• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judge Rules President Trump Plausibly Incited Violence at Rally as Candidate

Cardinal

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
111,874
Reaction score
109,295
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Another day, another legal matter for the President.

A Kentucky Federal Judge rejected to dismiss the claim from three protesters at a 2016 Trump rally that then candidate Trump provoked violence with his rhetoric to have them removed.

U. S. District Judge David J. Hale ruled in a March 31 opinion that he is rejecting requests from Trump and his supporters named as defendants in the case to dismiss the charges brought by three rally protesters because there was precedent of violence at previous Trump rallies, and Trump was inciting violence by ordering the removal of protesters.

The protesters, Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau, filed suit after they were forcibly removed a Trump rally in Louisville, Ky., in March 2016, claiming Trump encouraged a violent atmosphere and they were the targets of racial slurs.

“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” Hale wrote in his memorandum. “Based on the allegations of the complaint, which the Court must accept as true, Trump’s statement at least ‘implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.’”
Click to expand...

Donald Trump Incited Violence as Candidate, Judge Rules | Time

For context, here is a video of the rally.

 
The video was rough...Fat white ignorant bigots spitting up on themselves...Hard to watch
 
Cardinal said:
Another day, another legal matter for the President.



Donald Trump Incited Violence as Candidate, Judge Rules | Time

For context, here is a video of the rally.

Click to expand...


That headline is misleading.
I disapprove.

This judge did NOT rule that "Donald Trump incited violence as candidate".

All he did was refuse requests from Trump's lawyers to dismiss charges from the plaintiffs that Trump did incite violence.
All he's saying is that those charges are worthy of further examination.
[FONT=&quot]U. S. District Judge David J. Hale ruled in a March 31 opinion that he is rejecting requests from Trump and his supporters named as defendants in the case to dismiss the charges brought by three rally protesters because there was precedent of violence at previous Trump rallies, and Trump was inciting violence by ordering the removal of protesters.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” Hale wrote in his memorandum. “Based on the allegations of the complaint, which the Court must accept as true, Trump’s statement at least ‘implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.’”
Click to expand...

****in' clickbait.
 
The Mark said:
That headline is misleading.
I disapprove.

This judge did NOT rule that "Donald Trump incited violence as candidate".

All he did was refuse requests from Trump's lawyers to dismiss charges from the plaintiffs that Trump did incite violence.
All he's saying is that those charges are worthy of further examination.

****in' clickbait.
Click to expand...

Oh that makes the behavior of these animals okay then
 
The Mark said:
That headline is misleading.
I disapprove.

This judge did NOT rule that "Donald Trump incited violence as candidate".

All he did was refuse requests from Trump's lawyers to dismiss charges from the plaintiffs that Trump did incite violence.
All he's saying is that those charges are worthy of further examination.


****in' clickbait.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely correct. The point of the article was that the lawsuit was allowed to move forward. Expect the headline to be changed shortly.
 
Yay populist demagoguery.
 
The Mark said:
Oh hell no.

But I won't accept misleading headlines from ANYONE.
Click to expand...

Take it up with the Times. Cardinal had to use that headline verbatim, per B/N rules.
 
Last edited:
DiAnna said:
Take it up with the Times. Cardinal had to use that headline verbatim, per B/N rules.
Click to expand...
My complaint was directed at them.
 
DiAnna said:
Take it up with the Times. Cardinal had to use that headline verbatim, per B/N rules.
Click to expand...
Apparently he has some pull, though, because they changed their headline

:2razz:
 
Last edited:
The Mark said:
Oh hell no.

But I won't accept misleading headlines from ANYONE.
Click to expand...

It's good to read them though, just so you will know how they want you to think. :mrgreen:
 
truthatallcost said:
Oh, boo ****ing hoo there Cardinal. The media and B.O. admin got 5 Dallas police officers killed by fanning racial flames in 2016. Did the Trump protestors in your story suffer so much as a scraped knee?
Click to expand...

More "what about" Defense
 
Saladin4 said:
More "what about" Defense
Click to expand...

And complete and utter bull****. Trying to blame Obama for racist white people or any racial tensions is so typical of right wingers, they just blame everybody else, project, and deflect.

Sorry, Obama spoke clearly and eloquently, and factually. Trump rants and raves and attacks. The two are night and day. God the right wing are such idiots
 
“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” Hale wrote in his memorandum.

“Based on the allegations of the complaint, which the Court must accept as true, Trump’s statement at least ‘implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.’”
 
Protestors can't be kicked out of a venue, now?

This is going to be great, in the future. :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom