Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Trump lawyers argue that protesting violates Donald Trump's First Amendment right not to hear dissenting views, citing 5 USC § 6103 establishing today as Opposite Day   ( thehill.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Law, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Trump Donald Trump, Human rights, Donald Trump, Mr. Trump, Lawyer, Supreme Court of the United States  
•       •       •

6254 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2017 at 9:34 AM (26 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



216 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-04-21 08:32:01 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 08:57:30 AM  
jesus christ.
 
2017-04-21 08:57:57 AM  
I'm getting really farking tired of all this winning.
 
2017-04-21 09:18:08 AM  
I doubt he'll be successful, given the failure of HB 742, also known as the "Nelson Muntz Stop Punching Yourself Bill."
 
2017-04-21 09:38:08 AM  
Does Trump still need 2 lawyers present at all times because they can't trust him to tell them both the truth individually?
 
2017-04-21 09:38:29 AM  
Jimbo, Skeeter & Geech, Attorneys at Law and Live Bait Shop.
 
2017-04-21 09:38:55 AM  
Jesus farking Christ.

The only people who can violate your first amendment rights are government representatives, be they legislators or law enforcement.

Anybody else who prevents you from speaking is either exercising THEIR right to control their own private space, committing assault, or not actually violating your rights at all and just yelling at you as is their first amendment right.
 
2017-04-21 09:39:47 AM  

Diogenes: I doubt he'll be successful, given the failure of HB 742, also known as the "Nelson Muntz Stop Punching Yourself Bill."


But the landmark SCOTUS case "Iknowyouare v Butwhatami" casts a little doubt on the constitutionality of the Muntz bill.  And it doesn't pass the Poopyhead test.
 
2017-04-21 09:40:01 AM  
Please remember who the current USAG is and who sits on SCOTUS these days.
 
2017-04-21 09:40:18 AM  
christ, man up for five seconds donald!
 
2017-04-21 09:40:31 AM  
m.popkey.co
 
2017-04-21 09:40:42 AM  
Freedom of speech, just watch what you say.
 
2017-04-21 09:40:49 AM  
What a thin skinned snowflake.
 
2017-04-21 09:41:03 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 09:41:44 AM  
OFFS
 
2017-04-21 09:42:31 AM  
Poor little snowflake Donny
 
2017-04-21 09:43:26 AM  
Who knew Donnie was so sensitive about hearing dissenting views?
 
2017-04-21 09:43:59 AM  
I'd really, really like to know why the Bar hasn't knucklepunched these lawyers for not understanding how the First Amendment works.
 
2017-04-21 09:44:09 AM  

DubyaHater: Who knew Donnie was so sensitive about hearing dissenting views?


Every single person?
 
2017-04-21 09:47:48 AM  
Where the HELL did he get these lawyers?  From Schuster, Steinbeck and Let's-Throw-Everything-Against-the-Wall-to-See-What-will-Stick?
 
2017-04-21 09:47:53 AM  
Perfect.

Start siccing police dogs on protestors and kettling them and performing violent mass arrests.

You'll unite both sides and everyone in between once footage comes out and the internet explodes.  People remember the Civil Rights marches and Kent State.

The American people have a breaking point and that's over the line for a huge majority.  IMHO.
 
2017-04-21 09:47:59 AM  

DemonEater: The only people who can violate your first amendment rights are government representatives, be they legislators or law enforcement.


This!!!!!!
 
2017-04-21 09:47:59 AM  
The president's legal team also maintained that Trump had every right to call for the removal of the protesters since they "interfered with the Trump campaign's First Amendment right."

He had all the right to call for their removal but it isnt tied to the 1st amendment.  More of a property rights case.  But this is a spaghetti defense.  Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.
 
2017-04-21 09:48:43 AM  

Archidude: DubyaHater: Who knew Donnie was so sensitive about hearing dissenting views?

Every single person?


That's optimistic. Bush's lowest approval rating (Gallup) was 25%, so I'm going with "no more than 75% of us".
 
2017-04-21 09:49:02 AM  

Lord_Baull: I'd really, really like to know why the Bar hasn't knucklepunched these lawyers for not understanding how the First Amendment works.


or sanctioned by judges who have to listen to such frivolous tripe.
 
2017-04-21 09:49:23 AM  
Isn't there some limit to how stupid of a statement a lawyer can make in front of a judge before facing some kind of penalty?  Like the judge saying "I'm finding you in contempt for wasting my time"?
 
2017-04-21 09:49:30 AM  
Protesting goes with the job, asshole!

Don't like the heat? Then GTFO of the kitchen!!
 
2017-04-21 09:49:31 AM  

Lord_Baull: I'd really, really like to know why the Bar hasn't knucklepunched these lawyers for not understanding how the First Amendment works.


They're too busy trying to explain to the attorney general how the judiciary works.
 
2017-04-21 09:49:57 AM  
I believe this was set by precedent LALALALALAICAN'THEARYOULALALALALALA
 
2017-04-21 09:50:07 AM  
Of course no one actually read the article.
 
2017-04-21 09:50:31 AM  

Saiga410: The president's legal team also maintained that Trump had every right to call for the removal of the protesters since they "interfered with the Trump campaign's First Amendment right."

He had all the right to call for their removal but it isnt tied to the 1st amendment.  More of a property rights case.  But this is a spaghetti defense.  Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.


I get the spaghetti defense, I really do.
But this seems less like spaghetti and more like a brand new hi-bouncy ball.
 
