Person to be charged in connection with the insurrection according to one count is a former president and a current front runner for the nomination of a Major Political party who is already facing 74 criminal counts. Who stands accused of trying to defraud the government that he led at that time. Trying to obstruct the proceedings of a branch of government and trying to overturn the will of millions of voters in the swing states that determined the outcome of the Electoral College. The big question now that trump has been booked and fingerprinted, whats next in this case . Which is really unlike any other in American History. Here is what team trump has planned according to the New York Times. His lawyers used the arraignment to hint at one of his central defense strategies, a request to delay a second pending federal trial for months if not years. Delaying the proceedings as much as possible is widely expected to be part of mr. Trumps legal strategy given that he could effectively cal
Supreme court has defined it very specific, and it has to be the case that you directed your speech to inciting imminent lawless action, and that you were likely to incite or produce that action. it requires some evidence of what you meant to do, and also some evidence about timing, the immediacy of timing, all which is difficult to prove up, and quite constitutionally fraught. while we might ultimately see some incitement charges coming, you can see why the first amendment matter, jack smith chose to proceed in the way he did, with charges that really here in the current indictment don t touch on sticky first amendment issues of that sort. so, david, here s the thing. since this defense doesn t hold actual legal weight, i wonder if we should think of it more as a political argument, as the type of thing that is meant for trump supporters to peet on a loop