What it's actually a coup?

[Got Stripers]

I thought DeBarr gave us all the evidence we needed to dismiss this peaceful protest as anything BUT a coup. A federal judge seems to disagree and two of the conspirators have been referred to the DOJ, I hope the AG actually does something for a change.

“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” wrote Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California. “Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the vice president to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.” “a coup in search of a legal theory.”

Carry on.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I thought DeBarr gave us all the evidence we needed to dismiss this peaceful protest as anything BUT a coup. A federal judge seems to disagree and two of the conspirators have been referred to the DOJ, I hope the AG actually does something for a change.

“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” wrote Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California. “Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the vice president to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.” “a coup in search of a legal theory.”

Carry on.

what are the details of the plan? who was involved?

i don’t doubt some wanted to overturn the election. like some of the BLM rioters wanted a permanent end to the police. and after the 2016 election, some congressional democrats am challenged the legitimacy of election results in some states with no evidence ( as always. it’s ok when they do it). but it was never going to happen. it could not happen.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

It seems to most Trump supporters a coup is only a coup if it succeeds…. Anything before such as the planning coordination between people in the executive branch legislative branch and now seems the judiciary. And media talking heads. And laying the ground work for a stolen election Mantra since 2016 which Trump couldn’t use because he actually won legitimately. .. all that doesn’t matter !

because a very large group think he still won and it was stolen , and these are primary voters who could make him the nomination again ..

And who would want a lame duck POTUS a his Cult because they expect him and Congress to change Twenty-Second Amendment which where the 2 term provision for President come from.

And recent history clearly shows what Republicans will do to stay in power
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

i don’t doubt some wanted to overturn the election

Wow I can’t believe you actually said such a thing ?

Even with all the information provided and recorded and text messages..

Let me guess because they tried to use or claim some twisted legal arguments this makes the process legitimate political discourse?

That’s like saying a rapist isn’t a rapist because he only got to 2nd base ! Because she woke up

And ignore the part where he roofied her ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

It seems to most Trump supporters a coup is only a coup if it succeeds…. Anything before such as the planning coordination between people in the executive branch legislative branch and now seems the judiciary. And media talking heads. And laying the ground work for a stolen election Mantra since 2016 which Trump couldn’t use because he actually won legitimately. .. all that doesn’t matter !

because a very large group think he still won and it was stolen , and these are primary voters who could make him the nomination again ..

And who would want a lame duck POTUS a his Cult because they expect him and Congress to change Twenty-Second Amendment which where the 2 term provision for President come from.

And recent history clearly shows what Republicans will do to stay in power
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"It seems to most Trump supporters a coup is only a coup if it succeeds"

No, but it does seem that none of you can respond to what people actually say, so you respond to what you wish we said.

It had no chance of ever succeeding, because it wasn't a serious challenge to the election.

If my 10 year-old says "I'm going to hold my breath until they give the win to Trump", is that a coup? Or is that just someone acting irrationally?

What do you call it when after the 2016 election, SOME (not all) congressional democrats challenged the legitimacy of the Trump win in several states, when they had zero evidence that anything funny happened? Why wasn't that a coup?

If Trump and a small handful of the January 6 rioters were involved in a premeditated plot, show me the evidence and punish them accordingly. Please tell me what's wrong with that reaction?

How many democrats referred to Trump for his whole 4 years as an "illegitimate president"? Did you ever once say that was inappropriate?

Everything the left does is OK, everything the right does is wrong, we get it!

WDMSO, after the 2016 election, a tiny number of congressional democrats didn't like that their side lost, so they tried to overturn the election results with phony claims that the election was stolen in some states.

Now, some on the right did the same exact thing after the 2020 election, and you've spent a lot of energy criticizing them, and I agree with you 100%, what they did was completely wrong.

But we all know you never said a word to criticize the democrats who did the same thing in 2016. Why? Please explain the obvious double standard. Why do democrats always get a pass from you, for doing the same thing that you attack Republicans for doing? In 2016, even Joe Biden (to his credit) told those democrats to knock it off, because the election was over.

[wdmso]

You proved my point ! Thank you

So because you claim “It had no chance of ever succeeding, because it wasn't a serious challenge to the election. “.


It not a coup attempt and no big deal. ! Not sure how to read what you wrote another way

Everything the left does is OK, everything the right does is wrong, we get it!

Clearly you don’t get it …. There’s only 1 party willing to steal overturn an election ..who’s supporters stand by their attempts

Your love for false equivalence’s has no equal

US election 2016: Trump says election 'rigged at polling places'

Yet he won



Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

For those with historical amnesia Who still support a man who clearly has showed his intent . To lie then and again in 2020 but this time from the inside


All these statements were from Trump prior to the 2016 election

Hillary Clinton should have been prosecuted and should be in jail,” Trump tweeted Saturday. “Instead she is running for president in what looks like a rigged election.” If there were any question that he might be using the term “rigged” metaphorically, he cleared it up: “The election is absolutely being rigged by the dishonest and distorted media pushing Crooked Hillary — but also at many polling places — SAD.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

You proved my point ! Thank you

So because you claim “It had no chance of ever succeeding, because it wasn't a serious challenge to the election. “.


