The newest Trump indictments accuse him of attempting to subvert the electoral process by falsely claiming that the election was rigged. The best defense against this accusation is to do what all other courts have thus far disallowed; to present evidence in court that the election was rigged.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (23)
sorted by:
It is interesting that this came out before the announcement of the indictment:
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4130582-judge-rules-trump-false-election-claims-while-in-office-covered-by-presidential-immunity/
Granted this ruling is from a PA State judge and is for a different case, but it is nearly identical to the Federal indictment.
I know the immunity is not absolute because of that idiotic woman that sued him saying he raped her in a store. The govt refused to defend him even though it allegedly happened while Trump was POTUS. DOJ said that his tweets on the woman were not sent as part of his official duties. Regardless - if he believes the election was stolen (he does) then he can say that all he wants.
This whole set of charges is beyond stupid.
OMG PA got something right. This is a corrupt hellhole state.
This is what I found.
He can say anything he wants. It is free speech.
Biden and Hunter sell out the country. Nothing to see here.
Trump is charged for saying he won the election and it was stolen. Indict him.
This is against free speech. Read Brandenburg vs Ohio in 1969.
This is Trump's get out of jail card.
The E Jean Carrol lies were way before he was President.