![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
here’s the difference between the 2 sides. could you please point me to influential democrats in DC, who this summer, called for the liberal rioters to stop, and who called out the liberal politicians and liberals in the media, to stop instigating them by lying about police? i’ll wait for you to tell me who the democrats are who did that. almost nobody on the right is defending what happened in dc ( it’s indefensible). almost nobody on the left called out the summer riots which left 19 dead. and if inflammatory language and enciing riots is bad, why is Al Sharpton legitimized and embraced by the democrat party? or is inciting a riot only problematic when republicans do it? do you really not see any hypocrisy? Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
I haven't heard anyone claim the officer who shot the woman in the neck was sexist or a misogynist or denounce the Capitol police as "systemically sexist".... it's awful that she was shot and killed but she put herself is a situation that could end badly for her and it did.... the media is struggling to remind us that 5 people "WERE KILLED"...but one died of a stroke and another from a heart attack...which is unfortunate but I guess they count these deaths like covid now.....the woman who was shot....there is another who they say was trampled but there is very little info and then the police officer who died which is tragic, at least to those of us who support the police..... at least these folks took their grievances to the government... we know the left likes to air their grievances by destroying neighborhoods and the property of others and threatening and intimidating people in their neighborhoods and businesses and on their way to work.... which is actually NOT how it is supposed to work.... |
“I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump–I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough—until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Clearly the proper move here is to surrender to these folks and not hold Trump and his enablers accountable for inciting a murderous riot. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
The narrative is that Trump "incited" the riot. You went further in your interpretation that he knew exactly what was going to happen and that he wanted it--you even connected riotous "sounding" words to him which he had not spoken nor implied (your usual innuendo). Quite the opposite, he spoke of, and expected, a demonstration that would be peaceful and lawful. He was "happy" that so many showed up to give powerful and visible support to his cause. "Clearly," if the FBI knows about such plans that they report, they should arrest any that are breaking the law, and prepare themselves and the proper agencies to be ready to quell any riots. It's not necessary for you to insinuate that Trump and his supporters are murderous, riotous thugs. Such language fans any existing embers into actual flames. Maybe, as the adage goes, it takes one to know one. Maybe your the one inciting future riots. |
Quote:
Quote:
Political commentators are falling into mistake that violent terror threats get less so if some mercy (no impeachment) is shown its leader. There is history of counterterrorism efforts that show otherwise. Only complete isolation, powerlessness, deplatforming, of leader works. For the next 10 days and beyond, Trump has to be seen as ineffectual, without oxygen, so he can not have second act. No soft exit. It’s horrible to admit, but do not buy into argument that violence is less if we put a brake on gas pedal. They need to be stopped. But the violence is actually worse if they, and future recruits, view him as strong. They want to back a winner. We prepare for violence but it will be less so in the future with no leadership and if they know their leader can’t help them. Maybe I’m sounding too harsh, no mercy etc. He may be president of the United States but he is also inciter of domestic terrorism. And his complete isolation and condemnation is the safest path forward. We can’t stop now. Total isolation. |
You know, I understand whites are angry but it’s such a shame that when they riot, they just destroy their own neighborhood!
You can try and normalize Trump's behavior all you want, he is headed for the dustbin of history, to be listed as the worst president ever. Trump organized and incited this riot. His supporters proceeded to kill a Capitol Police Officer. This may not have occurred on 5th Avenue, but Trump is responsible for this homicide. He bragged that he could get away with this exact thing. Will we let him? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilP0XzkAp0I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQkV...ature=emb_logo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO3T...ature=emb_logo |
Quote:
But I do appreciate that you finally admit and define what you're doing. For all those who wondered why you would not respond with logical, rational argument, actual conversation, but would just ignore, and repeat, no matter how your lies were debunked, now you can all see the true, fanatical, authoritarian disposition driving Pete's unreasonable, one-sided, relentless rhetoric. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
No actually, the following was written by someone paid by this country to control the growth of violent terrorism and fight extremist groups, who has actually done it. Political commentators are falling into mistake that violent terror threats get less so if some mercy (no impeachment) is shown its leader. There is history of counterterrorism efforts that show otherwise. Only complete isolation, powerlessness, deplatforming, of leader works. For the next 10 days and beyond, Trump has to be seen as ineffectual, without oxygen, so he can not have second act. No soft exit. It’s horrible to admit, but do not buy into argument that violence is less if we put a brake on gas pedal. They need to be stopped. But the violence is actually worse if they, and future recruits, view him as strong. They want to back a winner. We prepare for violence but it will be less so in the future with no leadership and if they know their leader can’t help them. Maybe I’m sounding too harsh, no mercy etc. He may be president of the United States but he is also inciter of domestic terrorism. And his complete isolation and condemnation is the safest path forward. We can’t stop now. Total isolation. |
Quote:
offense to disagree with democrats? Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In other words, debunked by proclamation. I heard some of the evidence and would have liked a thorough inquiry into it. Even, now that it is over, I would still like some reliable (if that's possible) inquiry/investigation into what and how much fraud there was. And what the actual potential for fraud is with the wholesale of ballots being mailed to those who didn't ask for them, and how open to fraud the voting machines were. And I would like to hear SCOTUS argue the constitutionality of state governors or secretaries of state overriding state legislatures in allowing procedures that those legislatures didn't allow. And so forth. I understand how those who wanted Trump defeated would rather that the above did not happen. But it leaves a bad taste, to say the least, in those otherwise inclined. It certainly furthers the corrosion in trust that many of us have in how our governments operate. But winning helps. It can keep sweeping such concerns under the dirty rug of unbridled democracy. |
Quote:
|
It’s an open and shut case. Trump incited a violent insurrection against another branch of government. He needs to leave office now—either via resignation, the 25th Amendment, or impeachment. His most egregious enablers—ergo Hawley, Cruz—should be censured or expelled.
