- Joined
- Jun 3, 2020
- Messages
- 21,354
- Reaction score
- 7,396
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
SeditionSolitary for trespassing?
SeditionSolitary for trespassing?
Trump complained about the election results for weeks. Trump used the word fight over twenty times in his 1/6 "rally" speech. In a completely unrelated matter, the Capitol was violently breached ON THE SAME DAY!Good citation. It contains a major blow to those claiming Trump incited the riot.
See my post here.It seems Rodger Stone has ties to the Oath Keepers, and Stone is a Trump confident & operative.
Could these indictments lead further up, into the GOP, or Trump? Absolutely. No guarantees, obviously, but it is indeed possible. Stone? Bannon? Other Trump confidents? Who knows their connections to the radical groups? And as we saw, Trump won't let his confidents fall - and the GOP do Trump's bidding. If Trump pardons these guys, which he did, the GOP support him in it. If he says they should be released, the GOP says they should be released.
So yeah, I think Trump & the GOP have great reason to end the indictments and investigation, just as they vowed to end the entire 1/6 House investigation. Just as they refuse to show for subpoena, and as Trump did to Mueller & the DOJ. They are protecting themselves, and will continue to do so.
This figure of speech has been explained so many times I'm surprised you're still clinging to it.Trump used the word fight over twenty times in his 1/6 "rally" speech.
In a completely unrelated matter, the Capitol was violently breached ON THE SAME DAY!
No relationship, at all. /s
How a Presidential Rally Turned Into a Capitol Rampage (Published 2021)
We analyzed the alternating perspectives of President Trump at the podium, the lawmakers inside the Capitol and a growing mob’s destruction and violence.www.nytimes.com
Please, explain it again. Or link to another post explaining the meaning of the word "fight". I'd love to read it.This figure of speech has been explained so many times I'm surprised you're still clinging to it.
Good citation. It contains a major blow to those claiming Trump incited the riot.
Would they be useful idiots in that case?
Please, explain it again. Or link to another post explaining the meaning of the word "fight". I'd love to read it.
I quoted from it. What do you think?Did you actually read the link?????
They are investigating the Loudon School board that WaPo spoke so eloquently of because they were just teaching inclusion.
OuchI quoted from it. What do you think?
Apparently he didn't read it.Ouch
That is going to leave a mark!
The little details can get you.Apparently he didn't read it.
......because , unlike the Oath Keepers , there is no evidence they conspiredThen why not charge EVERYONE who entered the building that day with seditious conspiracy?
The answer should be obvious. Motive-- they would have to prove motive.
I always appreciate it when citations are made. You never know what you might discover when you actually read through them.The little details can get you.
Respectfully, they did specifically go to the Capitol and violently break into the building, violently attack police and attempt to stop government process. That did not happen in other cases of people using the word fight in speeches and comments.This figure of speech has been explained so many times I'm surprised you're still clinging to it.
Which only goes to show how a mob can be incited to do something without knowing what they are doing.......because , unlike the Oath Keepers , there is no evidence they conspired
See my post here.Respectfully, they did specifically go to the Capitol and violently break into the building, violently attack police and attempt to stop government process. That did not happen in other cases of people using the word fight in speeches and comments.
I know this thread is about the Oath Keepers, but my previous comment wasn't just about them. There were hundreds of others there acting out violently after hearing Trump's comments. To dismiss that would also be bias driven. Trump certainly took his time doing anything to reclaim the peace. Why is that?See my post here.
Post in thread '[W:#442]Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes arrested, charged in Jan. 6 conspiracy' https://debatepolitics.com/threads/...ed-in-jan-6-conspiracy.469974/post-1075265615
There are examples where individuals have resorted to violence for a cause. Tying those acts to the metaphorical words of politicians would be foolish, knowing how the phrase is widely used. Doing so in this example is purely bias driven.
No one here is dismissing the idiocy of the rioters of 1/6. Where do you perceive that was something I did?I know this thread is about the Oath Keepers, but my previous comment wasn't just about them. There were hundreds of others there acting out violently after hearing Trump's comments. To dismiss that would also be bias driven. Trump certainly took his time doing anything to reclaim the peace. Why is that?
However, it does not necessarily follow that an individual or individuals doing the inciting don't know exactly what they are doing.Which only goes to show how a mob can be incited to do something without knowing what they are doing.
Agreed.However, it does not necessarily follow that an individual or individuals doing the inviting don't know exactly what they are doing.
I fully expect that timing.Interesting that he's charged under 2384 instead of 2385. 2384 is kind of a "catch all" whereas 2385 is more in line with what the media has alleged.
Anyway, unless he takes a plea I suspect we'll get a trial in late September or early October. This has to be used for the most political benefit it can be.
I also expect yet another 'dangerous' COVID variant just before the elections, with the Democrats deploying Marc Elias to change the election rules and regulations yet again, as they did in 2020.Great point. It will drive the MSM frenzy towards supporting their Democratic masters. Covid is a wash for taking advantage of since their dear leader is making a mess of that crisis advantage.
I didn't. But I do see a looking-for-a-way-out for Trump in your comments. It's quite apparent that none of the violent events of January 6th would have happened if it wasn't for Trump, his rally and his rhetoric.No one here is dismissing the idiocy of the rioters of 1/6. Where do you perceive that was something I did?