This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultFun
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Sorry Trumpers, but Trump's "free speech" defense is not gonna work.

He is within his rights, under the First Amendment, to speak publicly about the election and even claim, falsely, that there had been outcome and determinative fraud during the election.

He is within his rights under the First Amendment, to speak about challenging the election results through legal means.

But, perpetrating conspiracies to discount legitimate votes and subvert the election results? Nope. The First Amendment is not down with that.

You can say what you like (e.g., say that everyone has the right to print money) and you're protected, but as soon as you do it (e.g., actually print your money), you're committing a crime.

Sorry, Trumpers😁
Top | New | Old
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
We know, contesting the results of an elektion to get the results overturned is not the same as contesting the results of an elektion to get the elektion overturned
JSul3 · 70-79
@sunsporter1649 When you win the popular vote and lose via the archaic Electoral College, 'one person, one vote' becomes meaningless.

Imagine the MAGA crowd if their God had won the popular vote yet lost due to the EC. They would be demanding the EC be eliminated. Who was the last GOP Pres. to win the popular vote?
2004...GWB.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@JSul3 50% of the population lives in 9 states, your opinion is screw the other 50%, their vote is meaningless, right?
JSul3 · 70-79
@sunsporter1649 Why do so many live in those 9 states?
How about we add some more Senators to those highly populated states and more House seats?
I do get the distinction between speech and actions, but it's a pretty thin line sometimes, and it gets even more nebulous when you start talking conspiracies. While I appreciate how nifty this indictment is legally, I'm worried that people aren't going to buy that its, well, basically "a crime.". It doesn't help much the way it's written on that point, either.
SW-User
@MistyCee Well, as someone in a newspaper said:

Tony Soprano can’t invoke the first amendment for telling his crew he wants someone whacked.
anythingoes477 · 31-35, M
@MistyCee It isn't up to the "the people" to buy it or not. It's up the judges now. There will always be those that let cult love overshadow reason and logic and truth. The "people" that matter were the 8+ million that showed to make sure he was flushed away in 2020. And the ones that show up again to double flush that piece of shit away in 2024. Those "people".......count. ;-) Because when he loses in 2024 by 2028 EVERY GOP bootlicker will know and finally believe how much of a lead weight he is tor the Republican Party.
@anythingoes477

And the ones that show up again to double flush that piece of shit away in 2024

These are the ones I'm worried about.
But keep flapping your lips there, Quad Indicted, and just ignore those prosecutors who are following you around with tape recorders!
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SW-User
@LordShadowfire Fair enough; I will amend accordingly.

 
Post Comment