Federal Judge Dismisses Claims That Congressman Helped Incite Capitol Riot

[Celerity]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/federal-judge-dismisses-claims-that-republican-representative-mo-brooks-helped-incite-capitol-riots



Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) has been acquitted of civil claims alleging he incited rioters during the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol last year by giving a speech. U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta said Wednesday that the speech Brooks gave to the crowd was protected by the First Amendment as free speech.

Mehta’s ruling has thrown a wrench in House Democrats’ efforts to sue former President Donald Trump and his allies for inciting the crowd during the riot. This isn’t the first ruling of its kind by Mehta—in February, he dismissed civil claims against Brooks’ co-defendants, including Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump Jr., but told the plaintiffs to continue their claims against the former president.

Mehta has already stated that Trump wasn’t immune from lawsuits filed against him and that the speech he gave on the day of the riot—in which he told supporters to “fight like hell” to “stop the steal”—was not within his official duties as president.


https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-judge-dismisses-claims-alleging-congressman-incited-capitol-riots-2022-03-09/

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Who appointed this judge?

Was it Obama?

why would he make such a FUCKING ruling?

[Celerity]

4. Barack Obama

[Calista241]

5. He's an Obama appointee from 2014.

[JT45242]

2. Who appointed this asshat

Inviting a riot is not protected speech.

[Celerity]

6. Barack Obama

[Ocelot II]

7. Obama.

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Acquitted or was the civil suit dismissed? There's a difference and Reuters should know that.

[Celerity]

9. that was the Daily Beast's use of 'acquitted', not Reuters, I put the link in the OP

Reuters never used the term 'acquitted'