The 2024 U.S. Presidential race

[Lexxi]

Basically, he is saying that it's OK for him to incite violence. Is there no federal law preventing this kind of "free speech"? How is this different from the proverbial falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater?

A state may not forbid speech advocating the use of force or unlawful conduct unless this advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

from - US Supreme Court. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)
You can hear the actual oral arguments here: {{meta.fullTitle}}

Facts of the case
Brandenburg, a leader in the Ku Klux Klan, made a speech at a Klan rally and was later convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicalism law. The law made illegal advocating "crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform," as well as assembling "with any society, group, or assemblage of persons formed to teach or advocate the doctrines of criminal syndicalism."
Question
Did Ohio's criminal syndicalism law, prohibiting public speech that advocates various illegal activities, violate Brandenburg's right to free speech as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?
Conclusion
The Court's Per Curiam opinion held that the Ohio law violated Brandenburg's right to free speech. The Court used a two-pronged test to evaluate speech acts: (1) speech can be prohibited if it is "directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action" and (2) it is "likely to incite or produce such action." The criminal syndicalism act made illegal the advocacy and teaching of doctrines while ignoring whether or not that advocacy and teaching would actually incite imminent lawless action. The failure to make this distinction rendered the law overly broad and in violation of the Constitution.

So, basically, it is okay for him to incite violence as long as it is does not/or is not directed at creating immediate lawless action that would likely be created by the words used.

Or, in other words: if Vance said "Haitians are killing and eating people's pet dogs. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!" and within the day several Haitians are shot at, then it becomes a question of whether or not 1) the people shooting did so based on Vance's words and 2) if a reasonable person, uttering those words, would have the belief that someone would go around creating violence against Haitians.

Or - there was that picture of a dude walking down the street carrying a goose. Picture was misused to make it appear as if the individual had killed the goose and was Haitian (neither factoids were true facts). If the person who misused the picture had said something like "someone needs to take care of that guy", and that specific guy was later murdered .... There's a better case against the person who said "take care of that guy" than against Vance saying "Haitians are eating dogs".

With Vance admitting that he wanted to incite violence, part of the criminal test would be covered, but would still need a direct connection between the words and specific people harmed by the words.

 

[Soen Eber]

So if a Haitian gets assaulted in Springfield and they can connect it to what Vance said, he's facing criminal court?

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

So if a Haitian gets assaulted in Springfield and they can connect it to what Vance said, he's facing criminal court?

I think US law is just very muddy around this.... many other countries would have no problem saying he's inciting violence, but many judges here are just absolutists on "speech." It's mostly understood there should be some sort of limitation but it's very hard to actually prosecute someone for it.

 

[Lexxi]

So if a Haitian gets assaulted in Springfield and they can connect it to what Vance said, he's facing criminal court?

Vance would probably have to be more explicit. Like if he said "go out and beat Haitians", then yes there could be a criminal case against him. Probably not a "slam dunk" case, but a case. More of a case if he specified a specific individual or the like. Which is why I mentioned the photographed guy with dead goose.

As is, if he just lied about Haitians eating people's pets, then no, probably not a case.

 

[Cindy Claveau]

 

[Isabeau]

(video if you’re so inclined)

Mykael Wyvern — 🔮🧙🏻‍♂️🐉 (@wyvern.bsky.social)

No biggie just Rich Lowery almost dropping the n word on Megan Kelly's show

bsky.app

 

[Cindy Claveau]

Trump Reacts to Assassination Attempt by Making Things Far, Far Worse

In Donald Trump’s first interview following the apparent attempt on his life on Sunday, he blamed the incident on his political rivals, telling Fox News that the would-be assassin “believed” and “acted on” the rhetoric of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

“Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country—both from the inside and out,” Trump told Fox. “They do it with a combination of rhetoric and lawsuits they wrap me up in.… These are the things that dangerous fools, like the shooter, listen to—that is the rhetoric they listen to, and the same with the first one.”

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Should Trump (or Harris) not survive until the election, whether because of an assassin's bullet, illness, or a Visitation of the Lord (a delightful old phrase once used in coroner's inquests meaning "well, they're certainly dead but we're not sure why"), what would happen? Would their vice-presidential candidate become the presidential candidate? And in that case, who would be the VP should they win?

 

[Cindy Claveau]

Should Trump (or Harris) not survive until the election, whether because of an assassin's bullet, illness, or a Visitation of the Lord (a delightful old phrase once used in coroner's inquests meaning "well, they're certainly dead but we're not sure why"), what would happen? Would their vice-presidential candidate become the presidential candidate? And in that case, who would be the VP should they win?

I'm not 100% sure, but this is how I've always understood it to work:

* If the President is dead or unable to function, the VP takes his place and is sworn in as President.
* If a party's candidate is killed, it's the party's job to name a replacement. Nothing that's written down requires two candidates or even that the same party should name that replacement. I imagine whatever happens would involve the Supreme Court, too.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

From now until the real election, it is assumed that Vance or Walz would receive the Electoral votes. Whoever they name would probably get the Vice President votes for their party in the Electoral College.

After the Electoral College has voted Congress may have room for shenanigans but should accept the votes as cast and then apply the procedure to swear in the Vice Presidential candidate as Vice President and then President.

In that case the President nominates a replacement Vice President who must then receive a simple majority vote in both chambers.

Unfortunately the procedure is untested and the Republicans have demonstrated a willingness to use rules creatively. If gods forbid Harris wins the election and then becomes incapacitated they could try to reject her Electoral votes in which case there is no winner and the House votes by state and appoints Trump.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

Because of our Electoral College we are not actually voting for the candidate who is on the ballot. In each state we are voting for a slate of Electors pledged to that candidate. The Electors are still alive. How their votes are bound is a matter of state law.

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

You are deliberately refusing to understand the full horror of the situation. What kind of meat do you think those food processing businesses are selling?
[/QUOTE]

 

[Free]

Oh wow, this election has a theme song.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

thats not yakkity sax

 

[Free]

Not ominous at all, Sherriff Zuchowski.

Residents express fear after sheriff says ‘write down all the

Portage County Sheriff Bruce Zuchowski seemed to encourage his friends and supporters to write down the addresses of people with Democratic yard signs,

theportager.com

Portage County Sheriff Bruce Zuchowski seemed to encourage his friends and supporters to write down the addresses of people with Democratic yard signs, sparking accusations of voter intimidation.

In identical posts to his personal and public Facebook accounts on Sept. 13, Zuchowski wrote what he claims to tell people who ask him what will happen if Vice President Kamala Harris wins the presidential election. Using dehumanizing language, he says he tells them to record the addresses of people with Harris yard signs in order to house immigrants with them.

“When people ask me…What’s gonna happen if the Flip – Flopping, Laughing Hyena Wins?? I say…write down all the addresses of the people who had her signs in their yards! Sooo…when the Illegal human “Locust” (which she supports!) Need places to live…We’ll already have the addresses of the their New families…who supported their arrival!” the posts stated, along with accompanying pictures of a television tuned to Fox News.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

J D Vance and the Red Skull

JD Vance, A Comic Book Villain Without Enough Shame To Wear A Scary Mask

He keeps finding new depths of depravity.

www.playtyperguy.com

 

[Cristiano]

Look! I was called an anchor baby beaner! I have reached level 60 of Elmo's Nazi Hellscape Simulator.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Look! I was called an anchor baby beaner! I have reached level 60 of Elmo's Nazi Hellscape Simulator.

View attachment 691

Just pretend that taco is an arepa.

 

[Soen Eber]

Look! I was called an anchor baby beaner! I have reached level 60 of Elmo's Nazi Hellscape Simulator.

View attachment 691

There really should be a video game ...

 

[Imnotgoing Sideways]

Wolfenstein 3D Counter-Strike? (o.o)