Comments by "jacq danieles" (@jacqdanieles) on "Judge Luttig: The most historic constitutional and political case in all of American history" video.

  1. Had Dump joined the mob at the Capitol, he'd definitely be an insurrectionist. But by his good fortune, his handlers prevented him from doing so. On this technicality he will skate.
    4
  2.  @openforumone  Judge Luttig is a conservative, Einstein
    4
  3. ​ @Moleetov Osama bin Laden also watched the 9/11 attacks on TV. Try again, Sherlock
    3
  4.  @Moleetov  the testimony of the convicted rioters should be sufficient to prove his incitement.
    3
  5.  @Moleetov  you haven't reached any "same conclusion", Einstein. The SC will rule in favor of trump. That's a given. But the reason will not be because he's not an insurrectionist.
    3
  6.  @nevermorefrompast-qx5wb  define "aid & comfort"
    2
  7. Did you listen to the part from 5:47 onwards?
    2
  8.  @murderface15g13  except you DID just hear about them ... at 5:47 ... duh!
    2
  9. ​ @ronaldcole7415 I would agree with you on the definition of "insurrection". But I don't understand why the rioters were not charged with insurrection. So how can trump be classified as such?
    2
  10. How do you define "aid & comfort"?
    1
  11. Debatable. Especially since none (that I know of) were convicted of insurrection.
    1
  12. @@PsychicPhysics33 Enrique Tarrio & Stewart Rhodes were charged with seditious conspiracy
    1
  13.  @CarlynLei  1. If you read my posts carefully, I'm NOT Maga 2. The outcome of the trial is irrelevant to the matter at hand at the SC: disqualification at the ballot 3. Not doing his duty to stop the violence is not the same as actively participating in the violence 4. He has not been convicted of insurrection. So how does the SC disqualify him based on "engaging in insurrection" 5. Listen to the guest sitting next to Luttig. 6. Your points 2,3,4 -- debatable if that amounts to "aid & comfort"
    1
  14.  @alanbrookes6637  I don't disagree. But my question is this: who makes the determination that he was the general? Does the Supreme Court? I think not.
    1
  15.  @CarlynLei  I'm not a trump supporter. Re-read my posts
    1
  16.  @Moleetov  look up "He invited us': Accused Capitol rioters blame Trump in novel legal defense"
    1
  17. ​@higgsboson1028if "it does not require a conviction", how do you determine if someone engaged in insurrection?
    1
  18. @higgsboson1028 while I fully agree with you, from the standpoint of making a legal determination to exclude him from the ballot, how does one determine his culpability in the insurrection without an actual conviction?
    1
  19. @higgsboson1028 sorry for my flippant reply. I mistakenly thought I was responding to a different thread. My mistake.
    1