- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
- Messages
- 40,682
- Reaction score
- 18,007
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
It’s looking more and more like the time is coming when we’ll need to become the people we’ve been waiting for.
Sacking Congress seems like an emergency. Isolated riots not quite as much.As I have said before, the President doesn't need approval, but when there is no emergency the President would normal defer to local law enforcement and leadership on deployment, and usually only at the request of local leadership.
So, if we take your demands for how things should have been done on January 6th and apply them to the LA Riots, you would have Trump mobilize the National Guard and Marines and deploy them to LA before the protests even started against the wishes of the Governor and Mayor of LA. Do you see the contradictions in your logic yet?
Since your argument is a strawman, no, I don't believe your incorrect characterization of my own positions.
Is it as hypocritical as how you and others continuously deflect, downplay, and otherwise try to minimize the 1/6 Sedition while also using isolated riots during a protest to excuse the use of military force against Americans and try to call them insurrectionists and such?
There's no limit to the amount of hypocrisy. Though if we're going to be honest, a quality sorely lacking from MAGA, the NG was requested early on during the 1/6 Sedition and not at all in this case. You know...in case you want to keep that "hypocrisy" at least somewhat grounded in reality.
Yup. Thats the plan. At least it’s being executed by idiots. So they’re going too fast and clumsy. If they keep it up the people may put their feet down before they have achieved adequate control.Dictators always use this strategy of escalation to orchestrate a crisis, which they created. They provoke outrage, then use the justified outraged reaction as a justification to repress. They have to create a situation they can point to and day only they can control.
Let me know when the governor of CA attacks Congress in an attempt to halt the recording of the EC to serve a conspiracy for another candidate to keep them in power after they were voted out, and Ill agree with you.Let's put it this way: If the LA riots lasted 2 and a half hours and then everyone went home and ICE was allowed to serve their warrants afterward, we wouldn't be here debating.
It is possible to say that both incidents were bad and both warranted the calling in of National Guard troops to help pacify the situation. Your side can't do that because you are stuck demanding that the National Guard be called in on January 6th before the riot, and not called in at all in LA even as the riots rage.
You further need to classify a 2.5 hour riot as an insurrection because they threatened to interrupt a lawful federal function, while blessing the violent riots attacking ICE and law enforcement for serving legal warrants for the arrests of drug cartel members.
The problem with ideologies build on emotions like the Democrats of today is that they exist entirely in a mash of such plain hypocrisies.
I'm not MAGA, just rational. I don't agree with the pardoning of the violent members of the January 6th riot.
Your use of "Sedition" is all too telling, and exposes your hypocrisy yet again. By definition, the LA riots would land the Mayor of LA, the Governor of California and several riot organizers charges of sedition because their actions over the last server days, and years to be honest, are specifically "resistance against the government or its authority" in their active role in block ICE from performing its legal duties.
I think it's a direct result of the previous Summer of Love and a big "not this time" better response. A good lesson learned response.Exactly, even when compared to Obama's policies, which were challenged in court and openly protested, but not like this. There is no question his move to send the National Guard was a political flex.
This is a lie.Let's put it this way: If the LA riots lasted 2 and a half hours and then everyone went home and ICE was allowed to serve their warrants afterward, we wouldn't be here debating.
It is possible to say that both incidents were bad and both warranted the calling in of National Guard troops to help pacify the situation. Your side can't do that because you are stuck demanding that the National Guard be called in on January 6th before the riot, and not called in at all in LA even as the riots rage.
It was an insurrection. Lying about it doesn't change it.You further need to classify a 2.5 hour riot as an insurrection because they threatened to interrupt a lawful federal function, while blessing the violent riots attacking ICE and law enforcement for serving legal warrants for the arrests of drug cartel members.
More lies and bullshit.The problem with ideologies build on emotions like the Democrats of today is that they exist entirely in a mash of such plain hypocrisies.
Not even close.I'm not MAGA, just rational. I don't agree with the pardoning of the violent members of the January 6th riot.
Your use of "Sedition" is all too telling, and exposes your hypocrisy yet again. By definition, the LA riots would land the Mayor of LA, the Governor of California and several riot organizers charges of sedition because their actions over the last server days, and years to be honest, are specifically "resistance against the government or its authority" in their active role in block ICE from performing its legal duties.
Your examples just don’t line up with reality.Let's put it this way: If the LA riots lasted 2 and a half hours and then everyone went home and ICE was allowed to serve their warrants afterward, we wouldn't be here debating.
It is possible to say that both incidents were bad and both warranted the calling in of National Guard troops to help pacify the situation. Your side can't do that because you are stuck demanding that the National Guard be called in on January 6th before the riot, and not called in at all in LA even as the riots rage.
