Below is my column in The Hill on the re-arrest of an Iowa man who took part in the January 6th riot. The case raises a growing concern over the way courts are weighing the political views of defendants a matter for bail and sentencing. While raising such concerns inevitably brings out an Internet mob and accusations of being a “fellow traveler,” free speech often demands the protection of the least popular individuals in our society. Many of those who long denounced the censorship of suspected Communists in the 1950s now support censorship or blacklisting of individuals on the right. Others remain conspicuously silent in the face of speech sanctions or censorship. The Jensen case reflects a new sense of license in weighing the political views of defendants in determining whether to release or to jail them.
Here is the column:
In “A Man for All Seasons,” Sir Thomas More confronts Richard Rich, a former protege who lied in court to convict him in exchange for being named attorney general of Wales. As Rich passes by, More asks: “For Wales? Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for Wales!”
The scene came to mind after Doug Jensen, one of the Jan. 6 rioters, was rearrested for listening to an online speech by Trump supporter and pillow magnate Mike Lindell. Jensen agreed not to use the internet as a condition of bail … but to violate those terms for the MyPillow Guy?
I have long been a vocal critic of Lindell and all those who rioted in Congress. Yet the Jensen case raises a concern about the conditions placed on bail by courts and the message that “rehabilitation” or remorse can be convincingly shown only by denouncing past political viewpoints or association.
After the riot, the Justice Department opposed bail for many defendants. The FBI found no evidence of a broad conspiracy of insurrection, however, and most of the roughly 570 people arrested have been charged only with forms of trespassing or parading. Only 40 face conspiracy charges related to planning to do violence or property destruction. Jensen was one of the best-known figures, pictured standing before police with his arms spread wide wearing a QAnon T-shirt emblazoned with an eagle.
He was charged with seven counts, largely for trespassing, parading or unlawfully entering the building; just one count alleges “assaulting, resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating, or interfering” with officers. Jensen did not appear to be armed and was shown moving through the halls, verbally confronting officers.
Like many of the arrested, Jensen had to fight for bail for six months before a judge agreed to release him pending trial. In securing bail on July 13, Jensen assured U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Kelly that he no longer believed in QAnon and was deceived by those who questioned the election. Kelly agreed, but only if Jensen stayed away from internet or cellphone access. Two weeks later, a court officer reportedly found Kelly in his garage secretly listening to Lindell.
According to the Washington Post, Judge Kelly initially was not inclined to release Jensen because “he wanted to be part of a revolution.” Kelly said it was “a close question” but decided to release Jensen because the accused man renounced his prior political views and said he was deceived by “a pack of lies.”
That scene is being repeated across these cases, as defendants are told to renounce their prior political association or, like Jensen, pledge to seek “therapy.”
Let’s be clear on a couple of points: Jensen deserved to be charged and deserves to go to jail for participating in a riot in the Capitol — and he clearly broke the conditions of this bail.
The concern, however, is that courts increasingly demand political reform as a prerequisite for bail or more favorable sentencing. The “close call” for Judge Kelly was resolved by Jensen denouncing those, such as former President Trump, who accused Democrats of stealing the 2020 presidential election.
Most of us view QAnon as a bizarre group of conspiracy theorists, one of the most active on the internet on either the left or the right. However, it is a bit unnerving to hear judges asking defendants if they are or have ever been a QAnon member. Kelly made clear that, if Jensen did not renounce the views of figures like Lindell and Trump, he would be left to wallow in jail.
We have seen this before. In the 1950s, liberal writers, unionists and others were pulled before Congress to state whether they were or ever had been communists. The very status of “fellow traveler” was enough to be blacklisted, investigated, even arrested. When Sen. Joe McCarthy waived his list of “known communists,” he was identifying not just “card-carrying members” but those “loyal to the Communist Party.”
The troubling aspect of Kelly’s bail decision is the message that if you believe a “pack of lies,” you should not be granted freedom pending trial. Cutting Jensen off of the internet was directly linked to preventing him from listening to such lies.
For civil libertarians, the concern should be that such conditions can become a type of thought-crime. We’ve already seen such cases abroad, including the United Kingdom where, in May, Nicholas Brock, 52, was arrested for what a court called his “toxic ideology” of racist and pro-Nazi views. Those views not only led to his arrest but drove his sentencing. Judge Peter Lodder declared: “I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.” Lodder denounced Brock — who did not commit any crime other than possessing hateful material or holding hateful views — as a danger to society due to his being a “right-wing extremist” and his “enthusiasm for this repulsive and toxic ideology.”
It is risky to raise concerns over cases like Brock’s or Jensen’s in this age of rage. To even voice such free-speech concerns is to invite an internet mob to accuse you of being a QAnon defender or an insurrectionist. Yet, governments always start to limit speech with the least popular, most-hated among us.
