Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Quoting Gym Jordan would be up to the Defense if they felt his opinion would help their case. This is not a criminal case. If it wasn't for the actions DJT took, Jan 6th and all the deaths and injuries that occurred during the riot/attack would not have happened.They are inconsequential as far as a court is concerned. It's like saying Jim Jordan thinks that Trump was in no way responsible for 1/6. What does it matter what he thinks? The only thing that matters in a court are facts, and there are no facts that Trump in anyway had to do with those breaking into the Capitol.
Even if he died as a result of the riot, how does that mean that Trump... what? He all by himself caused the riot and is responsible for EVERYTHING that came from it?The bitch doesn't stand a chance. Not only can't Trump be tied to the event as even partly or solely responsible, but the guy didn't even die as a result of the riot that day. She gets nothing.
Quoting Gym Jordan would be up to the Defense if they felt his opinion would help their case. This is not a criminal case. If it wasn't for the actions DJT took, Jan 6th and all the deaths and injuries that occurred during the riot/attack would not have happened.
Trumpyberra can't hide behind the 1st.Why don't we just get a constitutional amendment against free speech
Trumpybear was a President who fomented an attack on another branch of Government as a form of intimidation to stop the Constitutional process of counting of the EC votes.The idea of rights is to protect US citizens from retaliation by the government, and here you are saying a court of law should find Trump guilty for exercising his rights.
I know, you're a leftist, you hate our Constitution, but until we decide to get rid of it, it's still the law of the land.
If Obama isn’t charged for the murder of Dallas cops by a BLM radical, if Bernie Sanders isnt charged for his supporter who shot up the GOP softball game, or if Kamala Harris isn’t charged for encouraging BLM violence during riots… then Trump should t be charged for anything.
rumpyberra can't hide behind the 1st.
"The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president," he said, "and having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth."
Yer favorite Majority leader....
Trumpybear was a President who fomented an attack on another branch of Government as a form of intimidation to stop the Constitutional process of counting of the EC votes.
Funny coming from a New Republican, who supported halting the once proud tradition of non-violent transfers of power by ignoring the Constitution and seeking to install the certified loser of the 2020 elections.
His statement is not all opinion "having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth.WTF does it matter what he thinks?
Show me where he "fomented" an attack.
Your pretense that it was just a rally is a denial of the reality of the assault on several fronts. On our institutions as well as traditions that made our Democratic Republic successful and the envy of the world during our transfers of power from one party to the other.show me one post of mine where I supported the attack.
Donnies False statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole can all be proven with facts in court.
He called his flock on that specify day for a reason. He lit the flame and sent the MOB to the Capitol. It was a multiprong attack involving illegally pressuring the VP to claim unconstitutional powers to throw out certified election results and ec votes from certain states.
Your pretense that it was just a rally is a denial of the reality of the assault on several fronts. On our institutions as well as traditions that made our Democratic Republic successful and the envy of the world during our transfers of power from one party to the other.
But what exactly is the legal theory of “willful ignorance”? There has been much scholarly writing about this doctrine, in particular, is an excellent law review article authored by Alexander F. Sarch, which defines this doctrine as the following:No, it's a matter of opinion. If he felt the election was stolen then there were no lies or conspiracy theories
www.smerconish.com
When a defendant is charged with some crime requiring knowledge of some fact, but the defendant deliberately avoided learning whether the fact in question obtained, it is common practice among federal courtsto give so-called willful ignorance instructions. Such instructions tell the jury that it may find the knowledge element for the crime to be satisfied by the defendant’s willful ignorance of the relevant fact (also called the inculpatory proposition).
Tiny violn for an even tinier brain. How fitting.Fuck him. I shall play a song for him on my violin.
funny how you liberals are always giddy about some R being held to account for something he didn't even DO! And yet when it comes to provable and actually proven crimes that Ds have done (Hunter laptop, a gvt "servant" [ha ha] threatening someone in a foreign country that if he doesn't end an investigation into his son's nefarious business dealings, he won't get American taxpayer money anymore.. we get crickets from you..Trumpyberra can't hide behind the 1st.
"The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president," he said, "and having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth."
Yer favorite Majority leader....
