In regards to Trump telling people to fight...

Here is what he was actually talking about.



In other words he did not call for violence. Which is why he is not being charged with any sort of incitement charge. Its why an "insurrection" charge is not being used. Because there was no attempt to "overthrow the government". It was a riot. Not an insurrection.

 

You are right that it wasn't an insurrection. Folks call it that for dramatic effect.

But it was a great example of gross negligence on the part of Trump and those who helped him spread his stolen election nonsense. He was playing with a loaded gun and it went off. For him it was just about saving face after losing and trying to weasel his way into staying in the White House, but for many of the folks who believed him and answered his call it was a lot more. If this had all happened over the course of a week, he might be due some slack, but he had started spreading rumors of stolen elections all the way back in the spring. He set up his ego defense and then carried it out without a moment's thought as to the repercussions, not just to his followers but to the country as a whole. Insurrection it may not have been, but gross persistent negligence it very much was. I'm not sure if there's any criminal responsibility there but there is certainly a moral and ethical one and if his followers had either of the latter, they would never put that man back in the White House.

 

I 100% agree

 

If you look through much of the claims by Trump haters they rely on false information and twisting of words. Like the above. Like when they claim that when Trump said "find votes" he was trying to get the Georgia official to provide fake votes, when he wasn't if you actually look at the full context. Trump haters have consistently lied about what was said. And its always shown that TPTB do this "selective editing" on a regular basis.

 

I don't think under normal circumstances the riot would have happened. Even with Trumps rhetoric. I think a lot of things converged to make happen, what happened.

A few days ago I read a post which said that it wasn't until Trump that people started to question election results. But that isn't actually true. It might be true from that posters perspective, but its not true in reality. I myself have questioned election results for LOOONG before Trump even ran for office the first time around. And I would bet if you looked at the history of any political discussion forum you'll see questioning going on going back probably decades.

Add in how Democrats were changing election rules, without legislative approval, in many key States, due to "covid safety issues". Add in a media that amplifies rather than telling the whole truth. Add in the psychological effects from "stay at home" orders. And many other things that I could list.... And it all culminated into what happened.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to "excuse" Trumps rhetoric. It too is a part of those "lots of things" that I'm talking about. From what I can tell though, there is no one thing alone that set off the riot. Everything combined is what set it off. That is why I myself don't blame Trump for what happened. Because nothing in his history shows that he actually wanted a riot to happen. He's been against riots from the day he entered office. Even the Eastman memo's that certain posters like to point to showed that violence was not wanted (they conveniently ignore that part though). If you took any one thing that was happening that year, and it alone would not have resulted in what happened on 1/6. Put it all together though...well...we saw the results.

 

I credit this to Trump's intelligence. He is not dumb enough to say let's overthrow the government.

 

Cute. Leaving the implication that he really did mean to attempt to overthrow the government.

 

He was talking about a violent insurrection. This is not proven by just a video, but by testimony of his closest and most trusted advisors... including his own family, recordings, phone calls, ... and many other types of evidence . As well as his actions during, before and after the insurrection.

It took six days to present all the evidence of what he meant to the public. And a jury will hear all that evidence again, and more, in his criminal trial for sedition. At the end of which have they get a chance to decide. I can tell you: it does not look good for Trump.

There is too much evidence... even beyond what was presented in his Impeachment trial. I would suggest using the time left before he is convicted for insurrection that you come to grips with the fact that evidence is just overwhelming. And that excuses, rationalizations, and strawman arguments will NOT work outside MAGA world... and certainly not in the judicial system.

Or you can simply use your "Deep State Conspiracy Theory" to convince yourself that reality is not reality. But that's not going to help Trump.... Just you.

 

Yes, because it was an attempt to negate a lawful election.

 

But, no crime was committed, no matter how you spin it.

 

And that isn't illegal.

 

Well, you disagree with the State of Georgia and the District of Columbia where proceedings are proceeding. There is also some concern it violates what the Constitution says about elections, but I am not a lawyer.

 

No, he wasn't the proof is right there before your eyes and ears, yet you refuse to listen. And apparently what you think people testified to is of your own imagination.

Also, what trial for sedition? That is in none of the charges that I've seen. Care to link to it?

 

Democrats have used the same law that Trump was trying to use. Were their actions unlawful?

 

None of the charges is about insurrection.

 

Georgia isn't charging Trump with inciting an insurrection, neither are the Feds.

You probably shouldn't use the Georgia donut roll as a credible example in the future, BTW...lol

 

WBK, what happens if Fatti survives this unprofessional distraction? Holy MAGA!??

 

There is a reason that Dems are using charges against Trump that are broad in nature. RICO, Conspiracy, Obstruction....all of them are broad enough to fit almost any situation. And according to many lawyers RICO may not even be broad enough as many have expressed doubt that it fits what they claim of Trump. That reason is that the left uses words to twist and spin. And they are admittedly quite masterful at it. They've even managed to convince people that math is racist...that's how skilled they are. One of THE most logical processes out there, and somehow its racist. And they've convinced people of it. Same goes for "time".

Make no mistake, the charges against Trump are PURELY political in nature. This is even proven in Trump being found "guilty" of fraud by Engoran (however his name is spelled), who used a TAX assessment evaluation to claim that fraud happened. Something that does not actually determine the selling value of a piece of property. Which is determined by, normally, at least 4 parties, with two coming to an agreement on the value. 2 property assessors, 1 buyer, or loan giver, 1 seller (owner). EVERYONE that has ever bought a piece of property knows that a tax assessment is never used in the process of selling/buying.

 

Then the case will no doubt move on. Duh. But guess what....still no charges of insurrection or rebellion are involved. And you simply cannot get past that FACT.

 

It'll look even more like a kangaroo court than it already does. That's what...lol

 

No need, what are the charges again?

 

But Fatti will not be the main attraction WBK?!

 

The charges are bogus. That's what.

 

But what are they WBK, it's a list....

 

Fatty's survival and the case's survival are one in the same.

If she's DQ'ed, the case is history.