Jump to content

Two Capitol Police Officers file suit against Trump


Satchel

Recommended Posts

Trump will become the most sued POTUS in US history:

 

Donald Trump’s being sued by 2 U.S. Capitol Police Officers who claim the ex-Prez “inflamed” the insurrectionist mob, which they say nearly led to their deaths on January 6.

James Blassingame, a 17-year veteran, and Sidney Hemby, an 11-year veteran, just filed a lawsuit against Trump claiming they suffered horrific injuries and they’re laying the blame squarely at his feet.

In the suit, the cops claim Trump incited the January 6 riot by getting his followers riled up about trying to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

According to the docs, obtained by TMZ, Hemby says the riot resulted in him being “crushed against the doors on the east side” while “trying to hold the insurrectionists back.” He claims he suffered cuts and abrasions on his face, hands and body while the mob attacked.

Blassingame claims he was slammed against a stone column, injuring his spine an the back of his head. In addition to the physical attack, he says people were yelling and repeatedly calling him a n****r.

In the suit, Blassingame also says he’s “haunted by the memory of being attacked, and of the sensory impacts – the sights, sounds, smells and even tastes of the attack remain close to the surface.” He adds that he has survivors’ guilt because he was unable to help some of fellow officers … some of whom lost their lives due to the insurrection.

As for Trump’s responsibility for the attack … both officers point to his December 19 tweet where he said, “Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there. Will be wild!” They assert that was a battle cry … “taken by many of [Trump’s] supporters as a literal call to arms.”

The officers are suing for unspecified damages for their physical injuries and emotional distress.

 

https://www.foxbangor.com/tmz/donald-trump-sued-by-2-capitol-police-officers-over-jan-6-insurrection/

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess one way to combat the wrongful "De-Funding of the Police" is to give them large sums of cash at the order of a civil judge?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Over nearly five hours in the United States District Court for Washington, lawyers laid out their cases against Mr. Trump, contending that he deserved to be held responsible for inflaming a violent mob, despite what are typically wide immunity protections for a president’s speech and actions while in office.

“Mr. Trump dispatched the crowd that he assembled,” said Joseph Sellers, the lawyer for a group of House Democrats, including Representatives Barbara Lee of California, Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey and Hank Johnson of Georgia. “After he saw that they were engaged in breaking into the Capitol, instead of trying to calm them, he retweeted his incendiary remarks from the rally before.”

During a hearing over whether the suits can move forward, Judge Amit P. Mehta focused on why Mr. Trump did not act more quickly to call off the mob. He asked lawyers for Mr. Trump whether the president’s slow response was not evidence he agreed with the siege after telling the crowd to “fight like hell” and march to the Capitol…

“You have an almost two-hour period in which the president doesn’t take to Twitter or to any other type of communication and say: ‘Stop. Get out of the Capitol,’” the judge said, adding, “If my words were misconstrued and they led to violence, wouldn’t a reasonable person whose words were being misconstrued come out and say: ‘Wait a minute. Stop’?”

Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Jesse R. Binnall, argued that the suits should be dismissed because his remarks inflaming the crowd were protected by presidential immunity and his First Amendment right to free speech. He asserted that Mr. Trump had told the crowd to “peacefully and patriotically” march on the Capitol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/us/politics/trump-jan-6-lawsuits.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Jesse R. Binnall, argued that the suits should be dismissed because his remarks inflaming the crowd were protected by presidential immunity and his First Amendment right to free speech.

I'm no attorney, but I seem to remember reading more than once that freedom of speech does not cover speech that incites violence.  Pretty sure this scumfuck lawyer has read that, too.

I'm also pretty sure that presidential immunity doesn't cover speech that incites violence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

I'm no attorney, but I seem to remember reading more than once that freedom of speech does not cover speech that incites violence.  Pretty sure this scumfuck lawyer has read that, too.

I'm also pretty sure that presidential immunity doesn't cover speech that incites violence.

