USA politics, recent events.

[LastManOnline]

Not quite.

From Wikipedia:

Pennsylvania:

On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters, a process known as gerrymandering. Less than one month later, a new congressional map was drawn and approved. The new map would take place in the May primaries.[3] With the new congressional map in place, Democrats had a net gain of three congressional seats, giving the Democratic Party half of Pennsylvania's congressional seats.


Michigan:

In 2018, the state electorate passed proposals to create an independent redistricting commission,


*Edit: I'm not sure if any redistricting took place in Michigan since that time

Helpful post. A bit like informing us that that the murder victim had 4 instead of 5 bullet wounds. Don't miss the elephant in the room.

What you perhaps I advertently highlighted in your post is the republican practice of "gerrymandering. Add to that all the other means of trying to disenfranchised voters. If none of that works, just send down the local armed militia to stand outside the voting stations. Not very democratic, is it

 

[andyb]

Not quite.

From Wikipedia:

Pennsylvania:

On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters, a process known as gerrymandering. Less than one month later, a new congressional map was drawn and approved. The new map would take place in the May primaries.[3] With the new congressional map in place, Democrats had a net gain of three congressional seats, giving the Democratic Party half of Pennsylvania's congressional seats.


Michigan:

In 2018, the state electorate passed proposals to create an independent redistricting commission,


*Edit: I'm not sure if any redistricting took place in Michigan since that time

I think you've undermined your own case there, it says the Republicans were gerrymandering. Unless I've misunderstood your point.

 

[nicebutdim]

Helpful post. A bit like informing us that that the murder victim had 4 instead of 5 bullet wounds. Don't miss the elephant in the room.

What you perhaps I advertently highlighted in your post is the republican practice of "gerrymandering. Add to that all the other means of trying to disenfranchised voters. If none of that works, just send down the local armed militia to stand outside the voting stations. Not very democratic, is it

Not inadvertant at all and there's no denying the history of gerrymandering by US republicans. I'm not sure how historic events tie in to a thread entitled "USA politics, recent events"?

The information I posted is of little relevance, but was a response to your post that seemed to assume control of state legisature as overriding factor in the overall electoral processes of that state.

 

[nicebutdim]

I think you've undermined your own case there, it says the Republicans were gerrymandering. Unless I've misunderstood your point.

"the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters"

 

[LastManOnline]

The information I posted is of little relevance, but was

Would be really helpful if you could focus on the relevant stuff

 

[nicebutdim]

Would be really helpful if you could focus on the relevant stuff

Like quoting sentences in their full context?

Not sure why you appear to be so angry, but think it's best if I step away now.

 

[andyb]

"the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters"

That's right, it's in response to the 2012 changes which gave the Republicans extra seats, that was the gerrymandering.
It's righting a wrong.

 

[Darkwood]

Correct. Darkwood has written the vast majority of the content and reading back through it I find little of substance . What's clear is he is a big fan of ex president Trump and believes he has been cheated out of an election by voter fraud. The fact that Trump's vice President, his own attorney General, (William Barr) said otherwise matters, little. The states where disputed votes supposedly took place were all republican controlled. They all stated there was no fraud. The judges agreed including the trump appointed ones. But in Trump's World facts could be overturned by "alternative facts" and conspiracy theories.

Anyone popping in to the forum for the first time would think he had inadvertently stumbled onto "Parler-lite"

I sat through several hours of open hearing in the contested states, little to none of these have had the chance to be presented before judge and jury to be ruled on so any claims of no fraud have no meaning as no cases have allowed evidence to be heard or evidence to be gathered even though in some counties to this day we have court orders to allow for access to ballots and machines, they have effectively all be stonewalled repeatedly, your comment about William Barr - please do me the honours and recite what he actually said word for word and in full context.
I will ask again about an earlier comment you made, you said Trump has brought a white supremacist group from the fringes into the mainstream or words to that effect, you still haven't told me who this group is as I cannot find any.
This is not about 'in Trump's world', there has been individual private claims of voter fraud and also Powell brought independent claims herself which are not a part of Trump's claims.