The focus of the Jan. 6 cases is the riot itself. I would have the same objection to courts demanding that arrested Black Lives Matter (BLM) or antifa followers renounce their views as a condition of bail. Hundreds were arrested over the past year in violent rioting, including pre-planned attacks to take over or torch city halls, police stations and courthouses. It would be outrageous for courts to demand that BLM or antifa supporters not listen to these political movements or related political figures. They were arrested for arson and rioting, not holding “toxic ideologies.” For that reason, while I have long denounced antifa, I opposed the use of sedition charges against them in defense of free-speech rights that they would deny to others.
Even Jensen’s lawyer called his interest in right-wing sites an “addiction.” However, it shows the futility of trying to coerce people to give up their political viewpoints. Germany has outlawed Nazi symbols and material since World War II, but that has done little to quell the neo-Nazi movement. The only solution to bad speech remains better speech, not censorship and coercion.
Doug Jensen has been cut off from the MyPillow Guy — but that hardly makes me sleep better at night.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
“Two weeks later, a court officer reportedly found Kelly in his garage secretly listening to Lindell.” Should be Jensen; Kelly is the judge.
Left Wing media STILL LYING:
From the link in Turley’s Twitter post:
“Meanwhile, a retired U.S. Special Forces soldier and onetime Florida congressional candidate was arrested for his role in the insurrection. Jeremy Brown was accused of a misdemeanor charge of entering restricted grounds.. snip”
There was no ‘insurrection’, per the FBI, yet I still see articles almost daily from the mainstream media lying and claiming there was.
You are correct that I am skeptical by nature, e.g., I don’t believe in gods. Because if you can believe that sheer nonsense, you can make yourself believe ANYTHING! We done?
I am familiar with MKUltra which was a CIA effort to experiment to control minds with LSD. That’s an acknowledged fact. The only conspiracy theory I am aware of is whether one of the scientists who died committed suicide or was murdered. Is that what you are referring to?
Over and over again we get meaningless comments have absolutly zero substance from this Anonymous troll.
WTF?!?!?
\\][//
Our grade school teachers,the boy scouts,the Catholic church,big money political donors,movie moguls, etc etc etc. Who needs Qanon to point out that there are 10’s or 100’s of thousands sexual predators in this country. who even needs Qanon at all ,they are a straw argument.
I share Turley’s classical liberal view of freedom of speech. It was how I was raised. As the Beatrice Evelyn Hall quote goes, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That was a popular viewpoint back in the day when leftist radicals were on the wrong side of the power scales. But I look back on the classical liberal view of freedom of speech with sad nostalgia. The left’s advocacy for free speech was only transactional and temporary. Now that the scales of power have shifted, so have their views on censorship, etc. The same Hollywood that put out countless movies on the evils of the Communist blacklists, have no qualms about enforcing conservative black lists without even the slightest acknowledgement of their own hypocrisy. The same is sadly true in academia, news and media, courts and corporate boards.
The long march through the institutions was successful and freedom of speech was an invaluable tool. Well played, leftists.
Sorry, Prof Turley this is trivial.
ALL Criminal defendants have the constitutional presumption of innocence.
All criminal defendants have ALL of their constitutional rights.
Even Bail is a Condtitutional right.
Free speach is a constitutional right.
YOUR predjudiced view – and that of the Judge that Jensen “deserves” to go to jail for whatever he may have done on Jan. 6th is IRRELEVANT. He remains innoncent and in full posession of his constitutional rights until convicted.
That has not occurred. Courts can restrict the conduct of prosecutors, they can restrict that of defense attorneys – though to a far lessor extent. With respect to defendants the ENTIRETY of their powers is ensuring the defendant shows up for Trial.
THAT IS ALL.
Within that context they are obligated to infringe on rights to the LEAST extent that will ensure appearance at trial.
This is true whether we are talking about Jensen or Stone or Manafort, It is true if we are talking about BLM rioters.
They ALL not merely have the right to bail, but the right to free speech.
All this case does is demonstrate that our Judges are too arogant and too powerful.
While there are political elements here – there is plenty of evidence that the DC courts are politically corrupt and can not possibly try any republican for anything – or democrats for that matter. Comey was actually right – he could not get a conviction of Clinton in DC.
So what we have is those like Clinton and Brennan, and Clapper and Faucci, lying under oath before congress or acting recklessly with classified documents in violation of criminal portions of the espionage act – and getting away with it.
While Stone is convicted of lying by exculpatory omission, and jailed for exercising free speech rights, manafort is locked up for trying to find a defense witness., Polsters have found that 90% of prospective DC jurors think that all Jan 6th defendants should be executed, that they are guilty of an attempted coup.
And Finally we have those like you who can not grasp that locking the Capital on Jan 6th was itself a violation of the first amendment rights of protestors – not Rioters.
The government, the courts, the left, the media are trying to send a message – COMPLY, If you are not on the left – YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS.
If you actually want a real insurrection – keep this up.
Agreed. We are in full-on totalitarianism. Thought and speech are literally being criminalized.
Yet as bad as I knew it was, I admit to being shocked that 90% of people in DC would want the death penalty for protesters. Those people are my enemy, and it’s not my fault — I’m still an American. They are not.
HE GOT YOU THERE, TURLEY. You’re guilty of doing exactly that which you were arguing against.
