And the wins keep coming for the Trump Train!
WDRB reported that yesterday a federal appeals court in Cincinnati Ohio dismissed a fraudulent lawsuit filed during the 2016 presidential campaign against President Donald Trump.
The lawsuit was filed by three people who claimed they were assaulted by Trump supporters during a campaign rally in Louisville. During the rally, Trump told his supporters to remove the three plaintiffs, who were rowdy and protesting him. Trump shouted, “get ‘em out of here, but don’t hurt them.”
Here is more via WFPL:
“A federal appeals court has dismissed a lawsuit that alleges President Trump encouraged his supporters to assault protesters at a Louisville campaign rally in 2016.
“The three plaintiffs claimed they were pushed, shoved and punched by audience members after Trump repeatedly shouted “get ‘em out of here” during his speech at the Kentucky International Convention Center.
“The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that Trump’s words were protected by the First Amendment and that he didn’t specifically encourage violence because he also said, “don’t hurt ‘em.”
“The notion that Trump’s direction to remove a handful of disruptive protesters from among hundreds or thousands in attendance could be deemed to implicitly incite a riot is simply not plausible — especially where any implication of incitement to riotous violence is explicitly negated by the accompanying words, ‘don’t hurt ’em,’” Circuit Judge David McKeague wrote in the opinion.
“If words have meaning, the admonition ‘don’t hurt ’em’ cannot be reasonably construed as an urging to ‘hurt ’em.’”
“Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau filed the lawsuit in 2016 against Trump, alleging that Trump incited a riot under Kentucky law.
“Nwanguma alleged she was assaulted and subjected to racial slurs made by Trump supporters Alvin Bamberger and Matthew Heimbach, a local white supremacist.
“Shah alleged she was shoved by Trump supporters and Brousseau alleged he was punched in the stomach.
“Dan Canon, an attorney for the protesters, said in a statement that they will “seek further review.”
“Mr. Trump, throughout his campaign, intentionally used crowd violence to suppress dissident speech – the kind of core speech that the First Amendment traditionally protects,” Canon wrote.
“The Court’s opinion today gives him a free pass for that conduct, even though he had publicly been asking for violence to occur at these rallies for months, and even though his co-defendants have said they would not have attacked our clients if Trump had not directed them to do so. Allowing a candidate for public office to use the First Amendment as a shield under these circumstances is unprecedented and dangerous.”
“When a lower court ruled that the case could proceed against Trump last year, U.S. District Court Judge David Hale said he found ample support that the protesters’ injuries were a “direct and proximate result” of Trump’s directions.
“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” Hale wrote, “It was an order, an instruction, a command.”
“But the appeals court reversed Hale’s decision, saying the claim that Trump incited violent conduct isn’t plausible.
“In the ears of some supporters, Trump’s words may have had a tendency to elicit a physical response, in the event a disruptive protester refused to leave, but they did not specifically advocate such a response,” McKeague wrote for the 6th Circuit.
“After the protesters were removed from the 2016 rally, Trump explained why he calls on audience members to remove protesters.
“See, if I say ‘go get them,’ I get in trouble with the press, the most dishonest human beings in the world,” Trump said. “If I say ‘don’t hurt them,’ then the press says ‘well, Trump isn’t as tough as he used to be.’”
The three-judge panel ruled that President Trump could not be sued for inciting violence because his words are protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution because he didn’t actually say to hurt the plaintiffs in any way.
The lawsuit had claimed that Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau were all peacefully protesting at the Kentucky International Convention Center when then-candidate Trump stopped his speech and told his supporters to remove them. That’s obviously not true since they were being disruptive enough to actually warrant Trump’s attention in the first place.
The best part of this ruling is that the liberal left just can’t seem to believe that President Trump is on the right side of the law, the same law which they themselves have been great at taking advantage of for decades. In America, you have every right to free speech, speech that is protected from the government, but not from private individuals.