His conclusion was quite simple:
"... the Supreme Court would look at the actual language here, and I think they would look at this case with about as much scrutiny as they are ever going to apply, and probably give the speaker of what is arguably political speech every benefit of the doubt, which makes a conviction for a criminal case of incitement extremely unlikely."
LegalEagle goes on to talk a bit about the legal standard for impeachment, and says that a criminal conviction is not actually necessary for impeachment, and thus Pres. Trump could be impeached for any sort of offense.
Thus, while President Trump can be impeached for these things, it would not actually represent that there was some criminal incitement to riot.
He also brings up an incredibly interesting case in which Pres. Andrew Johnson in 1868 was impeached for his mere political speech, that was not criminal at all, which sets a precedent. I think most people, though, would say that it is a scary precedent, one that we would not actually want to have in the modern world -- one that would be classed along with the other backwards rulings of the 19th century. But, if it can serve the political purpose of the left, these tools will ultimately be brought to bear.
This is why LegalEagle brings up lawyer George Conway, who he says Pres. Trump used the rhetoric of violence and this would be correct in the moral sense. LegalEagle continues to spout out what one would expect a person of the liberal persuasion to say in making the case that there is some sort of moral crime here, but it the fact remains that it is pretty much impossible to conclude that Pres. Trump would actually be criminally liable for starting a riot.
So what we have are experts stepping out of their professional sphere to side with the mob...
Which makes the point even more clear:
Even the great detractors of Pres. Trump conclude that it is 'extremely unlikely' that Pres. Trump can be held legally responsible for inciting a riot.
We can ignore their posturing and talk of how Pres. Trump's rhetoric may be somehow morally reprehensible and calling for violence, because they admit that they cannot prove anything in a court of law to justify this. It is all tripe -- speculation from their gut operating on their political motivations.
The left is just grandstanding against Pres. Trump one last time.
No comments:
Post a Comment