Respectfully, I cant help but think & feel that what you’ve done is actually worse.
How can anything that our courageous, brilliant & much-loved Professor write on this topic be worse than having so many leftist-run power centers in our society act so cruelly, so hurtfully, so hypocritically, and so systematically & almost symbiotically, to unabashedly squash dissent?
After all, you seem like a very good guy with an honest heart, a brave & brilliant mind, and you probably, deep-down, believe Jenson is indeed innocent until proven guilty, and that Jan 6 was a protest gone wrong thanks to a bunch of the usual extremists that cause riots at most mass protests.
However, it seems like you’ve caved to the mob, or at least part of the false narrative, in your writing here. My guess is that you do it for the same reason that many others do – In order to quell your own fears of being cancelled or pounced on by the mob, you caveat your statements/writings with what has become pretty trendy; Loudly acknowledging that you agree that Jan 6 was some kind of historic violent uprising and openly condemning those accused of participating.
To sense this is certainly more disappointing because of who you are, and it seems to have the potential to be even more harmful because of who you are.
LA Phipps says:
“However, it seems like you’ve caved to the mob, or at least part of the false narrative, in your writing here.”
I hate to break it to you, but Turley is not a Trumpist. Never has been. You had better get used to it.
————-
Another estranged Trumpist joins the growing crowd….
I have been most impressed by Professor Turley’s analysis of constitutional Issues since his testimony in the Trump impeachment inquiry. That said, I have to agree with john Say, particularly with respect to Professor Turley’s pre-judging of Jensen’s guilt. That was most surprising and seemed to be included to reinforce the Professor’s denouncing of the riot. I don’t know whether Jensen is guilty or not, but it is clear that the judge violated Jensen’s first amendment right to free speech, and the judge is the one who should be punished. As Professor Turley points out, it would have been outrageous for a judge to require, as a condition of bail, that a BLM rioter denounce BLM. The left would have gone bananas over such a requirement, and rightly so. And the judge would be gone by now.
John, as usual, your argument and the surrounding statements are on point. The sad thing is that our judicial system has been compromised with intention.
It is that intention that is dangerous to democracy and liberty. Though you prefer to talk more in generalities and theory, I like to say what is on my mind. The left intentionally compromises our legal system and doesn’t have any concern for the rule of law.
“We hold these Truths to be Self Evident”–Thomas Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence – 1776
\\][//
“Trash-talk”
As they permit terrorists, murderers, rapists, and drugs easy access across our southern border they say that is trash-talk. What does that mean? They must love murderers, rapists, terrorists and drugs destroying American citizens. They are hateful people.
There are so many stupid people posting here it is astonishing! Especially the ones who make comments trashing Turley. WTF?
Let’s set the record straight as to the most likely answer to who instigated the Riot at the Capitol Building on Jan 6: FBI agents.
Questions About the FBI’s Role in 1/6 Are Mocked Because the FBI Shapes Liberal Corporate Media
The FBI has been manufacturing and directing terror plots and criminal rings for decades. But now, reverence for security state agencies reigns.
Glenn Greenwald | June 18, 2021
The axis of liberal media outlets and their allied activist groups — CNN, NBC News, The Washington Post, Media Matters — are in an angry uproar over a recent report questioning the foreknowledge and involvement of the FBI in the January 6 Capitol riot. As soon as that new report was published on Monday, a consensus instantly emerged in these liberal media precincts that this is an unhinged, ignorant and insane conspiracy theory that deserves no consideration.
The original report, published by Revolver News and then amplified by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, documented ample evidence of FBI infiltration of the three key groups at the center of the 1/6 investigation — the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and the Three Percenters — and noted how many alleged riot leaders from these groups have not yet been indicted. While low-level protesters have been aggressively charged with major felonies and held without bail, many of the alleged plot leaders have thus far been shielded from charges.
The implications of these facts are obvious. It seems extremely likely that the FBI had numerous ways to know of any organized plots regarding the January 6 riot (just as the U.S. intelligence community, by its own admission, had ample advanced clues of the 9/11 attack but, according to their excuse, tragically failed to “connect the dots”). There is no doubt that the FBI has infiltrated at least some if not all of these groups — which it has been warning for years pose a grave national security threat — with informants and/or undercover spies. It is known that Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio has served as an FBI informant in the past, and the disrupted 2020 plot by Three Percenters members to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) was shaped and driven by what The Wall Street Journal reported were the FBI’s “undercover agents and confidential informants.”
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/questions-about-the-fbis-role-in
William Whitten
So tell me, does he have to promise not to vote for whom “they” don’t want to be voted in? Does he have to show his ballot to the court before he turns it in for the count?
Capitol Riots: Blog Puppets Give Conflicting Accounts
semcgowanjr says:
September 9, 2021 at 8:47 PM
“The reality is that there was no riot. I was watching streaming video of people, mostly men and most of them wearing military garb and older – one old fellow was wearing Marine full dress – milling around and talking to the Capitol Police, who were firing water and perhaps chemicals. Yes, some military special ops veterans were climbing the walls for the fun of it.
prophet2020 says:
September 10, 2021 at 12:39 AM
“But you certainly CAN fake being a Trump supporter, all you have to do is wear a Trump hat or carry a Trump banner– that’s why they call it a false flag.