Trumpybear was a President who fomented an attack on another branch of Government as a form of intimidation to stop the Constitutional process of counting of the EC votes.
Funny coming from a New Republican, who supported halting the once proud tradition of non-violent transfers of power by ignoring the Constitution and seeking to install the certified loser of the 2020 elections.
Dems are LYING lowlife creeps so no surprising.It's amazing what these leftists try to blame Trump for. Half of the things Dementia is Fn up in this country they're still blaming Trump for, two years out of office. It's like when they constantly bring up Reagan and blame him for events taking place today. The guys been out of office 35 years now.
"The best part about being a Democrat is never having to say it was your fault."
Ray from Cleveland
funny how you liberals are always giddy about some R being held to account for something he didn't even DO! And yet when it comes to provable and actually proven crimes that Ds have done (Hunter laptop, a gvt "servant" [ha ha] threatening someone in a foreign country that if he doesn't end an investigation into his son's nefarious business dealings, he won't get American taxpayer money anymore.. we get crickets from you..
Wht kind of idiot lawyer told these people they had a case?
Did you read the last paragraph? It's not good for Trump:They should sue Pelosi, McConnell, and Ray Epps. Pelosi turned down the National Guard. This is all about greed and it should be dismissed.
Trump Is Sued in Death of Capitol Police Officer After Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
The suit in the death of Brian D. Sicknick seeks millions in damages from the former president, whom it paints as responsible for the violence that day, and two Capitol rioters.www.nytimes.com
WASHINGTON — The longtime partner of a Capitol Police officer who died after the Jan. 6 attack sued former President Donald J. Trump and two Capitol rioters on Thursday, arguing that his death was a “direct and foreseeable consequence” of their roles in the mob violence that day.
The suit, filed in Federal District Court for the District of Columbia just before the second anniversary of the attack, seeks at least $10 million in damages each from Mr. Trump and two men accused of assaulting the officer, Brian D. Sicknick, with chemical spray on Jan. 6, George Tanios and Julian Elie Khater. Mr. Khater pleaded guilty in the assault, and Mr. Tanios pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges.
“The horrific events of Jan. 6, 2021, including Officer Sicknick’s tragic, wrongful death, were a direct and foreseeable consequence of the defendants’ unlawful actions,” the suit said, adding that “the defendants are responsible for the injury and destruction that followed.”
Officer Sicknick died the day after the attack, but the Washington medical examiner ruled that it was from natural causes — multiple strokes that occurred hours after the mob confrontation — and prosecutors shied away from linking his death to the assault. But the medical examiner also said that “all that transpired played a role in his condition,” and the Capitol Police consider his death a “line of duty” fatality.
But the medical examiner also said that “all that transpired played a role in his condition,” and the Capitol Police consider his death a “line of duty” fatality.
Biden, Harris and Dems in congress should be charged and locked up.By that measure, the roughly 200,000 fentanyl deaths that have occurred since Biden took office and opened the border all have murder cases against Joe!
It's the medical examiner versus some nickname in a message boardThis will be laughed out of court. He died of a stroke the following day. Trump has zero to do with this.
But the medical examiner also said that “all that transpired played a role in his condition,” and the Capitol Police consider his death a “line of duty” fatality.
But what exactly is the legal theory of “willful ignorance”? There has been much scholarly writing about this doctrine, in particular, is an excellent law review article authored by Alexander F. Sarch, which defines this doctrine as the following:
The “Willfull Ignorance” Doctrine Will Be Trump’s Downfall - SMERCONISH
If Trump was indeed “willfully ignorant,” Attorney General Merrick Garland and the DOJ have a legal roadmap for indicting the 45th President of the United States.
To cast this doctrine in another light, again quoting Sarch: “… juries may find a defendant to have possessed the requisite knowledge for a given crime merely on the ground that he was willfully ignorant of the relevant fact”.
The Supreme Court and all federal courts of appeals have adopted a version of this doctrine in one form or another. On one hand, certain of these appeals courts require proof of an existing motive for remaining in ignorance besides proving the elements of (1) having suspicions about the fact of which knowledge is required; and (2) deliberately refraining from investigating the existence of the relevant fact.
