(Thread) Giuliani’s 1st Amendment Defense
I did another Sunday video (☕️ + talk)
I’ll put an edited transcription in the next tweet for those who prefer📑
I'll also do a Twitter Summary.
(Bonus: This'll help prepare you for the Twitter Bar Exam)
I did another Sunday video (☕️ + talk)
I’ll put an edited transcription in the next tweet for those who prefer📑
I'll also do a Twitter Summary.
(Bonus: This'll help prepare you for the Twitter Bar Exam)
1/ Edited transcript here: terikanefield.com/justice-and-ru…
After a short break (more ☕️) I’ll come back and see if I reduce a 17-minute video down to an 18-tweet thread.
After a short break (more ☕️) I’ll come back and see if I reduce a 17-minute video down to an 18-tweet thread.
2/ Rep. Swalwell filed a lawsuit against Trump, Jr., Mo Brooks and Giuliani accusing them of inciting the violence of Jan. 6th.
Last week, Giuliani filed a motion to dismiss the suit against him. drive.google.com/file/d/1wRyJHZ…
As expected, he presented a First Amendment defense.
Last week, Giuliani filed a motion to dismiss the suit against him. drive.google.com/file/d/1wRyJHZ…
As expected, he presented a First Amendment defense.
3/ A few of the key facts as they pertain to Giuliani.
One bit of law everyone agrees on is that after the electoral votes are counted and election certified, it’s all over: Biden becomes POTUS.
We all know the title of the rally “Stop the Steal” the timing and location.
One bit of law everyone agrees on is that after the electoral votes are counted and election certified, it’s all over: Biden becomes POTUS.
We all know the title of the rally “Stop the Steal” the timing and location.
4/ On the evening of Jan. 5, Giuliani tweeted a link to a YouTube video entitled “Watch this before Jan. 6th.”
The video falsely claimed that it was legal for VP Mike Pence to block the counting of the votes and certification of the election.
Giuliani retweeted it twice.
The video falsely claimed that it was legal for VP Mike Pence to block the counting of the votes and certification of the election.
Giuliani retweeted it twice.
5/ During his speech at the rally, Giuliani repeated these false claims.
He also told the crowd exactly what he wanted: He wanted ten days to take the matter back to the states, which he said would give him time to prove that the election had been rigged.
He also told the crowd exactly what he wanted: He wanted ten days to take the matter back to the states, which he said would give him time to prove that the election had been rigged.
6/ He talked about the fraud he would find if he had ten days. He also told the demonstrators “Let’s have trial by combat.” He also said this (#1)
He concluded with this (#2)
Giuliani stood by as Trump told the rally-goers to “fight like hell” and "March . . to the Capitol."
He concluded with this (#2)
Giuliani stood by as Trump told the rally-goers to “fight like hell” and "March . . to the Capitol."
7/ Notice: Rudy never actually said how he expected Congress to be stopped from certifying the election.
But unless I’m missing something the only possible way this crowd could stop the certifying of the election was through intimidation.
But unless I’m missing something the only possible way this crowd could stop the certifying of the election was through intimidation.
8/ I suspect he was hoping for a replay of the Brooks Brothers riot (Florida, 2000). Rioters orchestrated by Bush people intimidated vote-counters into stopping, thus delaying the certification, and giving SCOTUS time to call of the count.
washingtonpost.com/history/2018/1…
washingtonpost.com/history/2018/1…
9/ OK. Now for the law: speech is protected unless it “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and was “likely to incite or produce such action.”
(The rule is from Brandenburg v. Ohio)
You’re probably thinking, “Duh! Of course they did this!"
(The rule is from Brandenburg v. Ohio)
You’re probably thinking, “Duh! Of course they did this!"
10/ Giuliani writes this👇
Here Giuliani gets the long wrong: To lose his First Amendment protections, his speech must simply incite “lawlessness” or illegal behavior.
Turns out, conspiring to interfere with Congress by means of intimidation is unlawful. 42 U.S. Code § 1985
Here Giuliani gets the long wrong: To lose his First Amendment protections, his speech must simply incite “lawlessness” or illegal behavior.
Turns out, conspiring to interfere with Congress by means of intimidation is unlawful. 42 U.S. Code § 1985
11/ If Giuliani intended this crowd to stop the counting of the votes and the certification of the election—and if there was no way to do this without resorting to threats or intimidation
Then Giuliani was inciting imminent lawlessness
And he loses his 1st Amendment protection.
Then Giuliani was inciting imminent lawlessness
And he loses his 1st Amendment protection.
12/ Here is the context of his “trial by combat” comment👇
His defense is that he said “trial by combat” in the context of finding fraud later.
See why this is tricky?
His defense is a bit stronger than it seems at first glance. (Trump's is still very weak)
His defense is that he said “trial by combat” in the context of finding fraud later.
See why this is tricky?
