search
top

Incitement?

From an impromptu press conference:


One of the major charges against President Trump is the charge of “incitement,” which some have said occurred during his speech at the “Save America” rally held on January 6, 2021.

It has almost become axiomatic that Trump’s speech called for people to attack the Capital. (After all, that’s what some elected officials are saying and the media is saying.)

When one reads the speech, there is no such call.

In fact, Trump says the exact opposite:

We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time, far longer than this four-year period. We’ve set it on a much straighter course, a much … I thought four more years. I thought it would be easy. (emphasis ours)

A little analysis:

The Brandenburg test was established in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), to determine when inflammatory speech intending to advocate illegal action can be restricted. In the case, a KKK leader gave a speech at a rally to his fellow Klansmen, and after listing a number of derogatory racial slurs, he then said that “it’s possible that there might have to be some revengeance [sic] taken.” The test determined that the government may prohibit speech advocating the use of force or crime if the speech satisfies both elements of the two-part test:

  • The speech is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” AND
  • The speech is “likely to incite or produce such action.”

We are in no way trying to defend Trump the person, but we are going to defend the idea that someone calling for people to “make [their] voices peacefully and patriotically heard” is not incitement unless you consider the First Amendment “incitement.”

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There is a segment of America that is willing to let their hatred of a person allow other elected officials to try to say “the Constitution doesn’t matter.”

There is a segment of the America that is willing to be led down a path where their lies, backed by the media, wipe out protected speech.

If you don’t like Trump, that’s fine.

However, we should all disagree with people who are using their hatred of one person to attack the foundation of this country.



3 Responses to “Incitement?”

  1. Moondoggy says:

    Looks like in it’s efforts to protect our First Amendment rights and ensure all voices and opinions are heard YouTube has banned the video you have attached. Oh well, so much for those opinions, whatever they were – I wonder if this ban means that this impromptu press conference never really happened.

  2. […] Raised On Hoecakes covers “incitement” […]

  3. Carla says:

    It’s not surprising that you picked out one portion of Trump’s speech to emphasize, like a red herring. Don’t you know he is prone to making his wishes known while maintaining plausible deniability? Michael Cohen confirmed that, but you can see it all the time. Why don’t you look at the bigger picture? Trump also is the one who started crying foul in advance of his loss. He obviously had no evidence of voter fraud prior to the election, and he never presented any evidence after the election. All he did was make accusations.

    Trump is the one who had invited his fans to come to D.C. on January 6th in the first place. Can you guess why he did that? He said it was going to be “wild”. Well, he was right.

    He specifically mentioned Mike Pence in his speech; a portion of the text follows:

    “And Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn’t, that will be a, a sad day for our country because you’re sworn to uphold our Constitution.
    Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down.
    Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
    Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.”

    He said, “And you have to get your people to fight.” He was talking to a self-selected group, many of whom were ready to do just what Trump wanted. He lied to them when he said he would walk with them. He did not. He went back to the White House and watched the mess unfold, doing nothing to stop it. In fact, reports are he was pleased about the whole ruckus. This action, or inaction, by a sitting president is inexcusable. Trump continues to lie about the election results, claiming that it was stolen. Trump does not care about the country or he would never have started his Big Lie. He should have just conceded.

    A protester was even heard saying he had the right to be there (at the capital) because Trump “invited” him. Hope you will consider all the facts so that confirmation bias does not blind you. While Trump did use the word “peacefully”, he also used many other words to encourage his followers to get worked up into taking whatever action they could to stop Mike Pence from his constitutional duty to count the electoral votes. Trump’s followers were even heard chanting “Hang Mike Pence”!

    • AAfterwit says:

      Carla,

      We want to get this straight, you admit that Trump advocated for a peaceful march, and then tried to say he incited the crowd.

      He didn’t.

      The story the media and the left is putting out doesn’t match the facts.

      Thanks again.

      A. Afterwit.

top