It not a coup attempt and no big deal. ! Not sure how to read what you wrote another way

Everything the left does is OK, everything the right does is wrong, we get it!

Clearly you don’t get it …. There’s only 1 party willing to steal overturn an election ..who’s supporters stand by their attempts

Your love for false equivalence’s has no equal

US election 2016: Trump says election 'rigged at polling places'

Yet he won



Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here are my exact words from my previous post...

"If Trump and a small handful of the January 6 rioters were involved in a premeditated plot, show me the evidence and punish them accordingly."

SOMEHOW, from that, you claim that I said "It not a coup attempt and no big deal."

"Not sure how to read what you wrote another way "

You could start by taking an elementary school course in reading comprehension. Ask any average 5 year-old how to read what I wrote, and they'll tell you how to correctly interpret it.

You cannot accurately process anything which deviates from your militant liberalism.

I asked you why you had no concerns about congressional democrats claiming in 2016 that Trump stole the election from Hilary. All you can do is yammer about a "false equivalency", and of course you provide exactly zero evidence as to why the two situations aren't comparable.

In 2016, a very small number of congressional democrats hated the election outcome so much, that they tried to overturn it, based on fabricated claims of election fraud. That doesn't sound an awful lot like what you attack Republicans for doing?

Every single comparison which paints democrats in a negative light, you’ve said was a false equivalency. not one time, not once, could you admit that the left did anything wrong.

do you have any idea how completely predictable you are?

[wdmso]

Donald Trump’s phone logs of seven hours and 37 minutes, including the period when the building was being violently assaulted, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post and CBS News.

Are absent


Convenient?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Here are my exact words from my previous post...

"If Trump and a small handful of the January 6 rioters were involved in a premeditated plot, show me the evidence and punish them accordingly."

SOMEHOW, from that, you claim that I said "It not a coup attempt and no big deal."

"Not sure how to read what you wrote another way "

You could start by taking an elementary school course in reading comprehension. Ask any average 5 year-old how to read what I wrote, and they'll tell you how to correctly interpret it.

You cannot accurately process anything which deviates from your militant liberalism.

I asked you why you had no concerns about congressional democrats claiming in 2016 that Trump stole the election from Hilary. All you can do is yammer about a "false equivalency", and of course you provide exactly zero evidence as to why the two situations aren't comparable.

In 2016, a very small number of congressional democrats hated the election outcome so much, that they tried to overturn it, based on fabricated claims of election fraud. That doesn't sound an awful lot like what you attack Republicans for doing?

Every single comparison which paints democrats in a negative light, you’ve said was a false equivalency. not one time, not once, could you admit that the left did anything wrong.

do you have any idea how completely predictable you are?

asked you why you had no concerns about congressional democrats

Like I said false equivalences

But please keep beating that drum
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

A small number of people

18 minutes versus 7 hours!

We know the people who received calls or talked to Trump during the gap: Mike Lee, Jim Jordan, Mike Pence, etc. Get their records, identify the incoming number, and then you’ve got the phone(s) Trump was using.
They (esp lawmakers and Pence) will kick and scream but there’s no leg to stand on, legally, to block subpoenas for records so clearly related to the investigation and which were deliberately being obscured by WH and Trump. U.S. v. Nixon would be exactly on point.

Media should be all over GOPLeader McCarthy today demanding he tell whose number he called when he talked to Trump and how he knew to call that number
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

asked you why you had no concerns about congressional democrats

Like I said false equivalences

But please keep beating that drum
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's not a false equivalence just because you declare it to be a false equivalence. Why is it a false equivalence, and not a valid equivalence?

At the time, back in 2016, Joe Biden told the congressional democrats that what they were doing, was wrong. He told them to stop it, that the election was over. He can say it. But you can't.

So you're saying Biden was wrong, when he chastised congressional democrats for doing what they were doing? Either the congressional democrats were wrong to do what they did, or Biden was wrong for telling them to stop. They can't both be right. So who are you saying was wrong?

Have fun with that one.

It's wrong in your mind, for republicans to make false claims of election cheating in an attempt to overturn an election they lost. But it's OK with you, when democrats make false claims of election cheating in an attempt to overturn an election they lost.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Media should be all over GOPLeader McCarthy today demanding he tell whose number he called when he talked to Trump and how he knew to call that number
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's suspicious to you that a senior republican in the house, would be able to speak with a Republican president?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I thought DeBarr gave us all the evidence we needed to dismiss this peaceful protest as anything BUT a coup. A federal judge seems to disagree and two of the conspirators have been referred to the DOJ, I hope the AG actually does something for a change.

