Wednesday, August 02, 2023

Saving Me The Trouble

I would just add the First Amendment argument is bogus ( and anticipated by White in the first paragraph of the indictment). For example, if I tell my drunken buddies the governor oughta be shot!, that’s protected speech. If I continue with, “And here’s how we do it!,” and my buddies say “Sounds good, we’re in!”, we’ve arguably crossed over into conspiracy. Conspiracy is the plan, not the action. It’s an inchoate crime. Talking about the c, can be the crime.

Such talk is not political speech, do not protected speech.
It’s a question of law, not fact, so the judge could rule the jury doesn’t need to hear it, as it’s not a viable defense.  That ruling would ideally come before the trial, so the subject couldn’t come up and confuse the jury.

The second argument, on intent, is actually factually mush weaker. The indictment outlines the number of lawyers who told Trump there was no fraud. And there’s the fact of 63 cases tossed for failure to state a viable claim or present evidence sufficient to cross the courthouse door. Not to mention statements (again, in the indictment) that Trump made that he knew he’d lost. Not to mention he can’t say “I refused to believe it, so I’m innocent!” Besides the fact that what he did isn’t justified even if he thought there was fraud against him.

I’ve just spent 20 hours over two days in a car, listening to MSNBC to stay awake. I marinated in this stuff. Pity me.
There is pretty much a response to every objection/suggested defense I’ve heard raised, already in the indictment.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)