Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (234862)	4/29/2022 5:30:57 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 363590

from Brumar's thread.... WolfTracker There are 3 civil lawsuits against Trump that will play a pivotal role as to whether Trump can be indicted for inciting the attack on the capitol. House impeachment manager Eric Swalwell sues Trump and close allies over Capitol riot in second major insurrection lawsuit disq.us Two US Capitol Police officers sue Trump and say he should be held responsible for January 6 attack disq.us All 3 cases are being handled by Judge Amit Mehta United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. "In a ruling outlining how the former President could conceivably be responsible for inciting the attack on the US Capitol. Trump's statements to his supporters before the riot "is the essence of civil conspiracy," Judge Amit Mehta wrote in a 112-page opinion, because Trump spoke about himself and rallygoers working "towards a common goal" of fighting and walking down Pennsylvania Avenue. "The President's January 6 Rally Speech can reasonably be viewed as a call for collective action," Mehta said." Friday, Mehta wrote that the three lawsuits could move to the evidence-gathering phase and toward a trial -- a major loss in court for Trump. "To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent," Mehta wrote. "After all, the President's actions here do not relate to his duties of faithfully executing the laws, conducting foreign affairs, commanding the armed forces, or managing the Executive Branch," Mehta added. "They entirely concern his efforts to remain in office for a second term. These are unofficial acts, so the separation-of-powers concerns that justify the President's broad immunity are not present here." disq.us Note: If the court rules that Trump incited the attacks on the capitol that would be strong evidence for a criminal indictment.