Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHere's the full email Rep Mo Brooks sent the WH re: pardons:
The email request says it all: concern Democrats would abuse the judicial system by prosecuting and jailing Republicans who acted pursuant to their Constitutional or statutory duties, he now tells ABC
McEntee also says there was talk of trying to get pardons for everybody who worked for Trump, not only for Jan. 6
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=g0YzMQS6pJR2gKyAjh_TeQ
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
10 replies, 1310 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (15)
ReplyReply to this post
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Here's the full email Rep Mo Brooks sent the WH re: pardons: (Original Post)
kpete
Jun 2022
OP
Incredibly, Mo Brooks is even worse than I thought. Glad he's on the way out. nt
eppur_se_muova
Jun 2022
#10
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)1. Freedom of Speech doesn't cover lying
As for your alleged Freedom of Association, Mo, if you lay down with dogs, you're liable to get up with fleas.
AZSkiffyGeek
(11,079 posts)3. It doesn't?
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)6. Lying is legal
There are defined circumstances where it is illegal to lie - i.e. commercial advertisements, fraudulent financial transactions or where there is an affirmative legal duty to tell the truth, such as under oath, your taxes, and other situations covered generally under 18 USC 1001.
But apart from those specific legally-defined situations, freedom of speech most certainly encompasses the freedom to lie.
You can lie all day long. People won't like it, and it may catch up to you in the form of social consequences. but the freedom to lie is well established under the First Amendment.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)8. United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709 (2012)
The "Stolen Valor Act" prohibited lying about military honors. Alvarez lied about having received the Congressional Medal of Honor:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/709/#tab-opinion-1970529
The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true. This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth. See Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 377 (1927) (Brandeis, J., concurring) (If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be ap-plied is more speech, not enforced silence). The theory of our Constitution is that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting). The First Amendment itself ensures the right to respond to speech we do not like, and for good reason. Freedom of speech and thought flows not from the beneficence of the state but from the inalienable rights of the person. And suppression of speech by the government can make exposure of falsity more difficult, not less so. Society has the right and civic duty to engage in open, dynamic, rational discourse. These ends are not well served when the government seeks to orchestrate public discussion through content-based mandates.
...
The Nation well knows that one of the costs of the First Amendment is that it protects the speech we detest as well as the speech we embrace. Though few might find respondents statements anything but contemptible, his right to make those statements is protected by the Constitutions guarantee of freedom of speech and expression. The Stolen Valor Act infringes upon speech protected by the First Amendment.
superpatriotman
(6,252 posts)2. I'm fucking tired of being called a Socialist
Fuck off fascist phonies.
mobeau69
(11,156 posts)4. That dog won't hunt. Bahahahaha!
I know, thats all you have, Mo(go).
Pathetic
Nevilledog
(51,209 posts)5. Sent from my IPad is *chef's kiss*
ultralite001
(894 posts)7. WT...
"American (sic) simply cannot permit Socialist Democrats to abuse
Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Association, United States Constitution
and various federal statutes via their oft-used strategy of abusing the
judicial process via private organizations they fund or the prosecution
arm they will soon control."
"...or the prosecution arm they will soon control" ??? !!!
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)9. The DoJ
The DoJ is the arm of the US government that prosecutes criminal cases.
Trump lost the election, and thus the Biden Administration then appointed their nominees to the top posts therein. That is an ordinary consequence of an election.
eppur_se_muova
(36,299 posts)10. Incredibly, Mo Brooks is even worse than I thought. Glad he's on the way out. nt