Has America Imploded?

[Steve R.]

It is also not acceptable to dismiss facts as opinion.

Some times is not acceptable to state that something is a "fact" as if were cast in concrete and undisputedly "true". Facts can be revised.

A small story that appeared today: Dire Wolves Were Not Really Wolves, New Genetic Clues Reveal

 

[Isaac]

But since they removed him for inciting a riot

Are you referring to the riot that started 20 minutes before Trump's speech began?

Something you apparently don't know. Now you do.

 

[moke123]

Impressive.
Now do climate change.

Are you referring to the riot that started 20 minutes before Trump's speech began?

Something you apparently don't know. Now you do.

Trumps speech began well before the election.

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

time stamped 1:11 end of his speech

 

[Vassago]

Or we refer to his tweet, naturally, from Twitter.

Dec. 19: Trump tweeted his praise for a report by his adviser Peter Navarro alleging election fraud: "A great report by Peter. Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election. Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"

 

[Vassago]

As he continued to retweet the plans set up by these groups on that day leading up to the day of and praising them. Some of the people he retweeted were already on watch lists due to the ties to possible extremism. He egged it on. He knew there was a risk and didn't care.

 

[moke123]

Navarro was on fox thursday (1/14) still claiming trump won.

 

[Mike Krailo]

Still haven't seen any evidence of potus saying anything that directly incited violence. People were there to protest the stolen election process. There is no excuse for the violence that occurred, but blaming potus is purely political. That is crystal clear.

 

[Vassago]

Still haven't seen any evidence of potus saying anything that directly incited violence. People were there to protest the stolen election process. There is no excuse for the violence that occurred, but blaming potus is purely political. That is crystal clear.

He knew the groups that were going were prone to it yet he personally retreated their plans. He's either really native and stupid or he knew what he was doing. Probably a lot of both. In either case, you can be held liable for something you cause out of ignorance or with purpose.

 

[Jon]

Leaked video of Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey telling his employees that this censorship of Trump is just the beginning:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1349857189641510912

 

[Jon]

I just read this morning that the FBI knew of a planned violence and "war" in Washington, despite a senior FBI spokesperson claiming otherwise. Given the recent proven corruption within the anti-Trump FBI leadership, it hardly surprises me.

The Democrats impeach Trump in hours, unlike the usual months set by precedent. No investigation, fact-finding, or due process. Instead, knee-jerk political theatre because Nancy Pelosi just wants to say Trump was impeached twice. How childish. For a party that opposes hate speech, I have never seen so much hate in my life.

So here we have it, a president impeached without a proper trial for inciting a crowd to violence when it was already pre-planned. This is troubling.

For those who say this might not be the case, because the investigation is not yet complete, how can you then impeach a president without gathering the evidence first? I think history will show that the actions of this Democrat party will go down as one of the most corrupt in history. A president unfairly impeached without trial, just like the witch hunts from 100's of years ago. It is a stain on the democracy of the US.

Washington Post: FBI warned of violent 'war' at Capitol in internal report issued day before deadly riot

The FBI warned of a violent "war" at the US Capitol in an internal report issued a day before last week's deadly siege, but it wasn't acted on urgently enough to prevent the domestic terrorist attack, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.

edition.cnn.com

 

[Steve R.]

So here we have it, a president impeached without a proper trial for inciting a crowd to violence when it was already pre-planned. This is troubling.