WW”
semcgowanjr describes aging soldiers turning out in uniform to get beaten by police. They were ‘fine, upstanding patriots, contesting a rigged election, when attacked by police’.
But Prophet 20 20 knows the riots were violent. And he assigns full blame to ANTIFA. Bernie Bros were putting on MAGA hats. That’s how simple it was! A group of rowdy kids created waves of violence. Yet respectable, older, White guys were stuck with all the blame. By the liberal media!
Neither of these narratives relates in any way to what the New York Times captured in their 42 minute video. On that link one sees endless shots of older White men assaulting police.
Typically these rioters are puffy, husky types. ‘Belligerent diabetics’ is how you might describe them. How brave they are. Out-numbering police by 10-1.
This idea that ANTIFA blended in with Trumpers is so insultingly stupid that only backwoods yahoos would venture to present it. Only country bumpkins, who’ve never seen real ANTIFA, would expect us to believe those kids impersonated Trumpers.
Though if you’re a puppet on Johnathan Turley’s blog, nothing ‘has’ to make any sense. Claims can be insulting. That’s the whole idea! ‘Insult the intelligence of anyone who cares’.
These are reasons Professor Turley warns us not to trust mainstream media. Turley prefers we have no sense of context. No knowledge of events outside the rightwing bubble. To those that pliable, the puppets on this thread form a Greek chorus.
They were a bunch of morbidly obese men. Puhleeeeze, its a wonder they could climb the steps of the US Capitol. Its not like they were <del<anarchists peaceful protestors wearing black bloq, masks, skinny 20 somethings, hurling Molotov cocktails, barricaded police precincts, set homes and businesses on fire and escalated homicide rates from coast to coast.
You need to get offline for 1 month and deal with reality, but that presupposes you have interpersonal skills and friends.
They were a bunch of morbidly obese men. Puhleeeeze, its a wonder they could climb the steps of the US Capitol. Its not like they were
anarchistspeaceful protestors wearing black bloq, masks, skinny 20 somethings, hurling Molotov cocktails, barricaded police precincts, set homes and businesses on fire and escalated homicide rates from coast to coast.You need to get offline for 1 month and deal with reality, but that presupposes you have interpersonal skills and friends.
Anonymous,
I wish you would take-on a pseudonym to make it easier to keep track of your comments. I’m inclined to ignore anonymous comments.
You say:
“These are reasons Professor Turley warns us not to trust mainstream media. Turley prefers we have no sense of context. No knowledge of events outside the rightwing bubble.”
To my knowledge, Turley has never stated not to trust the MSM as such. Typically, he levels his criticism at “the media” in general NOT exempting the Rightwing media including his own network Fox. However, he does selectively provide examples of bias by the MSM in lieu of exposing any by Fox. I suspect his prejudice in favor of his employer is to be expected of a faithful employee! Certainly, all the other Fox prime time hosts follow suit.
It’s very telling, however, that he will NOT criticize OAN and Newsmax to the right of Fox despite the fact that those networks are disparaging Fox for not being conservative enough! Presumably, Turley has the good sense to ignore their attacks because criticizing them would serve only to undermine the Rightwing’s credibility in the face of the MSM. Better to appear to have a united front than to fight amongst themselves, but Newsmax is employing the same tactics to disparage Fox that Fox has used to discredit the MSM. Fox is being hoisted on its own petard. It remains to be seen how long Turley can pretend not to notice the attacks from the far Right. At some point, it will become too embarrassing to ignore!
Turley is in a tough spot maintaining his loyalty to Fox without sacrificing his academic credibility amongst his professional colleagues who overwhelmingly view Fox as the primary network which provided Trump a platform to lie unaccountably on his way to the presidency and continued to do so after his election loss until being sued for endorsing his election lies. I would venture to say that Turley now has some misgivings with his decision to become a legal analyst of a network defending itself for broadcasting a fraudulent election narrative!
Just sayin’
Questions About the FBI’s Role in 1/6 Are Mocked Because the FBI Shapes Liberal Corporate Media
The FBI has been manufacturing and directing terror plots and criminal rings for decades. But now, reverence for security state agencies reigns.
Glenn Greenwald
he axis of liberal media outlets and their allied activist groups — CNN, NBC News, The Washington Post, Media Matters — are in an angry uproar over a recent report questioning the foreknowledge and involvement of the FBI in the January 6 Capitol riot. As soon as that new report was published on Monday, a consensus instantly emerged in these liberal media precincts that this is an unhinged, ignorant and insane conspiracy theory that deserves no consideration.
The original report, published by Revolver News and then amplified by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, documented ample evidence of FBI infiltration of the three key groups at the center of the 1/6 investigation — the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and the Three Percenters — and noted how many alleged riot leaders from these groups have not yet been indicted. While low-level protesters have been aggressively charged with major felonies and held without bail, many of the alleged plot leaders have thus far been shielded from charges.
