Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

YUGE WIN! Court Rules In Favor Of Trump! Cite First Amendment!

Published

on

And the wins keep coming for the Trump Train!

WDRB reported that yesterday a federal appeals court in Cincinnati Ohio dismissed a fraudulent lawsuit filed during the 2016 presidential campaign against President Donald Trump.

The lawsuit was filed by three people who claimed they were assaulted by Trump supporters during a campaign rally in Louisville. During the rally, Trump told his supporters to remove the three plaintiffs, who were rowdy and protesting him. Trump shouted, “get ‘em out of here, but don’t hurt them.”

Trending: Trump Expels Obama Swamp Slug And He’s About To Get Rid Of EIGHT More

Here is more via WFPL:

“A federal appeals court has dismissed a lawsuit that alleges President Trump encouraged his supporters to assault protesters at a Louisville campaign rally in 2016.

“The three plaintiffs claimed they were pushed, shoved and punched by audience members after Trump repeatedly shouted “get ‘em out of here” during his speech at the Kentucky International Convention Center.

“The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that Trump’s words were protected by the First Amendment and that he didn’t specifically encourage violence because he also said, “don’t hurt ‘em.”

“The notion that Trump’s direction to remove a handful of disruptive protesters from among hundreds or thousands in attendance could be deemed to implicitly incite a riot is simply not plausible — especially where any implication of incitement to riotous violence is explicitly negated by the accompanying words, ‘don’t hurt ’em,’” Circuit Judge David McKeague wrote in the opinion.

“If words have meaning, the admonition ‘don’t hurt ’em’ cannot be reasonably construed as an urging to ‘hurt ’em.’”

“Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau filed the lawsuit in 2016 against Trump, alleging that Trump incited a riot under Kentucky law.

“Nwanguma alleged she was assaulted and subjected to racial slurs made by Trump supporters Alvin Bamberger and Matthew Heimbach, a local white supremacist.

“Shah alleged she was shoved by Trump supporters and Brousseau alleged he was punched in the stomach.

“Dan Canon, an attorney for the protesters, said in a statement that they will “seek further review.”

“Mr. Trump, throughout his campaign, intentionally used crowd violence to suppress dissident speech – the kind of core speech that the First Amendment traditionally protects,” Canon wrote.

“The Court’s opinion today gives him a free pass for that conduct, even though he had publicly been asking for violence to occur at these rallies for months, and even though his co-defendants have said they would not have attacked our clients if Trump had not directed them to do so. Allowing a candidate for public office to use the First Amendment as a shield under these circumstances is unprecedented and dangerous.”

“When a lower court ruled that the case could proceed against Trump last year, U.S. District Court Judge David Hale said he found ample support that the protesters’ injuries were a “direct and proximate result” of Trump’s directions.

“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” Hale wrote, “It was an order, an instruction, a command.”

“But the appeals court reversed Hale’s decision, saying the claim that Trump incited violent conduct isn’t plausible.

“In the ears of some supporters, Trump’s words may have had a tendency to elicit a physical response, in the event a disruptive protester refused to leave, but they did not specifically advocate such a response,” McKeague wrote for the 6th Circuit.

“After the protesters were removed from the 2016 rally, Trump explained why he calls on audience members to remove protesters.

“See, if I say ‘go get them,’ I get in trouble with the press, the most dishonest human beings in the world,” Trump said. “If I say ‘don’t hurt them,’ then the press says ‘well, Trump isn’t as tough as he used to be.’”

The three-judge panel ruled that President Trump could not be sued for inciting violence because his words are protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution because he didn’t actually say to hurt the plaintiffs in any way.

The lawsuit had claimed that Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau were all peacefully protesting at the Kentucky International Convention Center when then-candidate Trump stopped his speech and told his supporters to remove them. That’s obviously not true since they were being disruptive enough to actually warrant Trump’s attention in the first place.

The best part of this ruling is that the liberal left just can’t seem to believe that President Trump is on the right side of the law, the same law which they themselves have been great at taking advantage of for decades. In America, you have every right to free speech, speech that is protected from the government, but not from private individuals.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Kavanaugh Accuser Unravelling – Hit With Stiff Ultimatum After Ignoring Senate’s Inquiries

Published

on

...

* By

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service in the world, RWN offers the following information published by The Daily Caller:

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins said she finds it odd that Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of high school-era sexual assault, will not respond to inquiries from the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“That’s very puzzling to me. I have said from the beginning that these are very serious allegations and she deserves to be heard. She’s now being given an opportunity to come before the Senate Judiciary Committee and to answer questions and I really hope that she doesn’t pass up that opportunity,” Collins said to a group of reporters in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Tuesday morning.

This comes as Ford previously said she would be willing to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Collins has been on the fence on her support for Kavanaugh, and mentioned to reporters Tuesday she would like to see the “two attorneys who are representing Judge Kavanaugh and Professor Ford do the questioning for the first round and then go to the committee for questions.”