• If the riot was "pre-planned", then the case can be made that Trump did not incite anything. In-fact, Trump called for a peaceful rally. Nevertheless their is a conspiracy angle to consider. Trump Derangement Syndrome exists. There is a possiblity that some behind the scenes entity, otherwise known as "they", manipulated the situation to incite a riot.
• One person who was arrested has been identified as a "left wing activist". Why was that person there? The arrest of one person does not prove that there was a coordinated effort by the "left" to turn a peaceful rally into a riot, but it does raise the need to investigate.
• Evidently, law enforcement was dimly aware that things were "brewing", but failed to coordinate. This of course is one of those after-the-fact, gee-wiz, how did we miss it situations? Now the frantic blame game finger point has begun. The important point here, before assigning blame on Trump, investigate.
• One of the most galling aspects of this. Democrats who openly condemned police and called for people to riot have now disingenuously flipped to praise the police and to call what they previously referred to as "peaceful protest", as "violent insurrection". The Mayor of Washington DC, Muriel Bowser, evens supported previous the violence instigated by Black Lives Matter. Sanctimonious drivel. This is political manipulation and demonstrates that Democrats abide by no ethical standards. If my side protests, that is freedom of speech, if the other side protests, that is criminal behavior.

Tucker: Radicals are using threats, fear to control Americans | Fox News Video

'Tucker Carlson Tonight' host asks why Democrats are calling the Capitol Hill riot a racist insurrection

video.foxnews.com

Despite the title, the video below begins with showing Democrats calling for violence and occupying federal buildings despite their claimed new found conscience of supporting police and decrying violence. Political opportunism run amok by Democrats. If Democrats had any ethical integrity, they would have voted against the article of impeachment based on their own rhetoric.

Hannity: Troves of Spygate documents about to be made public​

 

[Jon]

If the riot was "pre-planned", then the case can be made that Trump did not incite anything.

That was precisely my point.

 

[moke123]

Rather than engage in whataboutism, consider the people he was addressing. While what he said may not incite you personally it obviously incited others.

Here's one example, albeit involving a lunatic. "He felt like he was answering the call of the president", "He thought he was there at the invitation of the president",

https://twitter.com/x/status/1349912400011665414

If the riot was "pre-planned", then the case can be made that Trump did not incite anything.

That argument can also be used to prove elements of incitement. If trump's aware of the propensity of the crowd he's addressing, such as being briefed of the possibility of violence or rioting, then his words and tone to that crowd take on a more direct meaning. To paraphrase, "Lets fight for your country", "I'm with you", "I'll march down Pennsylvania Avenue with you"

 

[Steve R.]

Rather than engage in whataboutism, consider the people he was addressing. While what he said may not incite you personally it obviously incited others.

Here's one example, albeit involving a lunatic. "He felt like he was answering the call of the president", "He thought he was there at the invitation of the president",

https://twitter.com/x/status/1349912400011665414

That argument can also be used to prove elements of incitement. If trump's aware of the propensity of the crowd he's addressing, such as being briefed of the possibility of violence or rioting, then his words and tone to that crowd take on a more direct meaning. To paraphrase, "Lets fight for your country", "I'm with you", "I'll march down Pennsylvania Avenue with you"

What a convoluted incomprehensible application of logic. When Trump explicitly calls for a "peaceful rally", this is somehow twisted to say that he somehow really means violence. However, when Democrats call for actual violence, they are incomprehensibly calling for a "peaceful rally". Democrats have been actually inciting the gullible mob into violent action. Also, as you should be aware, pulling one person out of a crowd as an arbitrary cherry-picked example, is not necessarily reflective of the entire crowd. You should be condemning the lying Democratic politicians who have been calling for violence and now disingenuously claim to be for peace.

PS: Those on the "left" routinely assert that "right" wingers are the ones somehow responsible for the violence at their so called "mostly peaceful" protests (with the violence actually endorsed by Democratic politicians). Given that possibility, it is entirely plausible that a "left" winger infiltrated the very peaceful Trump rally to incite the violence that eventually occurred.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Just one on the many embedded Antifa members wearing Trump gear. Amazingly he made bail fairly quickly.

John Sullivan

 

[Jon]

Here's one example, albeit involving a lunatic. "He felt like he was answering the call of the president", "He thought he was there at the invitation of the president",

You said it yourself, a lunatic. But do you believe everything someone says who is under investigation? The fact that his attorney is speaking about it may suggest that he is trying to absolve himself of prosecution. It is a poor example. Besides, is Trump responsible for lunatics that ignore his call for a peaceful protest?