2017-04-21 09:51:24 AM  
President Donald Trump's lawyers on Thursday argued that anti-Trump protesters infringed on his First Amendment right by expressing "dissenting views" at his campaign rallies.  According to a report by Politico, Trump's lawyers are asking a judge to halt an ongoing lawsuit against the president by maintaining that protesters "have no right" to voice opposing views during rallies.


I cannot even come up with a fictional misinterpretation of the First Amendment that is as wrong as this one.
 
2017-04-21 09:51:49 AM  
Lol this guy.
 
2017-04-21 09:52:24 AM  

bigfatbuddhist: Where the HELL did he get these lawyers?  From Schuster, Steinbeck and Let's-Throw-Everything-Against-the-Wall-to-See-What-will-Stick?


Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
2017-04-21 09:53:21 AM  

Karac: Saiga410: The president's legal team also maintained that Trump had every right to call for the removal of the protesters since they "interfered with the Trump campaign's First Amendment right."

He had all the right to call for their removal but it isnt tied to the 1st amendment.  More of a property rights case.  But this is a spaghetti defense.  Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.

I get the spaghetti defense, I really do.
But this seems less like spaghetti and more like a brand new hi-bouncy ball.



It's less a spaghetti defense and more a diarrhea Jackson Pollock.
 
2017-04-21 09:53:29 AM  

Karac: Saiga410: The president's legal team also maintained that Trump had every right to call for the removal of the protesters since they "interfered with the Trump campaign's First Amendment right."

He had all the right to call for their removal but it isnt tied to the 1st amendment.  More of a property rights case.  But this is a spaghetti defense.  Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.

I get the spaghetti defense, I really do.
But this seems less like spaghetti and more like a brand new hi-bouncy ball.


I do not disagree.  If I can see the problem in their argument, ya, their argument is bad and they should feel bad about themselves.
 
2017-04-21 09:53:54 AM  
This is like the prosecution arguing that its 6th Amendment right to counsel was violated when the state gave the defendant a public defender.

And if you're first thought is that makes no sense, congratulations you know more about Constitutional law than Trump's lawyers.
 
2017-04-21 09:54:26 AM  

chewd: [img.fark.net image 600x250]


Not everything that comes out her vagina is retarded?
 
2017-04-21 09:54:37 AM  

Saiga410: The president's legal team also maintained that Trump had every right to call for the removal of the protesters since they "interfered with the Trump campaign's First Amendment right."

He had all the right to call for their removal but it isnt tied to the 1st amendment.  More of a property rights case.  But this is a spaghetti defense.  Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.


serious question for law-types?

How does a campaign have first amendment rights?
and doesn't the party have to have standing?
 
2017-04-21 09:54:46 AM  
Dictator Donny.
Emperor Trumpius the Tangerine.

Winning at All Costs is Not True Leadership
 
2017-04-21 09:55:31 AM  
The Fascist in Chief.

What an ignorant, bullshiat argument that is... which is about right for President fark Face and his merry band of neo-feudal coonts.
 
2017-04-21 09:56:00 AM  

Karac: I get the spaghetti defense, I really do.
But this seems less like spaghetti and more like a brand new hi-bouncy ball.


Do not taunt hi-bouncy ball.
 
2017-04-21 09:56:33 AM  
Homer Simpson logic right there, it takes two to lie, one to lie and the other to hear it.
 
2017-04-21 09:57:05 AM  
 Three protesters who were ejected from a March 2016 Trump campaign rally in Louisville, Ky., have sued, claiming that they were roughed up after Trump incited violence by shouting "get 'em out of here!" from the stage.


Trump's lawyers, however, argued that the then-GOP nominee also specifically said "Don't hurt 'em."


GET 'EM OUT OF HERE!Don't hurt 'em
 
2017-04-21 09:57:39 AM  

DarnoKonrad: Lord_Baull: I'd really, really like to know why the Bar hasn't knucklepunched these lawyers for not understanding how the First Amendment works.

or sanctioned by judges who have to listen to such frivolous tripe.


Given the political climate, I'd be really cautious about slapping the President's lawyers around, no matter how much they deserve it.
 
2017-04-21 10:00:12 AM  
FTA: By Nikita Vladimirov


I don't know what's fake or real anymore.
 
2017-04-21 10:00:29 AM  
Go fark yourself asshole.  If it was the highest form of patriotic when the black guy was in charge, it's the highest form of patriotic when the orange guy is in charge.

img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 10:01:50 AM  
Trump: Those protesters were infringing my First Amendment rights! Make sure you tell the judge.

Trump's Lawyers: Ummm, Mr. President, that's not how this works. That's not how any of...

Trump: Just do it! I'm the President, dammit! [looks at Bannon for approval] And use good words. Only the best words!

Trump's Lawyers: *facepalm*
 
2017-04-21 10:02:53 AM  

jethroe: Perfect.

Start siccing police dogs on protestors and kettling them and performing violent mass arrests.

You'll unite both sides and everyone in between once footage comes out and the internet explodes.  People remember the Civil Rights marches and Kent State.

The American people have a breaking point and that's over the line for a huge majority.  IMHO.


Wasn't there a far-right nut arguing that we needed another Kent State to show the millennials their place and what can happen if you protest?
 
2017-04-21 10:03:12 AM  
But Donald, they weren't protesters, they were, PERFORMANCE ARTISTS!
 
Displayed 50 of 216 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report