GOP Lawyers Argue President’s First Amendment Rights Supercede Protestors’

[babylonsister]

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/04/15/gop-lawyers-argue-presidents-first-amendment-rights-supercede-protestors/

GOP Lawyers Argue President’s First Amendment Rights Supercede Protestors’
Posted by Jon Ponder | Apr. 15, 2007, 4:49 pm

Denver three: After GOP goons threw three people out of a 2005 taypayer-funded presidential event in Denver because they appeared to be liberals — under their coats, they wore anti-Bush T-shirts and one of them had an antiwar bumpersticker on her car.
A lawyer for the Denver Three said if the government is allowed to exclude people based on their views “it guts the First Amendment.”

The “Denver Three” sued, claiming the government violated their First Amendment rights. Now lawyers for Bush’s goons are arguing that the president’s right to free speech is more important than the rights of mere citizens:

“The president’s right to control his own message includes the right to exclude people expressing discordant viewpoints from the audience,” states the brief, filed by attorneys Sean Gallagher, Dugan Bliss and others representing Casper and Klinkerman.

Gallagher said the White House was not involved in developing this strategy.

A lawyer for the Denver Three said if the government is allowed to exclude people based on their views “it guts the First Amendment.”

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and both Roosevelts

are rolling over in their graves right now.....

[jimshoes]

2. All men are created equal

is just more rubbish to this administration.:mad:

[Arugula Latte]

10. They'd use the Constitution for toilet paper if they could get away with it.

:grr:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. bastards

pure and simple. laws don't apply to them. they only apply to the opponents

ARE THEY EFFIN KIDDING?????? ONLY BUSH GETS PROTECTION FOR SPEECH?

pardon me while I puke

[napi21]

4. I sure wish this would get more national exposure!

Even after 6 yearsI'mstillhaving a problem realizing that we have a President who will not even make a speech if there are people there who disagree with him!

I NEver rememberhearing of that happening with ANY of the former Presidents!

I know there have been some disruptive people thrown out of speeches in the past, but they were very few and far between.

[DKRC]

8. And they were disruptive before being taken out, not like these 3

who were tossed out simply for having an anti-war bumpersticker on a car and anti-bush t-shirts on at the speech.

Being wrapped in cottonbatting every step of the way for the past 7 years gives me a good idea of just how round the twist "Dear Leader" is...

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

5. As good an example...

As I have seen, or the quality of legal minds that surround Dear Leader.

[Demeter]

6. Isn't That Special! n/t

[The Magistrate]

7. That, Ma'am, Is Dictatorship Talking

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[HuffleClaw]

9. "Gallagher said the White House was not involved in developing this strategy."

claiming bush' rights supersede others rights while at the same time avoiding responsibility for the legal strategy itself? ONLY BushCo. could come with something that oily.

[mmonk]

11. What article?

I can't remember that being in the constitution anywhere. New amendment?