His defense is a bit stronger than it seems at first glance. (Trump's is still very weak)
13/ What we have is a factual question: Did Giuliani incite imminent lawlessness?
Because this is a factual matter for the jury to decide, I believe Giuliani’s motion to dismiss will be denied (but courts don’t always get things right.)
Because this is a factual matter for the jury to decide, I believe Giuliani’s motion to dismiss will be denied (but courts don’t always get things right.)
14/ If his defense fails, he’s in trouble. He can then be held responsible for any violence that was foreseeable and resulted directly from what the rioters did.
If his defense fails here, it’s also likely to fail in a criminal matter.
If his defense fails here, it’s also likely to fail in a criminal matter.
15/ I often get questions like these👇
After that deep dive, you see the problem, right?
Legal proceedings take time. Rule of law is slow and meticulous. Each motion requires an answer and a ruling. The only way for justice to be quick is in an autocracy.
After that deep dive, you see the problem, right?
Legal proceedings take time. Rule of law is slow and meticulous. Each motion requires an answer and a ruling. The only way for justice to be quick is in an autocracy.
16/ These questions are based on the idea that the lying of Republicans can be resolved through the legal system.
Let me give you an example why I argue it can’t:
Suppose Giuliani and Trump are found guilty and put in jail. That will definitely serve justice. . .
Let me give you an example why I argue it can’t:
Suppose Giuliani and Trump are found guilty and put in jail. That will definitely serve justice. . .
17/ . . . but it won’t solve the larger political problem.
The guys 👇are not going to say: “A court found Trump guilty, so I guess we should just break up the party and go home and start playing nice.”
They’ll call the trial a sham. They’ll say the judge was biased.
The guys 👇are not going to say: “A court found Trump guilty, so I guess we should just break up the party and go home and start playing nice.”
They’ll call the trial a sham. They’ll say the judge was biased.
18/ They’ll say the jury was made up of Democrats. They’ll treat their leaders as victims and martyrs.
I am NOT saying that they shouldn’t or won’t be prosecuted.
They should and they will.
I’m saying that won’t solve our political problems.
I am NOT saying that they shouldn’t or won’t be prosecuted.
They should and they will.
I’m saying that won’t solve our political problems.
19/ [Obviously I couldn't do it in 18 tweets. FAIL.]
I suspect this feeling 👇comes party from believing that a decisive victory in court (or elsewhere) will put an end to the Republican threat.
I suspect this feeling 👇comes party from believing that a decisive victory in court (or elsewhere) will put an end to the Republican threat.
https://twitter.com/HorsesWindy/status/1395899639090450432
20/ It won’t. The problem is deeper.
Court victories will help, no doubt.
They are likely to peel off some Republican support, and any of that we can do is helpful.
Political problems ultimately need political solutions.
What do I mean? See: terikanefield.com/things-to-do/
Court victories will help, no doubt.
They are likely to peel off some Republican support, and any of that we can do is helpful.
Political problems ultimately need political solutions.
What do I mean? See: terikanefield.com/things-to-do/
I suspect this comes from expecting instant rather than fast change.
FDR brought about very rapid changes. He literally changed the direction of the country.
Biden is moving even faster and Biden had a pandemic to deal with.
FDR brought about very rapid changes. He literally changed the direction of the country.
Biden is moving even faster and Biden had a pandemic to deal with.
https://twitter.com/ItsMooooooooose/status/1396268361550471169
There is no easy solution to the fact that a major political party is in the grip of anti-democratic extremists.
I think the 24-7 new cycle and click-generating headlines are part of the problem.
FDR had powerful opposition, but nothing like today's GOP.
I think the 24-7 new cycle and click-generating headlines are part of the problem.
FDR had powerful opposition, but nothing like today's GOP.
https://twitter.com/ItsMooooooooose/status/1396268361550471169
The most important thing people can do is get involved in very local politics. I mean neighborhood and town level.
I live in a blue town in a very blue state, and the danger at a local level here is very real.
I live in a blue town in a very blue state, and the danger at a local level here is very real.
https://twitter.com/LandkrohnM/status/1396467849904939011
This question is from the YouTube version.
If he's convicted of inciting the insurrection, the 14th Amendment section 2 should keep him out of the White House.
Trump winning the GOP nomination from prison would go down as one of the most bizarre occurrences ever.
If he's convicted of inciting the insurrection, the 14th Amendment section 2 should keep him out of the White House.
Trump winning the GOP nomination from prison would go down as one of the most bizarre occurrences ever.
Yes, that's correct.
I can't think of why he couldn't run for president from prison, except that campaigning would be a bit difficult 😆 and the GOP would truly be a laughing stock.
This guy did run for office from prison:
usatoday.com/story/news/pol…
https://twitter.com/jocallag42/status/1396509578725007361
I can't think of why he couldn't run for president from prison, except that campaigning would be a bit difficult 😆 and the GOP would truly be a laughing stock.
This guy did run for office from prison:
usatoday.com/story/news/pol…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
