General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPlanning of the coup: playing devil's advocate
With all the news going around about the "war room" and team drumpf communicating with insurrectionists....... I want to play a game of devil's advocate. I'm going to be drumpf's lawyer in a fictional court room where the charge is sedition and conspiracy to overthrow the government. The same exercise could apply to Gozar, Brooks, etc........
You are the prosecutor.
Here's my statement:
Your honor, my client feels terrible about what happened that day. Yes he and his team were in communication with several groups of his supporters, but it was only to plan and go over the logistics of a protest. We only intended for the former president's supporters to have their voices heard in accordance with their first amendment rights. We told them when to show up and encouraged them to march to the capital to protest there, again, in accordance with their first amendment rights.
Unfortunately some bad apples up at the front decided to take it too far, and once the dam burst, everyone else started to follow suit.
My client freely acknowledges planning a peaceful protest with these groups, but never encouraged anyone to take violent action, nor did he have any knowledge for talking to these groups that they ever intended to get violent. Maybe some congressperson encouraged them to get violent, we don't know, and my client isn't responsible for that anyway.
We've all seen the clip of my client saying in his speech to the protestors that they had to fight for their country, but clearly this is not meant to be taken literally. Or are we going to imprison every politician that uses the word fight?
So, I say to you, prosecutor, if you have nay proof my client actually ordered this violence, please, let's hear it.
End of statement.
Your turn...... do we actually have the smoking gun that drumpf (or someone like Brooks/Gozar/MTG) actually ordered the attack? They they ordered the Capital police to essentially defend with a skeleton crew, and told the insurrectionists where to attack?
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)jpak
(41,741 posts)GUILTY!!
Take him away!
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Dont forget, prosecutors took all of Rudys electronic communications and more.
And if you read the Rolling Stone article, there are organizers that are providing info to the select committee. At this point there has to be a referral to DOJ.
And there is this: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215982239
Ocelot II
(115,267 posts)of the so-called peaceful protest and the groups that used violence, like the Proud Boys - something indicating that the planners at the Willard Hotel instructed or authorized them to invade the Capitol and try to capture or at least physically intimidate Pelosi, Pence and others who were managing the proceedings, in order to prevent them from continuing.
Thunderbeast
(3,377 posts)to the actual CAPITOL INVASION planning....not just the rally at the elipse.
If they can create a story about metaphorical language of fights and wars, a good lawyer will find at least one juror from the red hat team to vote for aquittal.
This is the challenge for the DOJ.
albacore
(2,386 posts)Black's law dictionary...
"To arouse; stir up; instigate; set in motion; as, to incite a riot. Also, generally, in criminal law to instigate, persuade, or move another to commit a crime; in this sense nearly synonymous withabet.
Baked Potato
(7,733 posts)Maybe there will be phone taps or other recordings. Maybe there will emerge a plan of some kind for T***p to be led back into power with the added protection he would need, should the non-ordered plan succeed. Maybe there was a mole.
I really dont think T***p wanted to be President anymore. I think he went through the motions with his team of hangers-on who thought they would ultimately grift with him.
Any desire T***p had to stay on was solely to stop any investigation into his business dealings. Once his DOJ plan failed it was over, IMO.