Trump's acting homeland security chief acknowledged that far right extremists were inciting violence at BLM protests.
Call it the summer of fire all you want but don’t get upset when others call January 6th an insurrection and attempted coup.
Statistics show that far right extremists have killed 28 times more people (194 ÷ 7 = 27.7) than far left extremists and 18 times more people (194 ÷ 11 = 17.6) than Islamist extremists .
For the record, Biden and other top Dems condemned the violence at some BLM protests, saying lawbreakers inciting violence (whoever they are) should be prosecuted.
Yes, because Fox and others ran nonstop footage then of violent uprisings in Ukraine and Belarus and convinced these people that St. Paul, Joliet and Portland are nothing left but soot and rubble.
This morning, it was announced that Paul Pelosi, husband of Nancy, was attacked in their San Francisco home. But you know, some brown guy littered in Spokane so same.
Yes, more info is needed. It could be some of the lawlessness going on in the area in general couldn't it? If nothing was stolen and it was only an assault I tend to think you are right.
I can handle it fine, it's part of life. I don't obsess over it and use mental gymnastics to prove to myself that the other team is all bad like some here do. Seems like the ones that can't handle it are the left how try their darndest to justify the heinous actions of the violent portions of their team. Is there something more to discuss other than the jackasses in the op are idiots? I said that first post. Nowhere have I defended them; I've been clear as day.
As did CNN and MSNBC, remember the video of the report saying mostly peaceful protest and a build burned in the background?
Do yourself a favor and look up and see who made the concerted effort to bail all those arrested out of jail.
Then why the need to go on and on about the 2020 protests and riots when they have absolutely nothing to do with the thread?
I call BS to your "all those arrested". I highly doubt they bailed out violent offenders. They were probably mostly disorderly conduct type offenses or curfew violations. Feel free to prove they bailed out "all those arrested", including violent offenders, with sources and links.
No defense eh? Let’s review the tape: Start out with a deflection rather than straight condemnation or discussion. More OT deflecting. Bothsides More OT deflecting. “Just a couple idiots”. A whole lot of deflection. But da MaInStReAm MeDiA, aka more OT deflecting Deflecting and dishonest (since I’m quite sure none of the efforts were especially aimed at bailing out violent people). Anyway maybe there isn’t too much to discuss with these two very fine patriots, but you certainly found plenty of OT deflections from the past for someone not interested in “defending” them. I think you covered them all! Maybe we can throw in a Bill Ayer’s reference for old time’s sake.
The bothsidesism between 1/6 and Summer 2020 is utter stupidity because one was about overthrowing an election and the other wasn't. That's the salient aspect not the violence or property damage.
Do you not understand the adjective "mostly" and are you not aware that even a small number of persons are capable of arson and extensive vandalism?
Seems that the organization promoting the behavior of the "idiots" is the subject of a lawsuit. Seems that if the behavior was limited to those two clowns the voting rights organizations wouldn't have sued them and the DOJ wouldn't be investigating the organization. Arizona ballot box watchers face lawsuits | 12news.com https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...n-of-vigilante-voter-intimidation-in-arizona/
I made a comment initially about how some of the far right have gone totally off the reservation just like some of the far left have. Someone opined it’s most of the pub party (which I think is ridiculous). I still suggest there are plenty of crazies on both sides but it’s not the majority of either party. Some here NEVER want to hear about the crazies in their own house and prefer to portray the other side as the ones that are nuts(or a threat to democracy, or a threat to freedom, etc). The comments and replies evolved from there, and that’s what happens with threads. Someone comments someone replies with facts and or options and others chime in, that’s the way these boards go. The many years I’ve been here I’ve seen it happen time and again. It seems when some don’t like what’s being said, a common on thing now is to try to discredit the poster by saying stick to the topic and you know as well as I do many of these topics are intertwined. I guess I could just ignore when posters reply to posts if they aren’t singularly related to the thread? If that’s the new rules then most of these threads need to get purged of off topic comments. Question is who is the final arbitrator of that?
