The Marxist Liberal Democrats have worked themselves into a furious state. That one of them attempted to assassinate a dozen sitting Republican Congressmen yesterday really should come as no surprise to anyone. Senior Democrat bureaucrats are openly attempting a 18 US Code Chapter 115 Section 2385 overthrow of a lawfully elected Presidential Administration.
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—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 2, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 87–486, June 19, 1962, 76 Stat. 103; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
Comey and Mueller both clearly fall under this statute. It is painfully obvious that they are colluding to remove President Trump from office, even though it is absolutely indisputable that they lack the legal authority to do this. A sitting President may only be removed from office, (and like it or not, Donald J Trump is the current sitting POTUS) through the Impeachment process. The FBI, and or Department of Justice have ZERO Constitutional Legal authority to bring charges against a sitting President.
The Mainstream Media can also only be viewed as co-conspirators in this 18 US Code Chapter 115 Section 2385 attempt to overthrow a lawfully elected Presidential Administration. Their unceasing and hostile hyperbolic rhetoric has led to an unprecedented amount of violence directed at both the current Presidential Administration as well as the Presidents supporters.
At some point the Mainstream Media must e held to the legal standard regarding incitement to riot.
(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent—
(1) to incite a riot; or
(2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or
(3) to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or
(4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot;
and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph— 
Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(b) In any prosecution under this section, proof that a defendant engaged or attempted to engage in one or more of the overt acts described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of subsection (a)  and (1) has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or (2) has use of or used any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including but not limited to, mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, to communicate with or broadcast to any person or group of persons prior to such overt acts, such travel or use shall be admissible proof to establish that such defendant traveled in or used such facility of interstate or foreign commerce.
(c) A judgment of conviction or acquittal on the merits under the laws of any State shall be a bar to any prosecution hereunder for the same act or acts.
(d) Whenever, in the opinion of the Attorney General or of the appropriate officer of the Department of Justice charged by law or under the instructions of the Attorney General with authority to act, any person shall have violated this chapter, the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with a prosecution of such person hereunder and with any appeal which may lie from any decision adverse to the Government resulting from such prosecution.
(e) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to make it unlawful for any person to travel in, or use any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of pursuing the legitimate objectives of organized labor, through orderly and lawful means.
(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section; nor shall anything in this section be construed as depriving State and local law enforcement authorities of responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and local law.
(Added Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 104(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; amended Pub. L. 99–386, title I, § 106, Aug. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 822; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 601(f)(15), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3500.)
The Huffington Post, the Washington Post and even NBC are all clearly guilty of Incitement to Riot. Yesterdays actions by James T. Hodgkinson are the indisputable consequences of the Mainstream Media’s efforts to overthrow and delegitimize the lawfully elected Trump Administration.
What we are witnessing is disturbing on many levels. It is nothing less than the usurpation of authority by unelected bureaucrats (i.e. Deep State Officials) unaccountable to the United States Constitution or the American people.
Well, don’t feel so bad, voters. Because you didn’t actually give them that much power. They just took it. That’s the thesis of Columbia Law Professor Philip Hamburger’s new book, The Administrative Threat, a short, punchy followup to his magisterial Is Administrative Law Unlawful? Both deal with the extraordinary — and illegitimate — power that administrative agencies have assumed in American life.
Hamburger explains that the prerogative powers once exercised by English kings, until they were circumscribed after a resulting civil war, have now been reinvented and lodged in administrative agencies, even though the United States Constitution was drafted specifically to prevent just such abuses. But today, the laws that actually affect people and businesses are seldom written by Congress; instead they are created by administrative agencies through a process of “informal rulemaking,” a process whose chief virtue is that it’s easy for the rulers to engage in, and hard for the ruled to observe or influence. Non-judicial administrative courts decide cases, and impose penalties, without a jury or an actual judge. And the protections in the Constitution and Bill of Rights (like the requirement for a judge-issued search warrant before a search) are often inapplicable.
As Hamburger writes, “Administrative power also evades many of the Constitution’s procedures, including both its legislative and judicial processes. Administrative power thereby sidesteps most of the Constitution’s procedural freedoms. Administrative power is thus all about the evasion of governance through law, including an evasion of constitutional processes and procedural rights.”
Meanwhile, the Liberal Marxist in the Mainstream Media continue to furiously masturbate in public to their delusional fantasies of impeaching, prosecuting and executing President Donald Trump.
Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted for treason and — if convicted in a court of law — executed.
Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces.
The sad thing is that I don’t even have to run through a laundry list of his wrongdoings and cite a litany of sources.
Apparently Jason Fuller is so caught up in is masturbatory delusion that any and all common sense have deserted him entirely. Sorry to dissuade you of your cherished fantasy, but yes, before you charge anyone of a capitol crime you actually do have to lay out the specific statutory violation upon which you are accusing them.
For example, it would probably behoove The Huffington Post and Jason Fuller to retain legal council regarding Fuller’s published article as California Code, Civil Code – CIV § 48a applies to it.
(a) In any action for damages for the publication of a libel in a daily or weekly news publication, or of a slander by radio broadcast, plaintiff shall only recover special damages unless a correction is demanded and is not published or broadcast, as provided in this section. Plaintiff shall serve upon the publisher at the place of publication, or broadcaster at the place of broadcast, a written notice specifying the statements claimed to be libelous and demanding that those statements be corrected. The notice and demand must be served within 20 days after knowledge of the publication or broadcast of the statements claimed to be libelous.
(b) If a correction is demanded within 20 days and is not published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in the same daily or weekly news publication, or on the same broadcasting station as were the statements claimed to be libelous, in a regular issue thereof published or broadcast within three weeks after service, plaintiff, if he or she pleads and proves notice, demand and failure to correct, and if his or her cause of action is maintained, may recover general, special, and exemplary damages. Exemplary damages shall not be recovered unless the plaintiff proves that defendant made the publication or broadcast with actual malice and then only in the discretion of the court or jury, and actual malice shall not be inferred or presumed from the publication or broadcast.
(c) A correction published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in the daily or weekly news publication, or on the broadcasting station as the statements claimed in the complaint to be libelous, before receipt of a demand for correction, shall be of the same force and effect as though the correction had been published or broadcast within three weeks after a demand for correction.
(d) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “General damages” means damages for loss of reputation, shame, mortification, and hurt feelings.
(2) “Special damages” means all damages that plaintiff alleges and proves that he or she has suffered in respect to his or her property, business, trade, profession, or occupation, including the amounts of money the plaintiff alleges and proves he or she has expended as a result of the alleged libel, and no other.
(3) “Exemplary damages” means damages that may in the discretion of the court or jury be recovered in addition to general and special damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing a defendant who has made the publication or broadcast with actual malice.
(4) “Actual malice” means that state of mind arising from hatred or ill will toward the plaintiff; provided, however, that a state of mind occasioned by a good faith belief on the part of the defendant in the truth of the libelous publication or broadcast at the time it is published or broadcast shall not constitute actual malice.
(5) “Daily or weekly news publication” means a publication, either in print or electronic form, that contains news on matters of public concern and that publishes at least once a week.
– See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/civil-code/civ-sect-48a.html#sthash.kobNfStv.dpuf
Moreover, in an even larger context said article could be viewed as prima facie evidence of the Huffingtn Post’s co-conspiratorial collusion in the Deep State’s 18 US Code Chapter 115 Section 2385 Coup attempt. So, ya, you guys should probably invest in lawyers.