Article 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative [who] shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against the United States. Thousands of Yale and Harvard law school alumni and students petition for Cruz and Hawley to be disbarred. Trump supporters are not victimized by liberal elites. They are victims of their own worthless leaders. Trump, Hawley, Cruz: They are all unprincipled self-promoters who have been fundraising on the false promise of uncovering nonexistent election fraud. They know their claims are lies and they keep shouting them out. They have never produced one piece of evidence. If they want to prove their case, let their evidence see the light of day. It is currently up to 60+ lost cases in court with maybe one win. They were not cases that represented difficult questions when the court had to draw a hard line. You want to see unity, then call for the GOP leadership fronted by the VP to hold a National address to denounce the lie that the election was stolen. |
Quote:
OK, OK, I know it was a lot worse than that. Don't mean to minimize it. But a serious "insurrection!"? If it was an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government, which established government or civil authority was it revolting against. Trump was the established President of that established government. Was Trump revolting against himself? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
it was a riot, a garden variety political riot done by a bunch of jerks ( previously, no longer, a tactic of the liberal brat) who can’t take no for an answer. it was never, ever going to overturn an election, here was no plan to do so. it was a modern day temper tantrum. , Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
No mob had the power to do that. It sounds silly to even say that. What is your worst scenario. That all of Congress would be killed? Then what would happen to the relatively few and weakly armed who stormed the building? They would somehow be untouched, victorious, and the rulers of Congress? That is nonsense. To say anybody orchestrated such an obviously doomed attempt, unless they were total idiots (I know that you think Trump is this mastermind idiot capable of controlling thousands of people to do things he didn't specify but somehow really wanted and able to get 74 million to vote for him). I'm not getting how what you posit is "an open and shut case." On the contrary, Trump specifically noted that it would be a peaceful law abiding demonstration. Sounds like you're trying to incite what you would call an insurrection against the President. And "His most egregious enablers—ergo Hawley, Cruz—should be censured or expelled"? Is this some call to insurrection against members of Congress? You really do sound like a Castro type revolutionary. A Bolshevik. Maybe slightly milder. |
Quote:
Well, sometimes you have a shoe bomber and sometimes it's Lockerbie. I don't want either. What would have happened if as some of the rioters said, they hung Pence, shot Pelosi and killed Grassley? Stole the votes from the Electoral College? They had a map of the tunnels [in the basement of the Capitol], and they were talking about how they're going to be able to stop Congress from leaving. They imagined that this was the day there were going to be mass executions of Congressmen. If you want to understand the Real Deep State, the biggest thing you need to know is it’s institutional, impersonal, and operates on a national scale. The law enforcement-intelligence-national security bureaucracy doesn’t really care about a lot of the little things people think it cares about. It’s mostly focused on terrorists, serial killers, narco-traffickers, and foreign governments. Threats to the nation. Previous QAnon activity wasn’t on that scale, but the Capitol attack is. I don’t think this has sunk in yet. It wasn’t 9/11, but it was bigger than, for example, Benghazi. Americans storming the Capitol to prevent Congress from carrying out election law hasn’t happened before. When four Puerto Rican nationalists shot at Congressmen from the House balcony in 1954, they were rightly called terrorists, convicted in federal court, and imprisoned. And that was just four attackers, no one died, and it wasn’t encouraged by a losing presidential candidate to disrupt the peaceful transition of power. The Capitol attack was a unique event in American history, something they’ll teach about in high school. National security analysts are comparing it to last year’s FBI-thwarted plot to kidnap and execute Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, which came a few months after armed demonstrators forcefully stopped business at the Michigan statehouse. There have been armed post-election demonstrations at multiple statehouses, and reports of plots to storm them next week. It’s a pattern. And after the Capitol attack, the Deep State is going to take it seriously. |
Quote:
It sounds like you're depending entirely on the final proclamations and are not familiar with the details of the actual evidence that was gathered. It's probably more comfortable in that kind of bunker. |
Quote:
|
It was a rally that ended up as something liberals feel they can refer to as a coup. Who would have expected more?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Proud boys stand down and stand by, looks like seven white supremacy groups have been identified as organizing this riot, gee wiz where would they get that idea from. Hey you are DeBarr and have defended him for four years, it’s predictable and frankly it’s almost comical at this stage of this game show. I don’t know what’s more amusing, your defenses of all he does, or SD actually still believing he is the best president of our lifetime.
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com