Posted on 03/13/2016 12:49:36 PM PDT by usconservative
PING!!
See article, comments, especially #38 (text of bill)
According to H.R. 347 (signed into law by Barack Hussein Obama in February, 2012) it is ILLEGAL under CURRENT FEDERAL to protest of any type, in an area under protection by the U.S. Secret Service.
Until Donald Trump’s Secret Service protection is revoked, Trump can legally kick protesters out of his rallies no matter what they do.
Agree I was at a lot of those during my EOD career supporting Secret Service Tech Division, 72-94. Worst believe it or not was Sen Lloyd Bentsen running for VP in 88 at Shiprock NM on the Navajo Reservation...... thought I was gonna get scalped before we got out of there.....:o)
Dem politicians only enforce laws that help Dems.
Okay, getting a little bit technical, the referenced federal law strengthens the 1st Amendment-protected right of peaceful assembly under 14th Amendment. Insights, corrections welcome.
"(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case."
Since there were no firearms or significant bodily inury involved, it looks like (2) above is the maximum punishment in this case. And a Democrat judge will probably let the guy go free.
Again, insights, corrections welcome.
Leftist protesters are never prosecuted.
I sent it to the Trump Team last night.
And yet, he was let go after four hours in custody and posting bond?! WTF?!
>>According to H.R. 347 (signed into law by Barack Hussein Obama in February, 2012) it is ILLEGAL under CURRENT FEDERAL to protest of any type, in an area under protection by the U.S. Secret Service.
I’m sure that he meant for it to only apply to people protesting against Democrat/BLM/OWS rallies. The Dept of Just Us will see to that.
‘Since there were no firearms or significant bodily inury involved’
There were certainly firearms at the Chicago protest/disruption that forced the cancellation. People were there to rally and were assaulted and threatened.
I would bet there were Secret Service on site to prep the site and provide early protection preparations.
There are several videos as well so many of the ‘protestors’ were recorded.
Sounds to me like a decent job of conservative lawful pay-back could occur.
Let us hope so!
The International Left resorts to its old tricks...
The lying MSM propaganda machine is in high gear too.
Good find.
Silly rabbit. The law only counts when it benefits liberals, not when it might help the rest of us!
Be interesting to see what happens if Trump brings this up, though.
Or any other candidate, for that matter. All they need is someone who will enforce the law...(like so many other laws).
Liberal judge let him go
Thanks for the info.
Other than his death threats to Trump when he was in police custody, corrections welcome, I understand Dimassimo didn’t use a gun or inflict injury.
I’m trying to find constitutional justification for the federal law that has been referenced concerning this issue. And come to think of it, the 14th Amendment actually doesn’t apply in this case, as I had previously suggested, since 14A deals with state laws.
And I would like to justify with federal election laws since the feds have constitutional authority to make such laws, except that campaining is arguably not the election process per se.
So although I agree with the federal campaining law that has been referenced in principle, I’m actually struggling a little bit with respect to finding constitutional justification for it.
Again, insights welcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.