You further need to classify a 2.5 hour riot as an insurrection because they threatened to interrupt a lawful federal function, while blessing the violent riots attacking ICE and law enforcement for serving legal warrants for the arrests of drug cartel members.
The problem with ideologies build on emotions like the Democrats of today is that they exist entirely in a mash of such plain hypocrisies.
I'm not MAGA, just rational. I don't agree with the pardoning of the violent members of the January 6th riot.
Your use of "Sedition" is all too telling, and exposes your hypocrisy yet again. By definition, the LA riots would land the Mayor of LA, the Governor of California and several riot organizers charges of sedition because their actions over the last server days, and years to be honest, are specifically "resistance against the government or its authority" in their active role in blocking ICE from performing its legal duties.
Your protests lost validity when it changed from voicing objection to the legal actions to trying to stop those actions physically... in other words, from conception they were not valid protests since finding and outing and blocking ICE actions were the goal.
I guess if one thinks of this from a dysfunctional government perspective, I guess so. Normally this would just be something coordinated between city and state law enforcement and the Federal government if things reached the level where that kind of precaution would be necessary. This was more optics than actual need.I think it's a direct result of the previous Summer of Love and a big "not this time" better response. A good lesson learned response.
It amuses me that you think laying down and surrendering to the military is in the best interests of progressive leftism. If we did that, then we wouldn't be the progressive left anymore. We'd be enablers of authoritarianism, just like you.You should realize from reading my posts that my optimism for the Progressive left to do things that are sane and in their own best interest is vanishingly small.
It is a given that Trump will lie about anything if he thinks he gains an advantage by it. It is also, now, a given that Trump sycophants will promote any lie that covers for him. Even if they know that it is a lie. Facts don't matter. Being shown as lying doesn't matter. They'll immediately move on to the next distraction, and the next lie.Trump’s claim was debunked by fact-checkers in March, after he first made the statement during a Fox News appearance, and it’s still not true. There is no evidence Trump made any formal request about deploying 10,000 National Guard troops before the rally.
Mindless faux bullshit is not acceptable.
What I see is a strawman. Check your own logic.
It was a simple question. Your claim is that Trump was powerless on 1/6 but is capable of violating law today. Do you really believe this? Answering with a strawman isn't an answer.
Lol. I asked you a question. Your claim is that the mayor of DC and Nancy Pelosi prevented Trump from calling the NG on 1/6. It's a common claim. No basis in fact nor logic. My guess is that you don't believe it.
Here is this segment I was discussing in this quote above.Enten is out with a new segment discussing a NYT poll about how Americans feel about Trump on Immigration. He's over 20 points higher on the topic than he was in his first term and Enten points out Americans not only approve of Trump on the overall category but on the deportation specifics of Trump's efforts. Dems have their eyes closed and their stubborn minds made up and the position they are taking on protecting and shielding illegals, including illegal criminals, is political suicide IMO. I'm amazed they are really taking this ludicrous position - but they are!
J6 was a failed coup d'etat that tried illegally to retain a defeated candidate in office for another termThe same way that the progressive left has turned ICE raids to deport illegal aliens as a civil rights issue so they can couch their larger, longer, more damaging riot as saintly.
Few people, certainly not me, would cheer the January 6th riot. I will only point out that the January 6th riot was much smaller and lasted about two and a half hours, while the LA riots are 96 hours and ongoing. And, as I pointed out, the "insurrection" vacated the Capitol of it's own accord and went home, not by force, which undermines the "Stalinist History" of the Democrats that it was ever an actual insurrection.
It’s funny to me because these peopleIt amuses me that you think laying down and surrendering to the military is in the best interests of progressive leftism. If we did that, then we wouldn't be the progressive left anymore. We'd be enablers of authoritarianism, just like you.
Word salad.Again, I never claimed that Trump was powerless. I stated that decorum when it comes to deploying the National Guard is to wait for the local officials to request them, and not to deploy them without a pressing emergency. In the weeks before January 6th there was no such emergency to justify calling in the National Guard. It was offered, but they didn't want it.
And, again, what you demand should have been done on January 6th is the exact same ting that you oppose today. Because your logical is horribly flawed for obvious reasons.
I didn't say they prevented the deployment, I said that they refused to accept the deployment. In the case of a non-emergency, like pre-J6, such a refusal is usually honored. After the riot started those who refused the help pre-J6 came around on the idea and the National guard was their within hours.
the only times that I can recall where the President deployed the National Guard regardless of local political refusal is when the local politicians were part of the problem.
You all have danced around the J6 National uard subplot taking both sides as it suited your fever dreams.
Your Side: "OMG!! TRUMP WANTED THE NATIONAL GUARD TO HELP WITH THE INSURRECTION"
My Side: "Eh, then why didn't he ignore the refusal and deploy them anyway?"
Your Side: "... wul... OMG!! TRUMP DIDN'T DEPLOY THE NATIONAL GUARD BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE STOPPED HIS INSURRECTION!!"
