Are we being pushed into another Civil War?

This is great...Well done!!!

 

You previously asked if it was "worth taking the chance" and the answer to your own question was an emphatic "No!" It sounds like you're saying that even if the evidence otherwise supported the indictment of Trump and holding trials in one or more of the cases, that prosecutors should not move forward because the risk of violence isn't worth it? Is that right?

If that's accurate, does it actually matter to you what the potential evidence might be or might not be? In other words, can you envision any evidence which could come to light which would justify an indictment of Trump and moving forward with a criminal trial? Do you have any concern that might preclude enforcement of the law with respect to political leaders and candidates going forward so long as they have supporters willing to do violence?

 

I suspect it might have to do with the hearing on the timing of the documents case (maybe they will argue this as a reason to delay). That happens later today.

 

I will give you another example - the Whisky Rebellion. Shortly after Washington became President, the US taxed whiskey. It was very unpopular. People rose up, with arms, against the government because they disapproved. Had Washington adopted your viewpoint, he would have dropped the tax and gave in, to “save lives.” Instead, he led the army to face the rebellion, and saved the infant Country.

I defer to Washington, and hope our government never caves to a minor, deluded few who threaten violence when they don’t get their way.

 

listening to my fav podcast which presumably is about country music, I learned an enormous amount about making moonshine & the whisky rebellion.

CR018/PH04 - White Lightning by Cocaine & Rhinestones: The History of Country Music

 

What did a barista do to the OP?

 

This is a really bad analogy for your argument. You're now comparing Trump to OJ, whom everyone knows was guilty. Should OJ not even have been indicted?

 

Must have asked his pronouns to write on his coffee order

 

well this is a fly in the ointment

 

Bravo to the OP on making a splash...

 

The Bee!

 

I personally reject the political worldview so many perpetuate & regurgitate on a daily basis in this country. Heated politics and political fringe extremists have always existed in this country as have "progressive" and "conservative" solutions to the problems we encounter. America is at its best when reasonable folks from both sides negotiate on solutions to whatever problems exist. Really when you back away from all the rhetoric, what is the problem, really, that we'd kill each other over? If this were 1978, 1988, or 1998, would we be having these discussions or anything like this? Maybe in some basement of loonies talking tough with their tin foil hats on about some conspiracy or another. The general population mocked those types. Really what is so different now? Because "others" threaten? Threaten what exactly or that hasn't always been there?

What has changed? At some point the powerful drugs of money and power have infected our leadership and media at an unprecedented level, and the internet & social media has given a voice to the basement loonies. There is power and money to be had in creating divisiveness. And unfortunately, instead of using discernment, a great number of people who would have otherwise belonged to a more rational majority 20 years ago, now feed the monsters and keep us in this vicious cycle. You are easily manipulated. It doesn't matter your education level or socioeconomic status, the human weakness of fear of the "other" is easily preyed upon.

Of course there are extremists in the population, who would have been extremists in any century, but for most part the real enemies are those that divide us for power and money. These are individuals and organizations that DO NOT buy into the original ideas of this country.

My question is why do you continue to support them? Why not support leaders, media, etc who lean into messages of unity (whatever flavor, red, blue, whatever)? Because of fear of the "other candidate" getting elected? Your playing their game by their rules. Please wake up from your political daze of scouring cyberspace for the trans threats, conservative or liberal cabals, "their coming for my guns", "their coming to lynch me", blah, blah, fear, fear, etc. Get to know people different than yourself. You may think they are weird, strange, "crazy", etc, but for the most part I'll bet your "temperature" towards them starts to come down just a bit.

What kind of world do you want to live in? Does it require eliminating a big portion of society? If so you need to check yourself and get out a bit.

 

This is the oath I took, so yes it is worth it and required.

"... do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

 

And based on this post I'm pretty sure you didn't know you were making an analogy when you compared OJ to Trump with regards to innocence vs not guilty.

 

Where did he say he thought Trump was an enemy of the state? He was responding, as a member of the military, to your hypothetical uprising of MAGA terrorists. He took an oath to defend the Constitution against them.

 

You're a lawyer? lol

Nice try.

I didn't say former President Trump is an enemy of the state. I was referring to your post in which you said that 200,000 of his armed supporters would take to the streets and kill people for political reasons... to which yes I said yes, I swore an oath to defend The Constitution and it's worth it to stop it as a Soldier.