(08-02-2023, 12:22 PM)homebiscuit Wrote:

(08-02-2023, 12:06 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: The actual charge is conspiring to impede an official proceeding. 

So you can hash out the incite others bit with Mike if you'd like, but the actual indictment answers why he's facing the actual charge quite plainly. It is not limited to the rioting mob he helped to foment, it incorporates the repeated attempts to persuade Pence to participate in Trump and company's false elector scheme as well.

Here's the bit you seem to be looking for including Trump's words and encouragement to his supporters to act. 



He told his supporters that the election hinged on Pence's actions that day. 

This bit was shortly followed with the now infamous line "if you don't fight like hell, you won't have a country anymore." 

Now go right ahead and argue context all you want on that quote. You can defend it successfully, but I guarantee that most of the 2000+ ppl that actually crossed the threshold of the Capitol that day didn't give a damn about the context of that statement.

Breaking news! Local law firm threatens violence against others.

https://www.youhurtwefight.com/?utm_sour...olespa.com

You can spin it all you want but there is nothing which shows Trump incited what happened on January 6th. It sounds good for biased MSM sound bites and overzealous, politically motivated District Attorneys, but the words as they stand do not encourage anyone to violence or crime.

Again, as stated a moment ago, that bolded bit doesn't matter. That is not the charge, and that is not what the prosecution must prove. 

You and I can have different opinions about what Trump intended the crowd to do after his speech from here to eternity and it won't matter. 

His repeated attempts to persuade Pence to impede the certification are enough to prosecute without need to prove an intent to incite the rioters.

---