Limbaugh falsely says Biden didn't win legitimately while reacting to inauguration

[mandrill]

§2384. Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Maybe.

But there must be limits to the application of First Amendment protection to DELIBERATE lies about the legitimacy of the US government, the president, etc.

You shouldn't be able to say "Joe Biden stole the election. The government of the US is not legitimate." over and over again if you have no subjective belief that this is the case.

 

[Valcazar]

Maybe.

But there must be limits to the application of First Amendment protection to DELIBERATE lies about the legitimacy of the US government, the president, etc.

You shouldn't be able to say "Joe Biden stole the election. The government of the US is not legitimate." over and over again if you have no subjective belief that this is the case.

I think if that's your argument, the closest you are going to get is section 2385 - advocating overthrow of government:

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

 

[mandrill]

I think if that's your argument, the closest you are going to get is section 2385 - advocating overthrow of government:

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Bullseye!

Isn't that exactly what we have at all levels on 6 January?

 

[Anbarandy]

Calling out the results of an election, especially after the "irregularities" were simply dismissed, is a valid political opinion- RIGHT OR WRONG.

Hahahaha

 

[Frankfooter]

He could also get hit by Dominion.

Dominion Voting warns Fox News, Sean Hannity, other conservative outlets that defamation lawsuits are imminent

Media allies of President Trump, such as Fox News, have been sent letters by Dominion Voting Systems about election conspiracy claims.

www.cnbc.com

 

[lumenon9]

Go ahead. Limbaugh is exercising his first amendment right to express his opinion. You don't like it, don't listen.

You are all just "SORE F-uckin' LOSERS"

trying to hide behind "free speech bullshit"

You lost the election and like Bill Maher's story book to Trump says "Just Pack Your Shit and Go" -lol

L

 

[y2kmark]

Time to take him to court.

Let the singing fat lady sit on him until he gives back the Presidential Medal of Freedom....

 

[wigglee]

Go ahead. Limbaugh is exercising his first amendment right to express his opinion. You don't like it, don't listen.

He did win the Presidential Metal of Shit Spewing and seems happy to go to his grave spouting hate and lies. It is his right to further foment discord and false information, unfortunately for the nation.

 

[Insidious Von]

Remember, remember the 5th of November...gunpowder, treason and plot.

Made for TV film fronted by Robert Carlyle and Michael Fassbender wasn't that good.

 

[jcpro]

You are all just "SORE F-uckin' LOSERS"

trying to hide behind "free speech bullshit"

You lost the election and like Bill Maher's story book to Trump says "Just Pack Your Shit and Go" -lol

L

Free speech is bullshit? Interesting how the fascists are now coming out.

 

[LickingG2]

Calling someone a pedo is libelous and the victim is entitled to seek damages. Calling out the results of an election, especially after the "irregularities" were simply dismissed, is a valid political opinion- RIGHT OR WRONG.

Did you by chance go to the Giuliani School of Law? In the end the only irregularities were the amount of bleating and whining from the losing side.

 

[Frankfooter]

Free speech is bullshit? Interesting how the fascists are now coming out.

Now everyone is fascist?

 

[jcpro]

Now everyone is fascist?

No, only those who oppose the free expression, like yourself.

 

[Frankfooter]

No, only those who oppose the free expression, like yourself.

I see, true antifascists or antifa, support total free speech and no mods at all.
What are you doing on this fascist board then, the mods are totally fascist according to you and will ban you if you break their rules against free expression.

 

[Dutch Oven]

It's pretty clearly Sedition under Canadian law. Check s. 59 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Will have to check some American sources. But of course they'd park Rush's cancer-ridden ass in a hospital ward anyway and then taxpayer would have to pay for the vast gallons of pain killers they're going to pump into him. So probably not worth the trouble.


Seditious words

• 59 (1) Seditious words are words that express a seditious intention.
• Marginal note:Seditious libel
  (2) A seditious libel is a libel that expresses a seditious intention.
• Marginal note:Seditious conspiracy
  (3) A seditious conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to carry out a seditious intention.
• Marginal note:Seditious intention
  (4) Without limiting the generality of the meaning of the expression seditious intention, every one shall be presumed to have a seditious intention who
  • (a) teaches or advocates, or
  • (b) publishes or circulates any writing that advocates,
• the use, without the authority of law, of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada.
• R.S., c. C-34, s. 60

Marginal note:Exception

60 Notwithstanding subsection 59(4), no person shall be deemed to have a seditious intention by reason only that he intends, in good faith,

• (a) to show that Her Majesty has been misled or mistaken in her measures;
• (b) to point out errors or defects in
  • (i) the government or constitution of Canada or a province,
  • (ii) Parliament or the legislature of a province, or
  • (iii) the administration of justice in Canada;
• (c) to procure, by lawful means, the alteration of any matter of government in Canada; or
• (d) to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters that produce or tend to produce feelings of hostility and ill-will between different classes of persons in Canada.
• R.S., c. C-34, s. 61

Marginal noteunishment of seditious offences

61 Every one who

• (a) speaks seditious words,
• (b) publishes a seditious libel, or
• (c) is a party to a seditious conspiracy,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

• R.S., c. C-34, s. 62

You publish all of this as if it makes your point, but it doesn't.

1. What did Limbaugh say that advocated "the use, without the authority of law, of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change"? I didn't listen to his broadcast, so I hold open for the the moment the possibility that he said more than you troubled yourself to mention.

2. Why don't Limbaugh's comments more properly fit into the exemption language:

"no person shall be deemed to have a seditious intention by reason only that he intends, in good faith,....

to point out errors or defects in

• (i) the government or constitution..."

I don't expect you to provide a convincing response, but I should reserve that assessment until you actually bother to attempt to support your point.

 

[jcpro]

I see, true antifascists or antifa, support total free speech and no mods at all.
What are you doing on this fascist board then, the mods are totally fascist according to you and will ban you if you break their rules against free expression.

Feel free to ignore my posts. You have that right. But, I will call you people out every time you decide to embrace and support fascism.

 

[Frankfooter]

Feel free to ignore my posts. You have that right. But, I will call you people out every time you decide to embrace and support fascism.

Just as I will point out how ridiculous it is call moderating hate speech 'fascism', as you accept it here on this board.
You're just a chicken little.

 

[y2kmark]

He did win the Presidential Metal of Shit Spewing and seems happy to go to his grave spouting hate and lies. It is his right to further foment discord and false information, unfortunately for the nation.

That's one of the saddest things. There are any number of past recipients who earned the Presidential Medal of Freedom with towering achievements. Trump is the money changer in the temple, only a whole lot worse...

 

[fall]

Limbaugh falsely says Biden didn’t win legitimately while reacting to inauguration

Conservative radio show host Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday repeated false claims that President Biden did not “legitimately” win the 2020 presidential election even as the Democrat prepared to take th…

thehill.com

And it is another problem with current media: they do not understand the idea of what proof means. For example, it was not proved that the win was illegitimate. However, there is also no prove that it was legitimate. The absence of the proof does not imply that the opposite is true. For example, the fact that there is no proof that it was legitimate does not imply that the statement "the win was illegitimate" is correct. Similarly, the fact that there is no proof that it was illegitimate does not imply that the statement "the win was legitimate" is correct. The correct statement should be "there was no definite proof that the win was illegitimate." The court never says someone is innocent, it says that there is no proof someone is guilty.

 

[y2kmark]

Just as I will point out how ridiculous it is call moderating hate speech 'fascism', as you accept it here on this board.
You're just a chicken little.

I think the statement "we believe in vaccines now" should have a ? vs. a period...