My Side: "Eh... that unarmed "Insurrection" broke up and went home after a few hours. Not very insurrectiony. They were pretty much gone before the National guard even arrived."
Your Side: "... wul... OMG!! THEY WAITED A WHOLE HOUR TO CALL IN THE NATIONAL GUARD BECAUSE INURRECTION!!!"
My Side: "Eh... no... the national guard was mobilized within an hour, which is rather quick for a National Guard deployment, and they remained there for the remainder of Trump's presidency... who you agree has ultimate authority over National Guard deployment and never once did he ask them to take over the Capitol. Weird, right? Again.. not very insurrectiony..."
Your Side: "OMG!!! YOU ARE A MAGA NAZI!!!"
... and so on.
They requested the NG on 1/6.Again, I never claimed that Trump was powerless. I stated that decorum when it comes to deploying the National Guard is to wait for the local officials to request them, and not to deploy them without a pressing emergency. In the weeks before January 6th there was no such emergency to justify calling in the National Guard. It was offered, but they didn't want it.
And, again, what you demand should have been done on January 6th is the exact same ting that you oppose today. Because your logical is horribly flawed for obvious reasons.
I didn't say they prevented the deployment, I said that they refused to accept the deployment. In the case of a non-emergency, like pre-J6, such a refusal is usually honored. After the riot started those who refused the help pre-J6 came around on the idea and the National guard was their within hours.
the only times that I can recall where the President deployed the National Guard regardless of local political refusal is when the local politicians were part of the problem.
You all have danced around the J6 National uard subplot taking both sides as it suited your fever dreams.
Your Side: "OMG!! TRUMP WANTED THE NATIONAL GUARD TO HELP WITH THE INSURRECTION"
My Side: "Eh, then why didn't he ignore the refusal and deploy them anyway?"
Your Side: "... wul... OMG!! TRUMP DIDN'T DEPLOY THE NATIONAL GUARD BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE STOPPED HIS INSURRECTION!!"
My Side: "Eh... that unarmed "Insurrection" broke up and went home after a few hours. Not very insurrectiony. They were pretty much gone before the National guard even arrived."
Your Side: "... wul... OMG!! THEY WAITED A WHOLE HOUR TO CALL IN THE NATIONAL GUARD BECAUSE INURRECTION!!!"
My Side: "Eh... no... the national guard was mobilized within an hour, which is rather quick for a National Guard deployment, and they remained there for the remainder of Trump's presidency... who you agree has ultimate authority over National Guard deployment and never once did he ask them to take over the Capitol. Weird, right? Again.. not very insurrectiony..."
Your Side: "OMG!!! YOU ARE A MAGA NAZI!!!"
... and so on.
Your examples just don’t line up with reality.
The incident here in San Diego recently was staff at a small restaurant. Most of these raids have been of this nature.
Provocation for effect. Savage assholery conducted to rule people up to justify a savage response.
This is a training exercise.
To train us to shut up and do what we’re told.
Authoritarianism 101.
They requested the NG on 1/6.
I heard that trump was money laundering.How do those not line up with what I have stated? ICE is Immigration Enforcement. There job, by law, it to enforce Immigration law.
The actions in LA, which is what we are talking about here, were serving warrants on a Cartel money laundering scheme.
Enforcing the law isn't "provocation". It's enforcing the law. I realize that what you REALLY want is for the laws to be ignored, but that's not going to happen. Lawlessness is for Democrat presidents.
For rioters.
Again, protesting peacefully is fine. Blocking Federal Agents from performing their duties is not.
In anything, every politician that supports a "sanctuary city" policy are, by definition, committing acts of sedition.
The 5th Grade Emotional nonsense from your side is endless. Enforcing legally passed laws is not "Authoritarianism" any more than the IRS enforcing tax law is authoritarianism.![]()
No, Trump didn't. What ACTUALLY happened was that Trump, in the days before January 6th, instructed the Joint chiefs to have guard ready for deployment, even though the Capitol Police, Mayor and Congressional leaders didn't want them.Word salad.
This is what you wrote:
False, he offered them to the Capitol Police and the Mayor and Pelosi and the Mayor turned the offer down.
Trump refused to call the NG on 1/6. Your false claim above is meaningless. In violation of law, Trump deployed the NG to Los Angeles. This requires cognitive dissonance to accept. No amount of verbosity can alter these elemental facts.
You can't quote me on that because I supported Acting SecDef Miller and Gen. Milley in their handling of the DC NG on J6. You pulled that false claim out from where the sun don't shine.
Indeed MAGAs keep digging up the corpses of issues in the flailing hope to remake 'em while trying to bury the truth as Stalin did.
I heard that trump was money laundering.
You do realize that we don’t have to accept things people just say, right?