“It’s not unheard of to have counsel do questioning,” she added. “[Ford] will be represented by counsel. And I think it’s important that we hear from both Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh under oath in a public hearing.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell slammed Democrats for bringing forward a 36-year-old accusation of misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh, on the Senate floor Monday.

Continue Reading

Mueller Investigation Comes To Screeching Halt After Anti-Trump Dem Exposes His Fatal Mistake

Published

on

...

* By

Bob Woodward, an investigative reporter who works for The Washington Post, has been in the business of ‘dirty little secrets’ so long that he was part of the team who cast a light on Richard Nixon during Watergate. In fact, once Fox News even called him a Watergate legend. Well, it has become quite obvious that now he has his sights set on President Trump and his administration. In fact, he makes it very clear where he stands when it comes to President Trump in his new “secret” book, ‘Fear’.

Yes, it was a secret because he told no one about it for the past 19 months he’s been writing it. He wanted to keep a ‘low profile’ while he researched what he planned to include in the book. There was a press release for ‘Fear’ that described the book as “an unprecedented look into the harrowing life inside Donald Trump’s White House and how the president makes decisions on major foreign and domestic policies”.

Woodward claims that he engaged in “hundreds of hours of interviews with firsthand sources”. It is for this reason, we can tip a hat to the man’s work ethic despite the difference of opinion we have with him regarding President Trump and the administration. I am going to show you why right now.

Bob Woodward had an interview with Hugh Hewitt recently, in fact just a few days ago. In this interview what he revealed arguably gives President Trump supporters a very good reason to send a fat “IN YOUR FACE!” telegram to Democrats.

Check this out!

“So let’s set aside the Comey firing, which as a Constitutional law professor, no one will ever persuade me can be obstruction. And Rod Rosenstein has laid out reasons why even if those weren’t the president’s reasons. Set aside the Comey firing. Did you, Bob Woodward, hear anything in your research in your interviews that sounded like espionage or collusion?” Hugh Hewitt asked Woodward.

“I did not, and of course, I looked for it, looked for it hard,” Woodward answered. “And so you know, there we are. We’re going to see what Mueller has, and Dowd may be right. He has something that Dowd and the president don’t know about, a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony. As you know, that often happens, and that can break open or turn a case.”

“But you’ve seen no collusion?” Hewitt asked again to confirm.”

“I have not,” Woodward affirmed.”

Hewitt would once again ask Woodward about collusion at the conclusion of the interview.

“Very last question, Bob Woodward, I just want to confirm, at the end of two years of writing this book, this intensive effort, you saw no effort, you, personally, had no evidence of collusion or espionage by the president presented to you?” Hewitt asked.”

“That is correct,” Woodward said.”

Now if that isn’t satisfying to read, I don’t know what is. Not once, but twice Woodward clarified that he did not find ANY evidence of collusion during his research. This is coming from the same investigative reporter that was called at one time ‘a legend’ for his work. I mean, this is a man who is known for his extensive interviews with first witnesses, and research into documents, meeting notes, calendars, and even diaries. He is praised for how he constructs seamless narratives of events that he tells through the eyes of actual key participants.

Even the left knows this about him.

So, you can bet that him saying not once, but twice that he found zero evidence of collusion, is going be a real slap in the face for the left. Maybe if we listen very carefully we will be able to feel the tremor being caused by a nation full of ‘triggering’ liberals right this very second!

But I digress…

Despite this, there is still a lot of manipulative work he put into the book as well. For example, the petty stuff he made sure to include, was absolutely ridiculous.

Things such as:

“Fear: Trump In The White House also details President Trump’s explosive rants.”

“He is said to have called Attorney General Jeff Sessions “mentally retarded”, allegedly adding: “He’s this dumb Southerner. … He couldn’t even be a one-person country lawyer down in Alabama.”

I’d like to give a moment now to Trump, to clear things up on this.

There were also many schoolyard claims about White House Chief John Kelly such as the following:

“White House chief of staff John Kelly frequently lost his temper and referred to President Donald Trump as “unhinged” and an “idiot,” author Bob Woodward writes in his new book “Fear: Trump in the White House.”

We can clear that up to, since the book’s release Kelly has had something to say about this claim.

“Kelly, in a statement Tuesday, denied the claims as simply “not true.” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders also refuted the book’s claims.”

“Kelly said in his statement that “the idea I ever called the President an idiot is not true . . . . As I stated back in May and still firmly stand behind: ‘I spend more time with the President than anyone else, and we have an incredibly candid and strong relationship. He always knows where I stand, and he and I both know this story is total BS.'”

“I’m committed to the President, his agenda, and our country,” Kelly said. “This is another pathetic attempt to smear people close to President Trump and distract from the administration’s many successes.”

“Sanders said Tuesday that “This book is nothing more than fabricated stories, many by former disgruntled employees, told to make the president look bad.”

Needless to say, the book ‘Fear’ is just another ‘he said, she said’ work created with the purpose of adding fire to the left’s agenda and casting doubt upon the shoulders our President, but do you think it will have that effect at all? We want to know what you think!

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend