 Trump’s Lawyers Say Encouraging Reasonable Force Against Protestors Is 1st Amendment RightAccording to lawyers for Donald Trump, it was completely fine for the now President to have encouraged supporters to use  reasonable force  to remove disruptive protestors from his campaign rallies last year, as he was just exercising his right to freedom of speech by doing so.The claim came during an emergency motion asking the US appeals court to throw out a lawsuit filed by three people who believe they were manhandled at a Trump rally that took place during March last year in Louisville, KY. Fortunately for the two women and one man, U.S. District Judge David Hale refused to dismiss the case, stating that the plaintiffs  lawsuit  described a chaotic and violent scene in which a crowd of people turned on three individuals,  with the plaintiffs being punched, kicked and verbally abused. According to Trumps lawyers, one of the plaintiffs, an African American woman, had held up a  sign depicting Trump s face on the body of pig, Trump kept saying,  Get them out, get them out,  and people in the crowd began pushing and shoving the protesters,  said Alvin Bamberger, one of the audience members at the rally who was cited in the lawsuit and the one whom the plaintiffs described as the  most aggressive.  The President s lawyers felt the need to add that, in Trump s defence, he did say at the time,  Don t hurt  em. If I say,  Go get  em,  I get in trouble with the press, the most dishonest human beings in the world. The plaintiffs are attempting to sue Trump and his campaign, but the real question here is whether Trump should be deemed responsible for having incited, or at the very least, provoked the violence in the first place. The three people beaten and abused at the Louisville rally do, hence the reason why they re seeking damages from the President for what they believe was a reckless incitement of violence.President Trump s lawyers claim in their latest motion that protesters who  initially purchased tickets and entered the rally in a peaceful manner  can also be forcibly removed if they become disruptive. It also makes no difference whether the crowd reacted with unlawful violence beyond what Mr. Trump advocated, because the hostile reaction of the crowd does not not transform protected speech into incitement,  the lawyers added in their statement.Judge Hale believes the plaintiffs  complaint is more than enough to proceed toward a trial, writing in his March 31 order It is plausible that Trump s directive to  get  em out of here  advocated the use of force. [It] is stated in the imperative; it was an order, an instruction, a command. Trump s lawyers, however, believe that, not only is that a reasonable order for Trump to give, it is also his right. Without this court s intervention, this litigation will inflict irreparable harm on the Trump defendants by subjecting them to punitive litigation as the price of exercising their core First Amendment rights,  Washington attorney Michael Carvin said wrote. Mr. Trump had a First Amendment right to call for the removal of disruptive protesters from his campaign rally, and it is a bedrock principle of law that the right to exclude another   includes the right to use reasonable force. Furthermore, Trump s lawyers filed a  writ of mandamus  with the U.S. 6th Circuit Court this week, asking the appeals court to remove the case from Hale. Their argument was that Trump cannot be held liable for  negligently inspiring third parties to engage in violence. Featured image via Justin Merriman/Getty ImagesNews
trump lawyers say encouraging reasonable force against protestors is amendment rightaccording lawyers donald trump completely fine president encouraged supporters use reasonable force remove disruptive protestors campaign rallies last year exercising right freedom speech claim came emergency motion asking us appeals court throw lawsuit filed three people believe manhandled trump rally took place march last year louisville fortunately two women one man district judge david hale refused dismiss case stating plaintiffs lawsuit described chaotic violent scene crowd people turned three individuals plaintiffs punched kicked verbally abused according trumps lawyers one plaintiffs african american woman held sign depicting trump face body pig trump kept saying get get people crowd began pushing showing protesters said calvin hamburger one audience members rally cited lawsuit one plaintiffs described aggressive the president lawyers felt need add trump defence say time don hurt em if i say go get em i get trouble press dishonest human beings world the plaintiffs attempting sue trump campaign real question whether trump deemed responsible incited least provoked violence first place the three people beaten abused louisville rally hence reason seeking damages president believe reckless incitement trump lawyers claim latest motion protesters initially purchased tickets entered rally peaceful manner also forcibly removed become disruptive it also makes difference whether crowd reacted unlawful violence beyond trump advocated hostile reaction crowd transform protected speech incitement lawyers added hale believes plaintiffs complaint enough proceed toward trial writing march order it plausible trump directive get em advocated use force it stated imperative order instruction command trump lawyers however believe reasonable order trump give also right without court intervention litigation inflict inseparable harm trump defendants subjective punitive litigation price exercising core first amendment rights washington attorney michael carving said wrote trump first amendment right call removal disruptive protesters campaign rally bedrock principle law right exclude another includes right use reasonable force furthermore trump lawyers filed writ mandates circuit court week asking appeals court remove case hale their argument trump held liable negligent inspiring third parties engage violence featured image via justin imagenes
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT:  Trump’s Lawyers Say Encouraging Reasonable Force Against Protestors Is 1st Amendment RightAccording to lawyers for Donald Trump, it was completely fine for the now President to have encouraged supporters to use  reasonable force  to remove disruptive protestors from his campaign rallies last year, as he was just exercising his right to freedom of speech by doing so.The claim came during an emergency motion asking the US appeals court to throw out a lawsuit filed by three people who believe they were manhandled at a Trump rally that took place during March last year in Louisville, KY. Fortunately for the two women and one man, U.S. District Judge David Hale refused to dismiss the case, stating that the plaintiffs  lawsuit  described a chaotic and violent scene in which a crowd of people turned on three individuals,  with the plaintiffs being punched, kicked and verbally abused. According to Trumps lawyers, one of the plaintiffs, an African American woman, had held up a  sign depicting Trump s face on the body of pig, Trump kept saying,  Get them out, get them out,  and people in the crowd began pushing and shoving the protesters,  said Alvin Bamberger, one of the audience members at the rally who was cited in the lawsuit and the one whom the plaintiffs described as the  most aggressive.  The President s lawyers felt the need to add that, in Trump s defence, he did say at the time,  Don t hurt  em. If I say,  Go get  em,  I get in trouble with the press, the most dishonest human beings in the world. The plaintiffs are attempting to sue Trump and his campaign, but the real question here is whether Trump should be deemed responsible for having incited, or at the very least, provoked the violence in the first place. The three people beaten and abused at the Louisville rally do, hence the reason why they re seeking damages from the President for what they believe was a reckless incitement of violence.President Trump s lawyers claim in their latest motion that protesters who  initially purchased tickets and entered the rally in a peaceful manner  can also be forcibly removed if they become disruptive. It also makes no difference whether the crowd reacted with unlawful violence beyond what Mr. Trump advocated, because the hostile reaction of the crowd does not not transform protected speech into incitement,  the lawyers added in their statement.Judge Hale believes the plaintiffs  complaint is more than enough to proceed toward a trial, writing in his March 31 order It is plausible that Trump s directive to  get  em out of here  advocated the use of force. [It] is stated in the imperative; it was an order, an instruction, a command. Trump s lawyers, however, believe that, not only is that a reasonable order for Trump to give, it is also his right. Without this court s intervention, this litigation will inflict irreparable harm on the Trump defendants by subjecting them to punitive litigation as the price of exercising their core First Amendment rights,  Washington attorney Michael Carvin said wrote. Mr. Trump had a First Amendment right to call for the removal of disruptive protesters from his campaign rally, and it is a bedrock principle of law that the right to exclude another   includes the right to use reasonable force. Furthermore, Trump s lawyers filed a  writ of mandamus  with the U.S. 6th Circuit Court this week, asking the appeals court to remove the case from Hale. Their argument was that Trump cannot be held liable for  negligently inspiring third parties to engage in violence. Featured image via Justin Merriman/Getty ImagesNews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: trump lawyers say encouraging reasonable force against protestors is amendment rightaccording lawyers donald trump completely fine president encouraged supporters use reasonable force remove disruptive protestors campaign rallies last year exercising right freedom speech claim came emergency motion asking us appeals court throw lawsuit filed three people believe manhandled trump rally took place march last year louisville fortunately two women one man district judge david hale refused dismiss case stating plaintiffs lawsuit described chaotic violent scene crowd people turned three individuals plaintiffs punched kicked verbally abused according trumps lawyers one plaintiffs african american woman held sign depicting trump face body pig trump kept saying get get people crowd began pushing showing protesters said calvin hamburger one audience members rally cited lawsuit one plaintiffs described aggressive the president lawyers felt need add trump defence say time don hurt em if i say go get em i get trouble press dishonest human beings world the plaintiffs attempting sue trump campaign real question whether trump deemed responsible incited least provoked violence first place the three people beaten abused louisville rally hence reason seeking damages president believe reckless incitement trump lawyers claim latest motion protesters initially purchased tickets entered rally peaceful manner also forcibly removed become disruptive it also makes difference whether crowd reacted unlawful violence beyond trump advocated hostile reaction crowd transform protected speech incitement lawyers added hale believes plaintiffs complaint enough proceed toward trial writing march order it plausible trump directive get em advocated use force it stated imperative order instruction command trump lawyers however believe reasonable order trump give also right without court intervention litigation inflict inseparable harm trump defendants subjective punitive litigation price exercising core first amendment rights washington attorney michael carving said wrote trump first amendment right call removal disruptive protesters campaign rally bedrock principle law right exclude another includes right use reasonable force furthermore trump lawyers filed writ mandates circuit court week asking appeals court remove case hale their argument trump held liable negligent inspiring third parties engage violence featured image via justin imagenes