I assume then if you say that no voter fraud occurred you can explain why we now have numerous people on trial for voter fraud and are on film admitting to it, I find it amazing how these cases simply never make it to the mainstream media, it's almost like they had an agenda but hey, that would be me been a conspiracist again even though we have hours of CNN secretly taped conversations of hows to protect Biden from negative stories and how to attack Trump.

PS was not on Parlour or any forum of that kind, I don't even have a twitter and don't bother using FB although I have FB just to catch up on local bands playing.
I actually follow a group who have channels that breakdown the legal process and analyse the actions and merits of the cases and explain without bias what is occurring if you must know, I also follow people like Viva Frei who is a Canadian law expert and when he comments on US law he brings in guest speakers to confirm US laws and legal process when he need verification, I only know of parlour through their videos and if you watch YT recent one on parlour suing Amazon you will realise not all is as it seems or is told to you by the media.

 

[derek]

Proud Boys would be the white supremacist group being referred to I'd imagine.

 

[Midwest]

I wish you would read my posts and stop trying to put words in my mouth, at no point have I said there were no Trump supporters in the riots on Capitol Hill.
I was clear in stating the Pelosi is pushing for an impeachment on Trump based on the speech of the Trump rally 2miles down from Capitol Hill, she was clear about it been that speech that she claims incited the disturbances on Capitol Hill, at no point did I mention nore did she about tweets prior to or following the breach of Capitol Hill.

I never said the National Guard were in Cahoots, the national Guard is a large body, I cited a piece that gave specific names of the local police Chief Commander and who he reported to, it was the failure of who he reported to that the national guard was not brought in.

There were several prominent arrests over the breach of Capitol Hill and through FB messenger and Twitter the FBI have found a pre organised intent to cause maximum disturbances with some information asking for members of the government and opposition to be kidnapped and or killed, on such person was a deluded Trump fan who was found with a hit list and arsenal of weapons, I never said there were no trump supporters involved, I clearly stated the the mainstream media were telling a very different story to that of what happened that day, leaving out the fact that many arrested were there who participated in the initial push and breach of Capitol Hill were indeed Antifa and BLM, some well known and already facing previous charges for rioting.

When the building was breached and people got in at some point security were filmed letting in people through 2 side doors, people simply followed the crowd at this stage and starting walking in and walking around, there was plenty of uploaded footing that show people walking about filming the building and surrounding while in other areas their were been violent.

The link to the guy I cited - his lengthy video even shows him talking to a journalist at the end admitting to pre arranging it and he says he was sorry he couldn't tell her too much (her been a journalist) but he also goes on to say, "I told you it was going to be epic or words to that effect, isn't this the best, I just couldn't tell you too much," his internet history directly links him to Antifa, BLM and it shows him organising with groups for this event and attack, he is not a Trump fan and he came equipped but like I keep saying, the media ignore any of these hardened violent protesters who had pre-planned it and continue to say the riots were a reaction to Trump's speech that day.
PS - I am not claiming conspiracy, the FBI were aware of intentions of known groups, it was even publicly announced they had intelligence on such matters yet did nothing, requested no back up and then denied it after, the FBI will have reported this to Pelosi given she was in the chair that day, so 2 scenarios

They did report their concern and Pelosi told them to do nothing or they didn't tell Pelosi which raises bigger questions.
If they didn't tell Pelosi then the Chief Commander reported to Pelosi's rep' for the national guard and he should have also reported it been a security issue of the building she was in.
Somebody somewhere made a conscious decision to ignore the preemptive threat alert or ignored the active threat alert and from the citation of the interview given by the Chief Commander it looks on Pelosi in both scenarios unless by massive coincidence she was never told by 2 departments that were there to warn of her of such security matters.
Take from this what you will but when the sequence of event do not add up and then we see an unconstitutional attempt to impeach Trump it does point consistently to political motivation was in play and when I say unconstitutional I mean they are trying to impeach a private citizen now which impeachment does not cover and they are trying to do it by subverting the law and Trump's rights to a fair hearing.. now that is corruption right there if I ever saw it, all to ensure he cannot run again in 4yrs time.

I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’ve summarised the suspicions you’ve made.

Lets face it none of us know what really took place, we were not there. As typical in large scale violent demonstrations, it’s difficult to comprehend how this unfolded. We gain our information, from various sources, mostly the internet, which I have.

Indeed there was intelligence on what’s was to happen, you only have to look at all the stuff on the internet beforehand, about ‘stopthesteal’. I’ve read that the Capitol Police, said there was no such intelligence.

For your first point, the various persons were present in and around the Capitol because of the happenings in there, but also by various tweets Trump had been made leading up to this event, not least his speech, for many days before. He IMO incited them before and during.

Again from the internet, the Capitol Police are responsible for the security of the building. Washington, D.C., is not a state: Because D.C. does not have a governor, D.C. Guard deployments must be approved by the city’s National Guard army secretary, Ryan McCarthy. This is a slower process than a governor hastily declaring a state of emergency and calling in National Guard forces in large numbers.

Pelosi is not in charge of the security of the Capitol building (various internet searches).

Quite simply the Capitol Police were overwhelmed by the size of the mob. We will have to wait and see, why they did not have additional resources. They only have 2000 officers. Even if they were all deployed, that would be insufficient to protect the grounds and building IMO, in such an incident. Perhaps they were too vain to ask.

For your last point, there is precedent for impeachment of a person, after they have left office. Leave you all to google that.

Apologies for the long post folks ?

 

[MDJ]

Lets face it none of us know what really took place, we were not there.

Yeah we were mate, I watched the whole thing on TV and the Trump speech before hand, he asked the mob to go to the Capitol and said he would go in with them, he knew the Secret service wouldn't allow him to go but wound the crowd up and hundreds of out of control yobbo's then attacked the building and entered, Trump incited it and 5 people ended up dead, he was to blame, and thank God he has now gone, I want him to get found guilty, because if he doesn't he will be back next time in 2024, and it wouldn't surprise me if he won again, they are that daft over there.

 

[LastManOnline]

I sat through several hours of open hearing in the contested states, little to none of these have had the chance to be presented before judge and jury to be ruled on so any claims of no fraud have no meaning as no cases have allowed evidence to be heard or evidence to be gathered even though in some counties to this day we have court orders to allow for access to ballots and machines, they have effectively all be stonewalled repeatedly, your comment about William Barr - please do me the honours and recite what he actually said word for word and in full context.
I will ask again about an earlier comment you made, you said Trump has brought a white supremacist group from the fringes into the mainstream or words to that effect, you still haven't told me who this group is as I cannot find any.
This is not about 'in Trump's world', there has been individual private claims of voter fraud and also Powell brought independent claims herself which are not a part of Trump's claims.

I assume then if you say that no voter fraud occurred you can explain why we now have numerous people on trial for voter fraud and are on film admitting to it, I find it amazing how these cases simply never make it to the mainstream media, it's almost like they had an agenda but hey, that would be me been a conspiracist again even though we have hours of CNN secretly taped conversations of hows to protect Biden from negative stories and how to attack Trump.

PS was not on Parlour or any forum of that kind, I don't even have a twitter and don't bother using FB although I have FB just to catch up on local bands playing.
I actually follow a group who have channels that breakdown the legal process and analyse the actions and merits of the cases and explain without bias what is occurring if you must know, I also follow people like Viva Frei who is a Canadian law expert and when he comments on US law he brings in guest speakers to confirm US laws and legal process when he need verification, I only know of parlour through their videos and if you watch YT recent one on parlour suing Amazon you will realise not all is as it seems or is told to you by the media.

You started a thread which consists largely of your opinions and speculations. It consists primarily of "ifs, buts and mayby, s" Unfortunately hard facts are extremely hard to come by in your posts. When presented with the hard facts of Trump's blatant dishonesty and lying, you chose to ignore them and instead inform us of "declassified this and that" that you have read. You profess ignorance of the fact that Trump made white supremacy fashionable again.The proverbial dogs in the street know it. How did you manage to miss it??despite the hours of research you apparently put in to American politics. Trump took the traditional republican "dog whistle" (an appeal to right wingers) and replaced it with a trumpet.
On this forum, responsible sparks (and I don't doubt you are one by the way) are constantly reminding DIY posters of potential danger once we discern they don't understand what they are dealing with. Trump's politics are no different. They have danger written all over them. The responsible thing to do is call it out.

 

[LastManOnline]

The responsible thing to do is call it out.

P. S. I don, t or won't be getting involved in politics myself. I took that decision some time ago. My purpose in commenting on this thread (this will be my final comment on the matter) is because it has in my view crossed a line. It promotes idea, s which are simply not to anyone's advantage. Idea, s that are divisive. It would be a terribly pity if these type of thread was to become acceptable. This forum I have come to value. Its worth fighting for. Have a good day everyone?

 

[MDJ]

Trump had an unmatched entertainment value, I miss him.

Agree, I loved seeing the Clowns at the Circus when I was a kid

 

[MDJ]

trump was a blast of fresh air. hillary would have put the us into a rercession. just like bidet will do next.

LOL, Never seen such an idiotic post

 

[Darkwood]

You started a thread which consists largely of your opinions and speculations. It consists primarily of "ifs, buts and mayby, s" Unfortunately hard facts are extremely hard to come by in your posts. When presented with the hard facts of Trump's blatant dishonesty and lying, you chose to ignore them and instead inform us of "declassified this and that" that you have read. You profess ignorance of the fact that Trump made white supremacy fashionable again.The proverbial dogs in the street know it. How did you manage to miss it??despite the hours of research you apparently put in to American politics. Trump took the traditional republican "dog whistle" (an appeal to right wingers) and replaced it with a trumpet.
On this forum, responsible sparks (and I don't doubt you are one by the way) are constantly reminding DIY posters of potential danger once we discern they don't understand what they are dealing with. Trump's politics are no different. They have danger written all over them. The responsible thing to do is call it out.

You may want to look in the mirror of your own posts, you have repeatedly done exactly what you accuse me of doing, you fail to even address a question I asked now 3 times so really who is peddling in claims you do not back up... please name these white supremacists that is all I asked and still keep asking, I remind you I do not follow sites that peddle hearsay, propaganda and conspiracy, I watch legal debate and follow real proceedings and the evidence provided.
At no point have I denied dishonest acts of Trump you may have put but you take my position not to raise them as a position that I do not admit to them which is presumption on your part, a point I made earlier btw, all sides of politics has its bad points and I do not deny that but I pursue lesser of the 2 evils and what I have witnessed over the last 4yrs and the cases I have watched live, the content I have seen regarding Hunter Biden and his father has sealed my side of the debate to prefer Trump to the corruption that has entered the Whitehouse at the moment.

Regarding DIY - that has no relevance to this subject and your attempt to suggest they are comparable are just your opinion which I disagree, what I do agree with is your position to challenge ideas that you do not agree with as that is what debate is about however your claim 'dangerous' relative to this debate is your opinion and you need to back that up with more than attacks on me and what I say, I remind you you started of posting several posts by quoting part isolated paragraphs and sentences then deliberately taking them out of the context they were written in for nothing more than a 'jovial' jab at members.

As it stands at the moment you are spending more time actually complaining about the thread than you are challenging any specific points raised, you fail to bring anything to the table yourself except your opinion and claims you do not back up, so lets try move forward here (both of us) and bring more citation and evidence to back our positions.

PS - I actually think I know who these 'White Supremacists' are you refer to but need you to say their name because there is one glaring elephant in the room attaching that tag to them, even so I do not condone this group or the fact Trump may have boosted their presence in the public eye, funny how you brought that up and fail to mention the MSM and Democrats approach with BLM and Antifa both guilty of worse crimes then this suggested group you call out if it is the same group I am thinking.

 

[electric al]

P. S. I don, t or won't be getting involved in politics myself. I took that decision some time ago. My purpose in commenting on this thread (this will be my final comment on the matter) is because it has in my view crossed a line. It promotes idea, s which are simply not to anyone's advantage. Idea, s that are divisive. It would be a terribly pity if these type of thread was to become acceptable. This forum I have come to value. Its worth fighting for. Have a good day everyone?

By having an opinion you are involved in politics and have become involved.
We are all just sharing views and debating in a largely civilised manner and that is how it should be .The real danger is trying to shut down debate because that helps us better understand each others motivations and grievances .
Some good can come of that

 

[nicebutdim]

Yeah we were mate, I watched the whole thing on TV and the Trump speech before hand, he asked the mob to go to the Capitol and said he would go in with them, he knew the Secret service wouldn't allow him to go but wound the crowd up and hundreds of out of control yobbo's then attacked the building and entered, Trump incited it and 5 people ended up dead, he was to blame, and thank God he has now gone, I want him to get found guilty, because if he doesn't he will be back next time in 2024, and it wouldn't surprise me if he won again, they are that daft over there.

We can argue all day long about what meaning should be ascribed to spoken words and we may all perceive such words differently but, for purposes of clarity and accuracy, here are Trump's exact words:

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

The full speech is available to watch online and transcripts are also available to review.

 

[Midwest]

Transcripts have been made by various, some don’t mention him saying ‘peacefully’ and the best part of his speech, keeps referring to election fraud and that the election was stolen, with the audience cheering him on, and him seemly cheering them on.

This comes after various tweets he made before the 6th, same sort of rhetoric, but worse, which led to his account suspension.

We‘ll just have wait and see what his impeachment case says, if it goes ahead.

 

[nicebutdim]

Transcripts have been made by various, some don’t mention him saying ‘peacefully’

I'd copied and pasted those words from the first transcript provided by google, but agree that it would be very easy to omit or add words and why should anyone believe me? I'm just some random person on an internet forum, who might have fabricated that quote.

To be clear about what words were actually spoken, it is fortunate that video evidence also exists.

Many media outlets played the same clip, but chose to only play the section that fitted their agenda and then cut to talking heads who were ready to condemn. I don't agree with some of what @darkwood has posted, but fully agree with his words about the media and the explicit bias often displayed by news outlets that many people trust. I would state that anyone who receives their information, on domestic or international affairs, from news media is very unlikely to be in possession of even half the facts of any story. To find the video posted above I had to scroll past many videos that had editied out the contentious words - many of which claiming those words were never spoken.

 

[Darkwood]

To be noted here when Trump users the terms fight or fighting he is clearly been figurative as the context of the rest of his speech clarifies.
I find it strange that we have seen thousands of politicians use phrases like fight for what you believe and all they mean is in a figurative sense and not a violent one, but because it is trump and we have had a 4yr witch hunt on him they take those words as an incite to violence which within the context of the rest of the speech is ludicrous to suggest that.

'We are going to cheer on our brave senators' .... clearly part of a speech that is inciting violence -not!

 

[Midwest]

I'd copied and pasted those words from the first transcript provided by google, but agree that it would be very easy to omit or add words and why should anyone believe me? I'm just some random person on an internet forum, who might have fabricated that quote.

To be clear about what words were actually spoken, it is fortunate that video evidence also exists.

Many media outlets played the same clip, but chose to only play the section that fitted their agenda and then cut to talking heads who were ready to condemn. I don't agree with some of what @darkwood has posted, but fully agree with his words about the media and the explicit bias often displayed by news outlets that many people trust. I would state that anyone who receives their information, on domestic or international affairs, from news media is very unlikely to be in possession of even half the facts of any story. To find the video posted above I had to scroll past many videos that had editied out the contentious words - many of which claiming those words were never spoken.

Far enough. However, the rest of his speech just keeps on repeating the same rhetoric about election fraud and the steal etc, and as previously mentioned the tweets beforehand. Enough to inspire the crowd to do what happened IMO.

I do take the point about using terms like 'fight like hell' and its use in general, but whether that was his mens rea or not, that's exactly what happened. Being a man who holds such power or did have, he should of choose his words more carefully.

When I listen to this man, I find his words both arrogant, belittling and offensive. I recall someone posting about how many conflicts previous Presidents had took their country into conflicts, whereas Trump had none. But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?

 

[telectrix]

But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?

was a lot listed in an early post, think it was darkwood.

 

[loz2754]

When I listen to this man, I find his words both arrogant, belittling and offensive.

Totally agree. Couldn't have put it better. The president of the most powerful nation in the world surely should at least try to display a little tact when talking to people. Instead he talks over people, not allowing them to air their view.
I am glad he's out.

 

[MDJ]

But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?

was a lot listed in an early post, think it was darkwood.

Fair Play Tel, this site wouldn't be the same without you and your comedy, Your a good Guy, I'd love to have a pint with you sometime, it would be fun I know

 

[Midwest]

I learnt about the Hubris Theory some time ago with some of my bosses. I think Trump excels in this area. In fact he could teach a few leaders, a point or too. Makes Putin look like a -----.

 

[Darkwood]

In post 1 I linked to a list of achievements, browse through them and see how many you recognise from the media telling you, very few if any, when Obama was in the MSM fell over itself to promote positive feedback and spin on anything he did yet Trump has half the term of Obama and breaks all the records with jobs, economy, peace deals etc and nothing from the BBC or other outlets.
When you are constantly paraded with everything a person does wrong it is very easy to misjudge them and ignore what they have actually achieved.
I have never said Trump doesn't make gaffs, his 'injecting yourself with bleach' is a massive one of many but I prefer to judge the man for what he has done for the black community and black education, the employment record breaking figures as well as the economic ones, like i said before, on paper this man has achieved way more for the USA as any recent president has ever done and that is totally been ignored by the media to feed there anti Trump narrative.

 

[telectrix]

that's if there's any pubs left when this virus thing is over.

 

[GBDamo]

I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’ve summarised the suspicions you’ve made.

Lets face it none of us know what really took place, we were not there. As typical in large scale violent demonstrations, it’s difficult to comprehend how this unfolded. We gain our information, from various sources, mostly the internet, which I have.

Indeed there was intelligence on what’s was to happen, you only have to look at all the stuff on the internet beforehand, about ‘stopthesteal’. I’ve read that the Capitol Police, said there was no such intelligence.

For your first point, the various persons were present in and around the Capitol because of the happenings in there, but also by various tweets Trump had been made leading up to this event, not least his speech, for many days before. He IMO incited them before and during.

Again from the internet, the Capitol Police are responsible for the security of the building. Washington, D.C., is not a state: Because D.C. does not have a governor, D.C. Guard deployments must be approved by the city’s National Guard army secretary, Ryan McCarthy. This is a slower process than a governor hastily declaring a state of emergency and calling in National Guard forces in large numbers.

Pelosi is not in charge of the security of the Capitol building (various internet searches).

Quite simply the Capitol Police were overwhelmed by the size of the mob. We will have to wait and see, why they did not have additional resources. They only have 2000 officers. Even if they were all deployed, that would be insufficient to protect the grounds and building IMO, in such an incident. Perhaps they were too vain to ask.

For your last point, there is precedent for impeachment of a person, after they have left office. Leave you all to google that.

Apologies for the long post folks ?

Qui bono?

As always who benefits?

That most people do not know that many Republican senators were going to use, rightfully, the counting ceremony as an opportunity to air their objections and get them on record is very telling.

The fact that this "insurrection" allowed the process to be halted and subsequently waived through without contest tell us all we need to know.

 

[GBDamo]

P. S. I don, t or won't be getting involved in politics myself. I took that decision some time ago. My purpose in commenting on this thread (this will be my final comment on the matter) is because it has in my view crossed a line. It promotes idea, s which are simply not to anyone's advantage. Idea, s that are divisive. It would be a terribly pity if these type of thread was to become acceptable. This forum I have come to value. Its worth fighting for. Have a good day everyone?

Cherio, don't let the door smack your --- on the way out.

 

[GBDamo]

LOL, Never seen such an idiotic post

You must have missed mine then?

 

[MDJ]

I love the banter in general here, it is good we have differing views otherwise it would be so dull, even though I think Trump is a muppet, he was good value for a laugh, every day of his 4 years in office something happened, dozens of people getting the sack for starters, some of his comments were hilarious, however even I cannot argue his love for his country, he was America first, that said the country is more divided now then in the 70s when things were bad there then, I have a feeling he will be back, to me he is a complete joke but to millions of others a hero, a figure that will be remembered in history even in 200 years time for sure.

 

[nicebutdim]

Far enough. However, the rest of his speech just keeps on repeating the same rhetoric about election fraud and the steal etc, and as previously mentioned the tweets beforehand. Enough to inspire the crowd to do what happened IMO.

I do take the point about using terms like 'fight like hell' and its use in general, but whether that was his mens rea or not, that's exactly what happened. Being a man who holds such power or did have, he should of choose his words more carefully.

When I listen to this man, I find his words both arrogant, belittling and offensive. I recall someone posting about how many conflicts previous Presidents had took their country into conflicts, whereas Trump had none. But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?

