The irrefutable reality of Jan 6

[Septua]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3783637-jan-6-committee-releases-final-report/

“That evidence has led to an overriding and straight forward conclusion: the central cause of January 6th was one man, former President Donald Trump, whom many others followed.”

“None of the events of January 6th would have happened without him,” the report added.

We all knew that before the Select Committee was even created to investigate and confirm, what we already knew. We didn't know all the additional facts surrounding the Capitol breach, showing the size and scope of the conspiracy to obstruct the electoral vote certification; but we knew without doubt, Jan 6 would not have occurred if Donald Trump had simply accepted losing the 2020 election results and gone home to write his memoirs.

The prosecutors like to say, "..it's not what you know that matters; it's what you can prove" and I'm still hearing some doubts about that legal point from all the legal pundits on MSNBC. And some of the Committee witnesses testimony would not be admissible evidence in a court room. But I still believe a jury of 12 objective and sensible minded people would convict.

[TigressDem]

1. Don't yell FIRE in a crowded theater. Classic example of limit to free speech.

AS a pRezident .... the job has a "bully pulpit" and inciting a mob to "go fight like hell" is an obvious disregard for the OATH of Office.

We might need to codify this aspect to define High Crimes and misdemeanors to include various levels of abuse of the bully pulpit because it seems the reTHUGlicans are deciding to elect a bunch of mouth breathers who can't even handle Jr High Civics.

EVERY TIME we think the level of stupid is the worst we've seen, it gets worse.

[Stuart G]

2. That is exactly what Trump did. That is against the law. 12 people will decide that one.

And the judge will decide the sentence. (or maybe the jury). If I were on the jury...

"Go Immediate to Jail"
"Do Not pass Go"
"Do Not collect $200
"Officers take him to jail right now"!!!! ...This last one is the MOST IMPORTANT ONE

AND.............THERE IS NO DEFENSE IN YELLING "FIRE" IN A CROWDED THEATER. NONE, NADA, ZERO, ETC.

[yagotme]

3. Well, there is one defense against yelling "Fire".

If the theater is actually on fire.

[Stuart G]

4. Well said. No fire at the theater on Jan 6..(except the fire that Trump started)

[yagotme]

5. It just bothers me when that old saw is brought out.

Pet-peevish, I guess.

[rsdsharp]

7. Here's the Oliver Wendell Holmes dicta from Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919):

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic... The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. (emphasis added)

[yagotme]

8. Yes, the word you emphasized is usually left off.

Therefore, making it a false statement.

[MissMillie]

6. Well, to me, the Capitol breach is the tip of the iceberg

It's the culmination of several months of illegal activity. And the incitement started even before the election began.

I don't mean to make it sound like the violence at the Capitol is a small thing it's not small. Neither is Defrauding the U.S. (or its voters). Neither is filing phony electors. Neither is up-ending the Department of Justice. Neither is Election Interference (in GA).

He did all of that to hold on to power, and he failed.

It's difficult for me to see why anyone would be surprised that he sent the armed, loyal followers to obstruct a Constitutionally-mandated procedure.

I think the J6 Committee has gone a long way towards proving the case. And I'll also bet that DOJ is well on its way to filling in any "reasonable doubts" any jury might come up with.