Oh, okay Mister "Ben Carson lost his brain surgeon license"...as usual, your FAKE NEWS talking point is pure parody.
There are 80 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
In 28 cases President Trump was/is the plaintiff
In 48 cases President Trump was/is not the plaintiff
In 4 cases President Trump is the defendant
21 of these cases have been decided on merits
Of the 21 cases decided on the merits, President Trump won 14 of them or two-thirds of the cases
25 cases remain active, including Sidney Powell's "kraken" case scheduled for review at the SCOTUS.
Won??? Won WHAT, you brainless ****?? If they WON, why wasn't the election overturned, you fucking idiot???? What happened to all your bullshit articles saying that was gonna happen, Jagoff? As far as his impeachment "defense," do we take the opinion of lawyers so incompetnent they can't even spell the court's name at times (and Sheriff Jagoff), or 140 competent, objective attorneys? Hmmmm, TOUGH call...
[h=1]"Legally frivolous": Over 140 lawyers, scholars slam Trump's First Amendment defense[/h]
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?te..._src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr&via=Yahoo
AxiosFri, February 5, 2021, 2:22 PM
More than 140 constitutional lawyers and scholars
wrote in a letter Friday that the First Amendment claims made by former President Trump's lawyers are “legally frivolous” and do “not prevent the Senate” from convicting him during his impeachment trial, set to begin next week, per the
New York Times.
Driving the news: Trump’s lawyers
claim that the former president's conduct surrounding the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol siege is protected by the First Amendment. They also argue Trump can’t be tried after leaving office.
Support safe, smart, sane journalism. Sign up for Axios Newsletters here.
What they’re saying: “Although we differ from one another in our politics, disagree on many questions of constitutional law, and take different approaches to understanding the Constitution’s text, history, and context, we all agree that any First Amendment defense raised by President Trump’s attorneys would be legally frivolous,” the group of lawyers and scholars wrote in the letter, shared with the Times.
- “In other words, we all agree that the First Amendment does not prevent the Senate from convicting President Trump and disqualifying him from holding future office,” they added.
- "As scholars of constitutional law, we know there are many difficult questions of First Amendment law. But the permissibility of President Trump’s impeachment trial is not one of them."
- "The First Amendment is no defense to the article of impeachment leveled against the former President, because the First Amendment does not apply in impeachment proceedings; because the president does not have a First Amendment right to incite a mob and then sit back and do nothing as the hostile mob invades the Capitol and terrorizes Congress; or because, in context, President Trump engaged in unlawful incitement."
- ADVERTISEMENT -
"Accordingly, while we express no view here on the ultimate question of whether the Senate should convict President Trump and disqualify him from future office, we urge the Senate not to base its decision on the erroneous understanding of the First Amendment urged by President Trump’s lawyers."
