the First Amendment.
Far-right extremists or other hate groups can claim they are just venting or even fantasizing – both of which would be protected under the First Amendment. In the absence of any specific plan, threat or incitement, group members may never suffer legal consequences for oral or written expressions that nonetheless create fear in those who draw these groups’ ire.
For this reason, seditious conspiracy charges have historically been hard to prosecute.
The last time this charge was attempted was against members of the Christian militia group called Hutaree in Michigan in 2009, for allegedly planning to engage law enforcement “in armed conflict.” But the judge dismissed the sedition charges, citing First Amendment protections.
What is interesting about the Oath Keepers case is that Rhodes himself did not breach the Capitol yet was convicted of seditious conspiracy. Meanwhile three of his co-defendants – Jessica Watkins, Kenneth Harrelson and Thomas Caldwell – did storm into the Capitol building, but were not convicted of that charge.
This suggests that the jury believed that Rhodes’ texts and other communications incited others to violent, undemocratic action in a way that requires accountability."
Oath Keepers Convictions Shed Light On The Limits Of Free Speech – And The Threat Posed By Militias - Honolulu Civil Beat
The convictions of Stewart Rhodes and other Oath Keepers may lead law enforcement agencies to shift their understanding of militia groups.
This suggests that a jury in Washington DC is prone to utter and complete bullshit - that no one to the right of Putin can get a fair trial - and this whole affair is a mockery.
As I said, you're Reich openly assaults our constitution and freedom of speech. While you cheer them.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,681
- 17,617
- 2,250
These are the things that happen when the Orange God unleashed his Biglie on the mentally incompetent Militia's who actually thought Trumpy "The Back Stabber" was going to cover their backs, declare Martial Law, adjourn Congress, and disregard the Constitution.....and do all the fantastical things those Trumpybear supporting Militia's all dream of...
So, why DID Hunter get that job? Can you even pretend to answer that or is your deflector shield on too much? And I want to talk to the adult, not the 5-year-old that's been borrowing your phone.
Aldo Raine
Gold Member
I would not let you borrow my phone, no worries. For the same reason that Jared was given $2,000,000,000 to "invest" by the Saudis.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,681
- 17,617
- 2,250
For his PR values. Did they break any Ukrainian law or US law by offering him a job? Did Hunter break any laws by accepting it?
sartre play
Gold Member
- May 4, 2015
- 13,311
- 4,449
- 210
TRUTH, Everyone who has money connections & some power, GETS preferred treatment, and or access to money making possibility's. And you and every one else knows it. Not about political party, Its just reality.
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
No, these are the things that happen when fascists seize power. Civil rights are trampled under the jackboots of the democrat thugs.
This is under appeal, and in a different venue - outside of the swamp, it will be tossed out and the political assault on the opposition that it is.
I hope that the Department of Injustice and that corrupt pile of shit Garland appeals that and it goes to the SCOTUS, but then SCOTUS threw out "sedition" over a hundred years ago under "Debs," yet the lust of your Reich to crush civil rights drives you to keep testing what you can get away with.
Ah, an adult enters the fray. Okay, PR value is a POSSIBLE reason for giving him such a job, along with access to the two highest political offices in the US. Do we have any idea if they used him for PR? As for breaking laws, that's never been in contention, as we don't know, but if there is influence peddling, or cash kickbacks to the "Big Guy", we will need to deal with that, and hopefully that will come to light and not be buried by the partisan democrats in House (thankfully out of power now).
Now, there was another factor to this, with which I started, but temporarily shelved because the other poster was being a moron and got overwhelmed very easily, and that's regarding Hunter's paintings. I don't believe they're worth $10, but he's getting big bucks for them, and I don't see any reason for that beyond access to the Oval Office. Do you? I don't think PR would apply in this case.
And the TRUMP! obsession continues unabated in the fever swamp. Too bad he's not actually in power and therefore relevant.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,681
- 17,617
- 2,250
Try to seize power......Trumpyturd failed, and the winner of the 50 democratic elections assumed office a couple of weeks later. The ongoing prosecutions are a direct result of the attempt to seize power. Of course it's the ones dumb enough to buy into the Biglie and go on that rampage who are paying the price so far........
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,681
- 17,617
- 2,250
Well, I don't know for sure but I'd be willing to bet they have laws and loopholes that most all political families know about that let them get away with millions.....
Aldo Raine
Gold Member
He and his cult believe he is. Hell they still believe he is president.
Remember HE called himself "The Chosen One".
MAGAGA
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Trump isn't president.
He's just the last LEGITIMATE president.
Xi's man is Resident now.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
US clears flying taxis for limited use as FAA launches nationwide pilot program- Started by Doc7505
- Replies: 0
-
Beyond the Headlines: Why Smart Money Watches SEC Form 4 Insider Trading- Started by BellaJones
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