The implications of these facts are obvious. It seems extremely likely that the FBI had numerous ways to know of any organized plots regarding the January 6 riot (just as the U.S. intelligence community, by its own admission, had ample advanced clues of the 9/11 attack but, according to their excuse, tragically failed to “connect the dots”). There is no doubt that the FBI has infiltrated at least some if not all of these groups — which it has been warning for years pose a grave national security threat — with informants and/or undercover spies. It is known that Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio has served as an FBI informant in the past, and the disrupted 2020 plot by Three Percenters members to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) was shaped and driven by what The Wall Street Journal reported were the FBI’s “undercover agents and confidential informants.”
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/questions-about-the-fbis-role-in
WW
The Capitol Riots: Judge For Yourself
See 40 Minutes Of Nonstop Violence
Obese Olly and Estovir’s puppet are pretending January 6 was a mostly ‘peaceful’ protest. As loyal Trumpers, they feel obliged to uphold the lie.
However The New York Times spent months editing hours of video tape shot at the riots. The total sum of all those clips paints a gut wrenching timeline.
Take it from a Hollywood source: “You can’t fake these scenes”.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000007606996/capitol-riot-trump-supporters.html
“Take it from a Hollywood source: “You can’t fake these scenes”.–Anonymous
But you certainly CAN fake being a Trump supporter, all you have to do is wear a Trump hat or carry a Trump banner– that’s why they call it a false flag.
WW
Akinky:
“The Capitol Riots: Judge For Yourself
See 40 Minutes Of Nonstop Violence”
*********************
Hows about we just judge you? You musta posted the wrong tape there, Leni Riefenstahl. It was 40 minutes of video and SIX minutes of edited violence with some Irish guy narrating what he thought was happening though it didn’t match the scenes. And … Oh Heavens …Folks saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Yeah brutal stuff that wouldn’t even make a JV BLM/ ANTIFA riot squad. Did no one ever tell you that feeble attempts at lying make YOU look bad. But maybe you figure you couldn’t look any worse to us? What a clown show you’ve become.
Mespo, we have no trash collection nor recycled collection in Richmond, (3 weeks now). Yet Levar Stoney has found money to remove beautiful statues that taught people a great deal about US History. Please flex your JD muscle and knock some heads at Richmond city hall, and while youre at it, Governor Blaqueface too
😜
Estovir:
Mayor Stoned is a cruel joke. So glad I live outside the city limits and spend weekends on the water. That said I need to thank you for prompting my physical transformation and A1c improvement. Leaner, meaner and healthier thanks to good advice from you. CRP down too so I’ll be around a tad bit longer. Gracias!
🙂
First, while Turley constantly refers to a “riot” in DC on January 6, the reality is that there was no riot. I was watching streaming video of people, mostly men and most of them wearing military garb and older – one old fellow was wearing Marine full dress – milling around and talking to the Capitol Police, who were firing water and perhaps chemicals. Yes, some military special ops veterans were climbing the walls for the fun of it. To have a riot, there has to violence and property damage. We now know the only violent acts were perpetrated by Capitol police and the property damage was mostly conjured up by the media. In fact, one window was broken – possibly at the urging of a leftwing journalist who wanted something dramatic for his film – and a desk in the lobby was turned over. The media claimed the damage was over a million dollars when it was actually a few hundred. The doors were not battered down, they were opened FROM THE INSIDE and some of the protestors were allowed to enter the capitol, the same capitol that’s maintained with OUR MONEY!
What has actually happened is what Patrick Henry feared when he led the fight in Virginia against ratification of the Constitution, we now have a tyrannical government ruled by radicals who couldn’t care less for the rights of the very people who pay their salaries. All three branches of government are corrupt. I don’t know what’s going to happen although I know what should happen but probably won’t. I also know that Democrats like Turley don’t want to admit the truth so they refer to a legitimate protest as a riot.
semcgowanjr, shut up with your lies!
If you want to pretend that 146 cops cops were injured during a ‘peaceful’ protest, leave us out of it.
Aninny:
Yeah, we’ll believe you over the footage we saw on the day of the “riot.” It was only a riot when the FBI wanted it to be a riot.
You’ve apparently chosen not to watch any of the footage of the violence and want to pretend it doesn’t exist, and you simply don’t care what the LE officers there on the day say about the violence or about the injuries they suffered.
How many police on June 6 for felon Floyd riot in DC compared to number on duty Jan 6.
“All three branches of government are corrupt.”
– Semcgowanjr
____________
Pre-CISE-ly, Sherlock!
__________________
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________
It all began with “Crazy Abe” Lincoln “…acting by virtue of powers, [did] not only what [his] powers [did] not authorize, but what they forbid…,” by unconstitutionally denying fully constitutional secession – an enterprise that was undertaken by the American Founders themselves through secession from Great Briton. “Crazy Abe” went on to prosecute an unconstitutional war of aggression against a sovereign foreign nation, illicitly suspend habeas corpus, fail to deport freed slaves who could not become citizens as “…free white person(s)…,” per the Naturalization Act of 1802, and deny freedom of speech, press, assembly, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
Absolutely!
