Beskuldiging: Juicio a Trump: la incitación, un concepto resbaladizo | International

The images are extremely important. Republican senators will often be able to quit this year as it passes the Capitol on January 6. For that reason, arguing for Trump’s sake, as much as indicating that he has the right to do so, is that insurgency, by all means, is not directly incited by President Trump’s entities.

Democrats consider Trump’s “incitement to insurrection” motion to use his electoral fraud allegations to animate and persuade his followers to interrupt the Capitol and intervene to win victory over rival Joe Biden. The incentive for insurrection is not the same as the exercise, one of the offenses that expressly mention the Constitution as marketers of accusation, meaning that it is engraved in the expression “otros delitos y faltas graves” which mentions the same article 2. It is easier to try that the traction. This implies a significant conflict, although it is not necessary for insurgency.

The defense attorneys have jurisprudence to support their position that Trump’s speeches are compared to the First Amendment, which protects freedom of expression. In 2016, during his first presidential campaign, protesters opposed to the candidate presented themselves with one of their rights to protest. From the screenplay, Trump says to his followers: “Sacadlos de aquí.” The protesters assured him that he would get rid of Trump’s followers, and ask the candidate to incite the disturbances. A federal tribunal for appeals against Trump’s reasoning, and the establishment of the tabloids of the candidate institute compared by the First Amendment. La misma, defienden ahora sus abogados, que le protege tras haber exhortado a sus seguidores el 6 deer a “pelear como el demonio” y “marchar al Capitolio”.

But there are differences regarding this precedent. First, in this case Donald Trump was a private citizen who aspired to the presidency. The conduct that is being heard now, in change, is that of a President of the United States. And there are rules that can be legalized for a private individual and that, for a public cargo, constitute a violation of its jurisdiction and can be based on a accusation. As of last week, 144 expert advocates in the First Amendment have issued an abridgment card in which the “legally voluntary” classification is intended to reduce the constitutional commitment of the President.

Another difference is that, as it has been framed to demonstrate the accusation during its three days of argumentation, here are not a few hiccups. On the basis of the accusation not only the words directed to his followers at the age of 6 in that, according to Congressman Jamie Raskin in the juicio, Trump “gave up his commanding officer in jefe to convert into instigator in jefe”. It was also part of a planned and executed campaign by Trump with the aim of illegally locating it in the cargo hold. “Donald Trump cultivated for many months the violence, the alabó, and when the violence of the one who was able to follow him, the canal made this great historical event”, says Stacey Plaskett, one of the gestures of accusation, the group of congressmen who are sending the Chamber of Representatives to make tax cuts in the Senate.