Re: [OT] What's next for Kamala Harris?

suzeeq <suzeeq@imbris.com> wrote:

. . .

[about Trump]

What may have a better chance of finding him liable is the lawsuit
brought by some of the capitol police and their survivors. Of course,
that's on hold for another 4 years. But it's a civil case and doesn't
have the 'reasonable doubt' need for proof.

I don't think so. The Brandenburg test -- imminent lawless action --
applies to both criminal and civil law. As a matter of criminal law,
Trump incited neither the riot nor insurrection attempt. I don't
believe there is a way for him to be held liable for having committed a
tort in P.I.

The issue isn't the jury's finding of fact; the facts wouldn't be in
dispute. Reasonable doubt nor the lower evidentiary standard in civil
trials are irrelevant. This is a matter of law.