While conceding that Trump did use the word "peacefully" once in a roughly one hour speech it was rather obvious that he as well as fellow speakers intended that his followers converge on the Capitol to prevent what they considered an injustice i.e. the certification of what Trump and the boys referred to as a fraudulent election. And if you think the assault on the Capitol was spontaneous you can educate yourself by clicking on any of the links below: Secret Service knew of plans for violence 10 days before Jan. 6 riot Prosecutors Report Evidence of Advance Coordination of Capitol Riots Capitol Attack Was Planned Openly Online For Weeks—Police Still Weren’t Ready Prosecutors: Proud Boys Gave Leaders "War Powers" Planned Ahead for Capitol Riot
I understand your point above - Trump says lots of things, so let’s not believe what he says (which begs the questions of when do we believe what he says; and how do we know when to listen and not listen). But I still don’t understand the retort. What did I add that was not accurate?
Other than your last sentence, which I appreciate but we will never agree, we can agree that Trump “blows a lot of hot air.” Where will we disagree is that I think the words of a President matter. The world listens to such words, and the world reacts to such words. Moreover, we all know the story of the boy who cried wolf, and with that lesson, how can someone who we just ignore due to his incessant articulation of “hot air” have any efficacy at running our country?!?!
Lots to unpack here, but there is zero percent chance, based upon what we now know Trump knew about his so- called election fraud claims, that “he believed” the election was fraudulent. He knew without a shadow of a doubt that he claims were contrived from thin air.
He planted the fraudulent election idea well before he even lost in 2020, so the fact that he went through with it should surprise no one.
They do matter, not nearly as much as policy and action matters. As far as how can such a person have any efficacy at running our country. Great question. But we saw it for four years. I think quality cabinet appointments and a quality team of advisors and support go a really long way. Those collective pieces might be even more important than the actual name at the top.
Pretty sure calling anyone Nazis is 100% against the rules. Maybe the mods will finally get some balls and take the trash out
Trump knew his claims were bogus. The man he hired, Ken Block, told him out of all the swing states, there were no more than a total of 200 cumulative fraud votes max. Trump's own AG, Barr, told Trump he was full of it when it came to fraud claims too. Trump didn't care. Still doesn't care.
We're discussing some sort of standard that Trump then broke when it's clear that your critiquing Trump's specific actions, not some standard that hadn't been broken. Tailoring the standard around hyper-specific actions is not a standard at all, it's an attack on the person at issue.
That is quite a far cry from an "insurrection." Sounds like he wanted to delay the certification of the election to ensure the election was not fraudulently decided via peaceful protest. When it's put that way, that seems awfully different from all of the hysteria peddled around here and in the mainstream media. I didn't say that it was spontaneous per se. I said it was disorganized. Do you disagree with that?
I am unable (literally incapable) to separate the standard, or the specific actions, from the person. That much is true as it applies to me.
You're using the actions of a specific person to create the standard around those specific actions. That's the problem.
I'm just visiting. I don't GAF what happens to me. But you should not be allowed to call anyone Nazis/ It was made very clear by the mods that it would NOT be tolerated by anyone. You still fighting your war soldier. You worthless F