If you think that Trump is responsible for what he says and that his followers act on what the president wants, why do you ignore the previous hundreds of days where Trump has continually made his position clear: he believes in peaceful protest, law and order. He has said it so many times, his view on the topic is not under question. Yet you provide an example of a "lunatic" who does the opposite of what Trump wants.

 

[Vassago]

The riot was planned and Trump shared the tweets about it and egged on the very people that planned it. How would he not be partially responsible? In a position of power, you have responsibilities and can certainly be at fault for what others do when you not only don't tell others not to do it, but you share their posts knowing what they are up to. That's basically giving approval. He knew that.

Unless he really is going senile.

 

[Steve R.]

The riot was planned and Trump shared the tweets about it and egged on the very people that planned it. How would he not be partially responsible? In a position of power, you have responsibilities and can certainly be at fault for what others do when you not only don't tell others not to do it, but you share their posts knowing what they are up to. That's basically giving approval. He knew that.

Unless he really is going senile.

This is going to extreme nit-picking. First, where is the evidence that the riot was planned? If planned, who planned it, Antifa to hurt Trump? Occasionally, peaceful rallies do turn unexpectedly violent. But this incident seems to be an example of where some are looking for the smallest almost impossible to find piece of "evidence" to inflate it into a massive mountain of conjectural "evidence" that is propped-up by negative distorted incomprehensible "logic".

Why the focus on Trump? We have Democrat after Democrat who has called for violence. The incoming vice-President, Harris has even supported bailing out those arrested for committing violence so they get out on the street and commit more violence. The Mayor of Washington DC, were the Trump rally took place, even supported the violence of Black Lives Matter this past summer. These very same Democrats who have proposed to castrate law enforcement, condemn law enforcement by calling them all sorts of vile names, encourage looting and rioting, now ridiculously stand-up in Congress and disingenuously claim, with great sanctimony, to now be for law and order so that they can impeach Trump. They had no business voting to impeach Trump based on their promotion of violence. The focus of the discussion should be on them, as they are liars and political opportunists who are selling garbage to the gullible public. They are the threat to democracy.

 

[moke123]

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard," Trump said in his speech. "Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for [the] integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time, far longer than this four-year period."

• "We're gathered together in the heart of our nation's Capitol for one very, very basic and simple reason, to save our democracy."
• "We will not let them silence your voices. We're not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen."
• "Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that's what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal."
• "That's what they've done and what they're doing. We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved."
• "When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very different rules."
• "Let them get out. Let the weak ones get out. This is a time for strength....It's all part of the comprehensive assault on our democracy and the American people to finally standing up and saying, 'No.' This crowd is again a testament to it."
• "You will have an illegitimate president, that's what you'll have. And we can't let that happen."
• "We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we've been forced to believe over the past several weeks. We've amassed overwhelming evidence about a fake election."
• "We're going to see whether or not we have great and courageous leaders or whether or not we have leaders that should be ashamed of themselves throughout history, throughout eternity, they'll be ashamed. And you know what? If they do the wrong thing, we should never ever forget that they did. Never forget. We should never ever forget."

Whataboutism:

The focus of the discussion should be on them, as they are liars and political opportunists who are selling garbage to the gullible public. They are the threat to democracy.

 

[Jon]

In a position of power, you have responsibilities and can certainly be at fault for what others do when you not only don't tell others not to do it

But he did say protest peacefully, so he told them not to do it. Meanwhile, Biden remained largely silent while there were over 40,000 arrests at the BLM "peaceful protests" by July 2020, so to me that suggests perhaps you view Biden's actions as "impeachable." If you want to argue the point that Trump is in a position of power and Biden is not, that would be inaccurate. He was the leading candidate to be president and represented nearly 100 million people.