219
Trump Announces Press Conference to Prove Election Was Stolen – Rolling Stone
(www.rollingstone.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
219 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10179 readers
200 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
RICO charges in Georgia are far easier to prove than federal RICO charges.
Sure, but first amendment issues and generally proving something is not sincerely held seems difficult to me. The former is something appeals courts will decide while the latter is something a jury will decide.
"First Amendment issues" is a non starter and a Trump lawyer talking point. As Judge Chutkan so aptly said, "Mr. Trump, like every American, has a First Amendment right to free speech, but that right is not absolute." There are lots of kinds of speech which are illegal all by themselves. With respect to a RICO case, when acts of speech are "overt actions in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy," even otherwise benign speech can be illegal. Conspiring to commit a crime, and taking overt action to further that conspiracy, is a crime all by itself, even if the crime being conspired does not come to fruition.
Whether or not the conspirators' "sincerely held belief" was that "the election was stolen" is irrelevant. If that is what you sincerely believe, there are already legal procedures to deal with that; take your case(s) to court. Which the Trump team did, with zero success. Just because you don't like the outcome does not make doing an end run around the law and conspiring to change election outcomes in illegal ways "suddenly legal."