 

that sounds like some marxist commie thinking there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How could anybody forget how GWB sat in that chair for three hours flipping through the pages of My Pet Goat, after having been told that the citadel of democracy was under attack? If he could sit and read for three hours, why couldn’t Trump watch his insurrection on TV? People everywhere are asking…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Satchel said:

Over nearly five hours in the United States District Court for Washington, lawyers laid out their cases against Mr. Trump, contending that he deserved to be held responsible for inflaming a violent mob, despite what are typically wide immunity protections for a president’s speech and actions while in office.

“Mr. Trump dispatched the crowd that he assembled,” said Joseph Sellers, the lawyer for a group of House Democrats, including Representatives Barbara Lee of California, Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey and Hank Johnson of Georgia. “After he saw that they were engaged in breaking into the Capitol, instead of trying to calm them, he retweeted his incendiary remarks from the rally before.”

During a hearing over whether the suits can move forward, Judge Amit P. Mehta focused on why Mr. Trump did not act more quickly to call off the mob. He asked lawyers for Mr. Trump whether the president’s slow response was not evidence he agreed with the siege after telling the crowd to “fight like hell” and march to the Capitol…

“You have an almost two-hour period in which the president doesn’t take to Twitter or to any other type of communication and say: ‘Stop. Get out of the Capitol,’” the judge said, adding, “If my words were misconstrued and they led to violence, wouldn’t a reasonable person whose words were being misconstrued come out and say: ‘Wait a minute. Stop’?”

Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Jesse R. Binnall, argued that the suits should be dismissed because his remarks inflaming the crowd were protected by presidential immunity and his First Amendment right to free speech. He asserted that Mr. Trump had told the crowd to “peacefully and patriotically” march on the Capitol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/us/politics/trump-jan-6-lawsuits.html

 

image.thumb.png.563df09eebdebbcd431bab81cfa2ff8a.png

 

https://www.binnall.com/our-team/jesse-r-binnall/

 

attorneys-bluth.gif

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

He asserted that Mr. Trump had told the crowd to “peacefully and patriotically” march on the Capitol.

Trump also said to his followers: “if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.” His lawyer Rudy Giuliani urged “trial by combat.” Everyone got the message. The ‘nudge nudge, wink wink’ after “peacefully” was implicit. Maybe he was just referring to the march itself. But his soldiers knew what their marching orders were and we have multiple sources reporting that Trump was ecstatic watching the violence unfold on tv. His goons were fighting for him and he loved it, something he thought many of his closest allies weren’t doing enough of, especially Mike Pence.

Edited by WhatTheBuck
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think the "Law & Order" President gives fuck one about law enforcement officials.....you may as well have died in the insurrection.  Because you're really not gonna like what happens next...

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Lobo said:

If you think the "Law & Order" President gives fuck one about law enforcement officials.....you may as well have died in the insurrection.  Because you're really not gonna like what happens next...

Yep.  Law and Order means "beat up people I don't like."  It doesn't mean -- it's not even CLOSE to meaning -- enforce and protect the laws of the United States/local jurisdictions.  Keep up, folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really amazing to think about.  Even if you don't think he instigated it...there's undeniable video/audio/text proof that he sat back in the White House, ate McDonald's, watched Police Officers get beaten to death, and did absolutely nothing to stop it even though all he had to do was sent a simple tweet.  A handful of other officers took their own lives afterwards due to the PTSD.  All he had to do was type 140 letters into a phone like he had thousands of times before.  But he didn't.  He watched, in real time, law enforcement officials being beaten and murdered.  And the rest of you sat back and said, "Now there's just a pure law and order president right there, that's who he is."  

You think about that the next time you worry about a CVS with broken windows.  One tweet, and a half dozen cops go home to their families tonight and a hundred others don't have to be hospitalized.  But nope.  That's your guy.  That's your hero.  That's the guy you'd let face-fuck your wife if given half the chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...