Corrupt, at a minimum.
Nonsense, Lincoln was on firm constitutional grounds. Sessession was forbiden because the states had all ratified the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. (1777) as well as ratifying the Constitution of the United States of America. And don’t forget the southern Democrats started the hostilities by attacking Fort Sumter.
You are simply ignorant ot history.
WW
That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
Unrelated and irrelevant documents do not and did not bear on anything American.
The U.S. Constitution holds dominion.
The Constitution does not preclude or deny secession.
Of course, secession is the essence of America and its Founders – secession from Great Britain is precisely what they did.
“Crazy Abe” had military forces illegitimately and illegally on foreign territory and invading a sovereign foreign nation.
The only legal act “Crazy Abe” could have conducted was immediate withdrawal of military forces from a sovereign foreign nation – end of story – no civil war – period!
Please provide a citation of the Constitution for denial of secession.
Of course, you can’t.
What a ——- idiot!
The very fact that the southern states ratified the US Constitution is their agreement to abide by that constitution. In their attempt at unilateral secession, broke that agreement which is obviously unconstitutional.
These facts are too obvious to deny by claiming that someone who upholds such facts is an “idiot”. Ad hominem is not a valid argument.
\\][//
While Jonathan Turley is having a deep sleep, I will share some real news with you. The Democrats are now openly moving in the direction they have long wanted to go: to DESTROY THE US CONSTITUTION. Consequently, ANY person that belongs to the Democrat Party is advocating for the destruction of the US Constitution and the destruction of all liberties and rights. Of course, in openly adopting this agenda, the Democrats still follow an incremental process because they know that most Passive Americans will go along with the Democrat’s anti-America agenda and will be afraid to object to it. The first critical Democrat Party objective is the demonize the Constitution and other vital American documents by characterizing them as inherently racist, or such other nonsense. Thus, Biden just attached a warning label for such documents as the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitutions, which reads, in part, that these documents “contain harmful language that reflects attitudes and biases of their time.” Warnings of graphic and violent content in historical documents are also given. The war against the Democrat/RINO lowlifes has long been in play and was a major reason that Trump was elected President in 2016. All Democrats have blood on their hands for supporting Biden and his murder of US troops. Stolen elections do, indeed, have serious and dangerous consequences.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/national-archives-introduce-harmful-content-warning
Feldman, your paper has another article saying that Texas Republicans are ill-advised in their attempt to punish high-tech companies.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/texas-passing-social-media-law-punishing-tech-platforms-censoring-conservatives
You mischaracterize the Washington Examiner’s article by implying that the paper says “that Texas Republicans are ill-advised in their attempt to punish high-tech companies.” The Washinton Examiner, unlike most mainstream media publications actually has some genuine journalists–not presstitutes–on staff. Consequently, the paper provides multiple perspectives on the facts, not a single, uniform, biased, political agenda like the mainstream media presstitutes do. The person in the article who says “that Texas Republicans are ill-advised” to punish high-tech companies for practicing censorship is Carl Szabo, vice president at NetChoice, a tech trade group that supported the lawsuit blocking the Florida law. Szabo is a RINO member of Fake-Conservative (Trojan Horse) organization The Federalist Society. Consequently, Szabo WANTS high-tech companies to censor conservatives because he secretly favors leftist causes. Szabo knows that real reason that high-tech companies should be punished for censoring conservatives is that the high-tech companies are in BED with the Democrat members of the Deep State US Government that are out to DESTROY the US CONSTITUTION. But, of course, he won’t ever publicly admit that. In other words, the US Government is really censoring conservatives and the high-tech companies are merely willing accessories to carrying out violations of the First Amendment.
I made an error in the last sentence of my post. The high-tech companies are really accomplices–not accessories–so that last sentence should read as follows: “In other words, the US Government is really censoring conservatives and the high-tech companies are accomplices to the US Government’s goal of carrying out violations of the First Amendment. It’s an important legal distinction because the two are working hand in hand to subvert the US Constitution.
Feldman, tech companies, as private businesses, can refuse service to anyone they don’t want to work with. That’s freedom of choice.
as private businesses, can refuse service to anyone they don’t want to work with
Tell that to Master Piece Cake.
That is only partially true, so in the end that is another lie based on your own logic.
Mr. Turley, you misapply Thomas More’s quip (which is based on Jesus’ words in Mark 8:36). Doug Jensen did not sell his soul. Nor did Mike Lindell. On the contrary, I believe that in the final judgement, they will be seen to have preserved their souls and their integrity though allegiance to the truth, even in the face of despotism and oppression by those who truly have sold their souls for power.
“What is truth?” Pilate asked Jesus. “He who has ears, let him hear.” The FBI sold their souls for power by colluding against patriotic Americans by deliberately infiltrating and turning Jan. 6 into a false flag event that the MSM used to demonize 75 million patriots with. Eventually the FBI said there was no insurrection — but half a year after the media and political damage had already been done.
Then the so-called “journalists” and pundits sold their souls by whipping up hysteria over Jan. 6 as alleged “insurrection” — which seems to have compelled you and other conservatives like Ben Shapiro to disavow it as an ill-advised riot — even though it should be clear that it was largely staged by FBI agent provocateurs, much like the Reichstag Fire was staged. It was stage to impose dictatorial control. We now see millions of patriotic Americans viewed as “potential domestic terror threats” by the media and the Whitehouse, simply for questioning the 2020 election and the official narrative being imposed on them.
And those who were present on Jan. 6were turned into political prisoners, their constitutional rights violated by wrongful imprisonment and lack of due process for what is essentially a misdemeanour: trespassing, and in some cases, property damage — and for most of them, peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights.
The Democrats have also sold their souls for power by turning against their fellow Americans in this way, and by implementing a traitorous government working in collusion with Chinese Communists and globalists, intent on destroying the USA and the West from within. And imposing an autocratic global biosecurity state in the process. But their reward (power) is a Faustian bargain, a deal with the devil. They will pay the price in the end, if not in this life then in the world to come.
And not least, the CCP have sold their souls for the sake of world domination – even though in the end it will not profit them either. They persecute their own people and perpetrate all manner of evil, and now they want to do the same to the whole world. That evil empire will eventually fall, and where will the Leftists be who supported it? Their idolatrous support of this evil, naively believing it to be good, will not be rewarded either. They will be left with an empty feeling in the end. Government based on fear and power cannot stand.
The American experiment, which puts individual freedom first, is a prevailing ideal that won’t be so easily wiped from the Earth. It lives on the hearts of millions. Jesus also said “I have overcome the world.” Meaning that no matter what evil men (and women) do, God will triumph in the end. When we die we face the Judge and no one will get away with doing evil and lying in the end — even if they think they managed to in this life.
A great many people have sold their souls in the last few years, but not those two patriots — Jenson and Lindell. I believe that by their example they exemplify Jesus’ words “no greater love Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13). They, and others who have stood up for America in this time of trial, have been willing to give their lives for the good of their country.
Ashli Babbitt did just that. She felt compelled to go to Capital building to demand answers for the treason being committed by politicians – the very people who have since used her death as a pretext to imprison other patriots and scapegoat them. But the truth will win out in the end.
I think you should recognize who really sold their souls in this situation, and who is standing up for the USA and for truth, for a nation founded on Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment values. It is certainly not those who sided with the Chinese Communist Party (i.e., the Democrats and RINOs).
Can’t you just feel the spirits of the 56 signatories to the Declaration of Independence and the American Founders at large chomping at the bit to engage and vigorously bring their endeavor to fruition once again?
One ponders what it will take; precisely what will it take?
____________________________________________
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
Judge as political censor. That’s a new one. Maybe we should get the black robes to renounce the Constitution they hold is such disdain. These defendants are presumed innocent Your Honor. Not guilty.
Some would suggest the guillotine.
On a happier note, imagine if the following passed in the US.
Australia’s Highest Court Holds Media Outlets Financially Liable for Trolls and Shlltposters
https://reason.com
SCOTT SHACKFORD | 9.9.2021 12:10 PM
Australia’s highest court has upheld a controversial and potentially destructive ruling that media outlets are legally liable for defamatory statements posted by online commenters on Facebook, a decision that could result in massive amounts of online censorship out of fear of lawsuits.
The case revolves around a television program from 2016 on Australia’s ABC TV (no relation to America’s ABC network) about the mistreatment of youths in Australia’s jail system. Footage of Dylan Voller in a restraining chair was part of the coverage. When media outlets covered this program and posted links to the coverage on Facebook, users made comments about Voller, and this prompted Voller to sue the media outlets. The comments were defamatory, Voller claimed, and he argued that the media outlets themselves were responsible for publishing them.
The media outlets countered that, no, they were not the publishers of third-party comments on Facebook and were not responsible for what they said. The outlets have been appealing to the courts to toss out the lawsuits, and they’ve been losing.
Modern jurisprudence follows the depraved witch trials and warlock judgments of yesteryear under the Twilight Amendment with a plausibility and presumption of guilt until proven innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Case in point: selective-child a.k.a. reproductive rites or the “burden”, also planned parent/hood or another “burden”. A drug-induced progressive condition, a mob that prevented authorized medical access, that prompted transnational insurrections over a multi-trimester period in progress. From those who brayed Jew privilege and now White privilege… one step forward, two steps backward.
Mespo, the judge was not being a political censor. It was Jensen himself who made the decision to supposedly give up Qanon. He was trying to get out of jail by making a lot of claims that were contradicted by evidence. The judge was being skeptical about his sincerity and after 6 months of Jensen’s claims the judge decided to give him a chance, WITH conditions. The reason for imposing those conditions was because Jensen claimed he was done with Qanon and conspiracy theories. If Jensen was being sincere he wouldn’t have been caught. It’s no different than making sure a drug addict is sticking to his own claim of being off drugs. As his statement goes,
“The troubling aspect of Kelly’s bail decision is the message that if you believe a “pack of lies,” you should not be granted freedom pending trial. Cutting Jensen off of the internet was directly linked to preventing him from listening to such lies. His freedom came with conditions just like any other criminal is subject to pending trial.
