If inciting an insurrection towards their own government is an action without legal repercussions, I don’t see how the law would be less lenient about straight up firing a gun at an opponent.

I by no means want any party to resolve to violent tactics. So even though I play with the thought, I really don’t want anything like it to happen. I am just curious if it’s actually the case that a sitting president has now effectively a licence to kill.

What am I missing?

  • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    So it protects official acts without actually specifying what an official act is. If incitement of insurrection is an official act, it seems like the definition is quite broad.