“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” wrote Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California. “Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the vice president to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.” “a coup in search of a legal theory.”

Carry on.

There may have been a few there who stupidly thought they could pull off a "coup." Bad apples usually show up when there's going to be a huge crowd. That is not a reason to demonize the vast, vast majority of peaceful protesters with a pejorative label that is assigned to the few idiots.

The "protest" (rally) was attended by several thousand people. "Rally organizers told the National Park Service that they anticipated 30,000 people would attend. Law enforcement said the crowd size ahead of the protest was possibly as much as 80,000, according to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy. The crowd size at the rally was at least 10,000, according to the Associated Press."

Are you accusing those several thousands of peaceful "protesters" of trying to stage a "coup"?

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

There may have been a few there who stupidly thought they could pull off a "coup." Bad apples usually show up when there's going to be a huge crowd. That is not a reason to demonize the vast, vast majority of peaceful protesters with a pejorative label that is assigned to the few idiots.

The "protest" (rally) was attended by several thousand people. "Rally organizers told the National Park Service that they anticipated 30,000 people would attend. Law enforcement said the crowd size ahead of the protest was possibly as much as 80,000, according to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy. The crowd size at the rally was at least 10,000, according to the Associated Press."

Are you accusing those several thousands of peaceful "protesters" of trying to stage a "coup"?

You aren’t following along, Trump and likely a few high ranking GOP members, his advisers and attorneys were attempting just that and I have no doubt the leaders of several groups and their soldiers attending were doing their part to help that cause. Do I think everyone attending was involved, certainly not, but a small percentage were and if all the phone records and timeline were public it would be crystal clear who was part of the big Green Bay sweep.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It's suspicious to you that a senior republican in the house, would be able to speak with a Republican president?

With a burner phone???????????

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

You aren’t following along, Trump and likely a few high ranking GOP members, his advisers and attorneys were attempting just that and I have no doubt the leaders of several groups and their soldiers attending were doing their part to help that cause. Do I think everyone attending was involved, certainly not, but a small percentage were and if all the phone records and timeline were public it would be crystal clear who was part of the big Green Bay sweep.

If I remember correctly, DeBarr objected to calling the Jan6 rally an "insurrection." If I remember correctly, there were a variety of types who attended the rally. A few were bent toward violence. Some of those few actually thought they could change the results of the election. If I remember correctly, the variety of types did not act in concert. They did not all get together before hand in order to coordinate an "insurrection." Many of them are now being prosecuted for things other than "insurrection, for some sort of trespassing, assault, property damage, etc. There is one now, If I remember correctly, who is being charged with some variety of insurrection.

So far, there is no evidence, if I remember correctly, that those protesters who have been arrested had any ties to some alleged Trump conspiracy. And the numbers of "protesters" who were peaceful hugely, vastly, greatly, immensely, outnumber those who were not peaceful. So it was, indeed, if I remember correctly, as DeBarr said, a mostly peaceful protest. Calling the rally an insurgency or a coup is ridiculous.

If the judge who said that it is more likely than not that there was some sort of illegal "coup" plotted by Trump, that is a different story, and yet to be proven. If I remember correctly, the plot that was cooked up was alleged by the cookers to be constitutional. If so, then any "coup" that would result would not be illegal. And if the intent was to stay within the bounds of constitutionality, and the plot was not actually carried out, then it was a mistake that didn't happen.

Of course, with the right DOJ and jury, it can be made out to be what ever the prosecution desires.

[Pete F.]

"I have never obstructed justice...I am not a crook."
-- Richard M. Nixon, Nov. 17, 1973

"I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term."
-- Donald J. Trump, March 29, 2022
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If I remember correctly, DeBarr objected to calling the Jan6 rally an "insurrection." If I remember correctly, there were a variety of types who attended the rally. A few were bent toward violence. Some of those few actually thought they could change the results of the election. If I remember correctly, the variety of types did not act in concert. They did not all get together before hand in order to coordinate an "insurrection." Many of them are now being prosecuted for things other than "insurrection, for some sort of trespassing, assault, property damage, etc. There is one now, If I remember correctly, who is being charged with some variety of insurrecion.

So far, there is no evidence, if I remember correctly, that those protesters who have been arrested had any ties to some alleged Trump conspiracy. And the numbers of "protesters" who were peaceful hugely, vastly, greatly, immensely, outnumber those who were not peaceful. So it was, indeed, if I remember correctly, as DeBarr said, a mostly peaceful protest. Calling the rally an insurrgency or a coup is ridiculous.