Mespo, the judge was not being a political censor. It was Jensen himself who made the decision to supposedly give up Qanon. He was trying to get out of jail by making a lot of claims that were contradicted by evidence
***********************
The same could be said of Galileo. It’s still America, Sevvy. You can believe and say what you want even if charged with a crime. Judges have too much power given their unelected (i.e., unaccountable) position. Judges aren’t daddies. They’re government officials and what or who you listen to is none of their damn business. Grow up, Sevvy. Be a man – which means not subservient to any other man.
Svelaz,
After reading quite a bit of your commentary here, it has become quite obvious that you are a fascist authoritarian. Are you an American? It is hard to believe that even a most hard core Democrat could be as mindlessly dismissive of the rights and liberties of this nations citizens.
Your ideas are pathological and dangerously totalitarian.In a word, you are psychologically sick.
WW
WHAT ABOUT Q’ANON..?
Professor Turley writes:
“Most of us view QAnon as a bizarre group of conspiracy theorists, one of the most active on the internet on either the left or the right”.
One is heartened to hear that Turley has no regard for Q’Anon. But where are Republican leaders on this topic? Where is rightwing media? Have Fox News personalities taken the time to make clear that Q’Anon is a crazed conspiracy?
It seems like Q’Anon is an intellectual pandemic threatening the stability of American thought. In this regard Q’Anon is genuine health crisis and should be treated as such.
It seems like Q’Anon is an intellectual pandemic threatening the stability of American thought. In this regard Q’Anon is genuine health crisis and should be treated as such.
Well Paint Chips, those with a functioning left-half of their brain have a natural immunity (critical-thinking skills). That would explain why your paranoia has you begging for the government to intervene to protect your mental health.
I thought that was Peter Shill / Seth Warner / John Burgoyne / Paint Chips / She who will remain nameless
😉
Estovir uses his most established name on an occasional basis. But the truth is, more than half the comments on this thread, on any given day, are puppets of Estovir. For that reason these threads often have the sound of a monotonous echo chamber for really stupid people.
What other names are you saying are socks of Estovir?
Natacha, Anonymous, Jeff, Anonymous, Justice Holmes, Anonymous and oh Anonymous…definitely all socks of Estvieer
LOL that you think Jeff and Estovir and Natacha are the same person.
Olly, sounds like you’re a Q’Anon cheerleader. ..No surprise..! We’ve always known that’s your level.
QAnon and Proud Boys welcomes LGBTQ-eieio. you should consider looking for a boyfriend with them. Just saying
It’s all in the name: ‘Proud Boys’. No woman in her right mind dates losers of that magnitude.
Q’Anon is a nothing that is used as a talking point for the left that has none left.
The ONLY time I ever read about Q’anon is from Bidenistas claiming it is a pro Trump thing. No one I know gives a shit about Q’anon and their stupid theories. For all with know its another false flag FBI operation.
If anyone here can make any sense out of this Q’anon nonsense I would like to see it.
\\][//
One is heartened to hear that Turley has no regard for Q’Anon
I treat Q and Leprechauns exactly the same. With a smile on my face enjoying fanciful play.
Then I get on with my day.
Anonymous:
If you don’t beleive there is an elistist child abuser ring operates in this country and abroad funded by the super rich and populated by the miscreants, brigands and licentious of the human species, you must have ignored the testimony of Corey Hiam, the utter depravity of Michael Jackson, the conviction of Roman Polansky, the ‘suicide” of Jeffrey Epstein, the exploitation by Bill Clinton and the testimony of scads of adults who survived these vipers. Child sexual abuse is real even if the conspiracy of silence is run by Democrats and the Qanon folks don’t have the facts straight just yet..
Mespo believes the Q’Anon fables. And Donald Trump, of all people is going to ‘save us’ from Q’Anon. Ain’t that a laugh! 26 women have accused Trump of unwanted advances.
Yet not one has proven their case, and a number have been disproven. Why don’t you prove, not argue, the cases of those women. You can’t. I heard you raped 30 girls under the age of 13. Prove you didn’t.
Of course I don’t believe you raped those girls, but I do believe that at some time or another you made unwanted advances. Do you realize that if a man asks a woman for a date and she refuses, that could be construed as an unwanted advance? It makes your arguments seem silly, which they are.
26 women have accused Trump
How many of those have filed charges?
Aside from the rape charge?
eb
More than have filed charges against Biden.
Trump’s also in the midst of fighting two defamation suits based on his denial of sexual harassment and rape.
Is this how you determine guilt or innocence? You must realize that such a thinking process is below the standard of a grade school drop-out. Surely you are smarter than that, right?
Excellent response. These liberals don’t care about rape, murder, child molestation or any of the things they use as tools to gain power.
Mespo, I love that you’ve come out for team Qanon here!!! It explains much.
eb
eb:
I’ve come out for truth and not dismissing people’s ideas out of hand especially when there are circumstances to back it. Only the fool is certain but maybe you already know that!
Naw!