But thanks to corrupt cowards like Mitch McDonnell and pathetic liars like Kevin McCarty, immediacy didn’t happen. They didn’t use the political tools available (impeachment/conviction), instead kicking it over to the judicial process. Now the judicial process is “election interference”, and predictably, the cult believes it.
Here's ac question. If Trump didn't want the violence, why did he wait for 2 hours to release a statement to stop the obvious violence the whole world was watching?
And even the “this is what happens” tweet (after his staff begged for hours to get something out) was chilling. Basically “you got what you deserved, now go in peace”. A real humanitarian, that one. In reality, that tweet only came out once the violence was settled down and it was clear his autoglope scheme didn’t work, and it ended mostly because it became clear Mike Pence was not going to be a participant. Otherwise, who knows.
Regarding the CO supreme Ct ruling - if you are a self described originalist such as Scalia and Thomas, how do you ignore the actual words of the 14th amendment? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...the-colorado-ruling-read-the-dissents/676920/
Bless your heart, you must have a lot of badges. You'll get more chances to listen to Trump's speech...at his trial. Talking about an inability to properly interpret events. Wow.
Trick question!!!!! He wanted the violence, he enjoyed the violence. His only regret? The violence didn't work.
Their out here would be to invalidate the mechanism by which he was removed from the ballot. Say it's a federal issue, congress has to do it, etc.
You have provided nothing. Absolutely nothing that shows trump called for violence. Yet you tried and continue to try and take small snippets and say they are something they are not. You have been propagandized into believing the false narrative. Well actually I don’t think you have been propagandized. I actually think you are smart and dont care that you lie about what happened. I hope I am wrong and that you actually are propagandized as at least you would be ignorant and not evil in your intentions. But you have shown me enough to say you know exactly what you are doing. And you don’t care that you are lying to push the false narrative.
That odd disconnect you have that prevents you from properly processing data has reared it's head again.
Perhaps you are in some kind of backward land because Trump has talked out of both sides of his mouth since day one.
If Trump was opposed to the violence, do you think he did everything in his power to stop it as quickly as he possibly could?
Haha, notice how you avoid the questions. You wanted context but not too much context. That is because you so desperately don't want to think about the actual issue, as then you would need to admit that you are a willing supporter of political violence, so long as it has the right party ID.
Here's a question - do the events of Jan 6th happen without Trump organizing that event and giving that speech? Clearly no, they don't. I'm with McConnell all the way on this one. He clearly provoked the events of that day.
Trumpers are here incorrectly interpreting what Trump said. Here's the fix to help them understand what he really meant: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard...(but) if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."
I still haven't read the Colorado Opinions but have some thoughts and questions generally. There's been a lot of discussion about the incitement of violence. I tend to doubt that Trump's January 6th speech meets that test. But it seems like someone could "engage" (the word used in the 14th Amendment) in an insurrection or rebellion without having incited imminent violence on the day in question. My recollection is that Trump's J6 indictments do not include a charge for seditious conspiracy, which seems the be the closest federal crime to "insurrection"? I don't think Smith charged Trump with seditious conspiracy, and I'm trying to think through why he didn't in light of the fact that others were charged and convicted of it. Thoughts?
Yes they would have. The militias were already there in force ready to go and they would have triggered it all any way. I think what we would have seen are groups of people heading to the Capital instead of one big mass. But to say it wouldn't have happened if Trump didn't say GO, fail to understand certain groups were going to go no matter what.
I don’t think trump could have done anything to stop what happened that day. Just like he did not call for it. He was not going to be able to stop it. It happened. But it sure as heck was not an insurrection as some want to believe. If it were…trump would have violated the law and called for violence. But he did not…