If the judge who said that it is more likely than not that there was some sort illegal "coup" plotted by Trump, that is a different story, and yet to be proven. If I remember correctly, the plot that was cooked up was alleged by the cookers to be constitutional. If so, then any "coup" that would result would not be illegal. And if the intent was to stay within the bounds of constitutionality, and the plot was not actually carried out, then it was a mistake that didn't happen.

Of course, with the right DOJ and jury, it can be made out to be what ever the prosecution desires.

So you buy into the green bay sweep as being constitutional? I can see you sitting on your plastic covered sofa, getting a woody as Navarrow uses his animated hand gestures to bring home the key points of the sweep in order to make it appear logical and constitutional. Just because all the evidence isn't yet available, doesn't mean there was illegality planned and coordination with many in and out of the white house. Trump has for his entire life used people to do his dirty work and in such a way that he has been difficult to charge, his final days in office were probably no different.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

So you buy into the green bay sweep as being constitutional?

Where do you get that? I didn't buy into anything.
I said it was "alleged" by the planners to be constitutional. Do you "buy into" a claim that an illegal coup was planned?

I can see you sitting on your plastic covered sofa, getting a woody as Navarrow uses his animated hand gestures to bring home the key points of the sweep in order to make it appear logical and constitutional.

You have a perverted way of seeing what you want to see.

Just because all the evidence isn't yet available, doesn't mean there was illegality planned and coordination with many in and out of the white house. Trump has for his entire life used people to do his dirty work and in such a way that he has been difficult to charge, his final days in office were probably no different.

Right, until all the evidence is available and proved beyond reasonable doubt to show an "attempt" at an illegal coup, I'm not "buying in." I recall you and others prematurely buying in to stuff about Trump before it was proved, and it turning out to be BS.

But at least it makes you feel good for a while . . . I guess.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It's suspicious to you that a senior republican in the house, would be able to speak with a Republican president?

Jim if he did wheres the call Log? still not sure what you defend this Man

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Right, until all the evidence is available and proved beyond reasonable doubt to show an "attempt" at an illegal coup, I'm not "buying in." I recall you and others prematurely buying in to stuff about Trump before it was proved, and it turning out to be BS.

But at least it makes you feel good for a while . . . I guess.

So what's your position on the missing Call Logs ?


Are they not the property of the people ?

[Pete F.]

True to form
Trump asks his friend Putin to take a break from murdering innocent civilians to help him frame Biden.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Would Americans ever support a coup? 40 percent now say yes.
That percentage jumped significantly since 2017 and includes more than half the Republicans we surveyed.

and they love Putin... so a Coup is right in Republicans wheel house

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So what's your position on the missing Call Logs ?

Don't have a position.

Are they not the property of the people ?

Push come to shove, the property of the people doesn't belong to the people. The Capitol Building, e.g. Or tax revenues. Our "Representatives" and agency bureaucrats pretty much control "our" property.

[Pete F.]

When Trump knows he's up to no good, he borrows other people's phones. And that's what he did for nearly 8 hours on January 6, 2021.

He used Rudy's phone multiple times that we know of that day. You know, the Rudy who’s phone is currently in the possession of the SDNY....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

When Trump knows he's up to no good, he borrows other people's phones. And that's what he did for nearly 8 hours on January 6, 2021.

He used Rudy's phone multiple times that we know of that day. You know, the Rudy who’s phone is currently in the possession of the SDNY....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Authoritarian mind reading Pete knows what true $hit is.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Authoritarian mind reading Pete knows what true $hit is.

Bolton said he and Trump have spoken about how people have used “burner phones” to avoid having their calls scrutinized.

TFG thought Bolton said "burger phones", which refers to the red phones in the situation room with a direct line to McDonald's. All a big misunderstanding.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim if he did wheres the call Log? still not sure what you defend this Man

I'm not defending Trump. Pete said it's suspicious that his partys leader in the house would call him on a crazy day.

What's stunning, is that you act as if I'm a Trump apologist. The fanatic is you. I say he's a morally bankrupt man who got some great policy results. You say he's a Sith Lord, you've never, ever, once said he did anything to improve the country...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Would Americans ever support a coup? 40 percent now say yes.
That percentage jumped significantly since 2017 and includes more than half the Republicans we surveyed.

and they love Putin... so a Coup is right in Republicans wheel house

If you want to increase trust in elections, mandate photo ids and require that we show an id to vote or to get an absontee ballot.

That's what any problem-solver would suggest to ensure election integrity. Presumably there's a reason why your side is so adamantly opposed to those things...

If someone is opposed to drug tests, you kinda have to wonder what they're afraid of...

What's the proof Republicans love Putin? I'd like to see that data...I remember when Obama mocked Mitt Romney for suggesting Putin was a threat, and everyone on the left LOVED it.