The speech was heavy on rhetoric and bluster, but nothing that would ordinarily be considered unusual for a politician. I'm not going to claim that some people weren't driven on by his words, but that his words certainly don't come close to incitement of violence.

The contrast with words from many of his political opponents, over the past year, is stark:

Chris Cuomo (CNN Journalist and brother of Democrat Governor of New York) speaking about antifa protesting in NY: "Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful?"

Nancy Pelosi speaking at 2020 Democrat National Congress: "You've got to be ready to throw a punch."

Maxine Waters (democrat representative) addressing a crowd of supporters: "If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere."

Senator Cory Brooker (democrat) addressing activists: "Get up in the face of some congress people."

Eric Holder (unsuccessful democrat candidate 2020) addressing supporters: "When they go low, we kick them. That's what this new democratic party is about."

Madonna Speaking publicly: "I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the white house."

Robert DeNero speaking about Trump on video to followers: "I'd like to punch him in the face."

Jonny Depp at public rally: "When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?"

Kamala Harris during news interview about nationwide protests: "They're not going to stop.... and nor should they."

Nancy Pelosi (speaker of the house): "I don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country."

Senator Tim Kaine (democrat): "What we've got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, and now there's the momentum to be able to do this."


The above quotes could all be considered as direct incitement to (or justification for) violence, but no one seems to be upset by them.


You mention Trump's achievements and that's something that many people refuse to acknowledge. I don't think anyone would deny many of his daft moments, but not starting a single war was unprecedented in recent times. His reigning in of North Korea would have been considered masterful if managed by anyone else. Restoration of diplomatic ties, cordial relations and direct flights between Israel and several middle eastern countries would have been rewarded with a nobel peace prize, again if it had been managed by anyone else - that process is still dividends.

Anyone who thinks that Trump was an unmitigated disaster would do well to pay attention to US foreign policy during the next four years. They'd also do well to watch employment figures in the US, but that will be heavily skewed by the pandemic.

What I'm trying to get at is that Trump wasn't an ideal president, but nor was he evil incarnate. The man bums and blows a bit, but he got stuff done for America and many other countries.

 

[GBDamo]

The speech was heavy on rhetoric and bluster, but nothing that would ordinarily be considered unusual for a politician. I'm not going to claim that some people weren't driven on by his words, but that his words certainly don't come close to incitement of violence.

The contrast with words from many of his political opponents, over the past year, is stark:

Chris Cuomo (CNN Journalist and brother of Democrat Governor of New York) speaking about antifa protesting in NY: "Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful?"

Nancy Pelosi speaking at 2020 Democrat National Congress: "You've got to be ready to throw a punch."

Maxine Waters (democrat representative) addressing a crowd of supporters: "If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere."

Senator Cory Brooker (democrat) addressing activists: "Get up in the face of some congress people."

Eric Holder (unsuccessful democrat candidate 2020) addressing supporters: "When they go low, we kick them. That's what this new democratic party is about."

Madonna Speaking publicly: "I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the white house."

Robert DeNero speaking about Trump on video to followers: "I'd like to punch him in the face."

Jonny Depp at public rally: "When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?"

Kamala Harris during news interview about nationwide protests: "They're not going to stop.... and nor should they."

Nancy Pelosi (speaker of the house): "I don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country."

Senator Tim Kaine (democrat): "What we've got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, and now there's the momentum to be able to do this."


The above quotes could all be considered as direct incitement to (or justification for) violence, but no one seems to be upset by them.


You mention Trump's achievements and that's something that many people refuse to acknowledge. I don't think anyone would deny many of his daft moments, but not starting a single war was unprecedented in recent times. His reigning in of North Korea would have been considered masterful if managed by anyone else. Restoration of diplomatic ties, cordial relations and direct flights between Israel and several middle eastern countries would have been rewarded with a nobel peace prize, again if it had been managed by anyone else - that process is still dividends.

Anyone who thinks that Trump was an unmitigated disaster would do well to pay attention to US foreign policy during the next four years. They'd also do well to watch employment figures in the US, but that will be heavily skewed by the pandemic.

What I'm trying to get at is that Trump wasn't an ideal president, but nor was he evil incarnate. The man bums and blows a bit, but he got stuff done for America and many other countries.

Don't you be bringing reason to a bitch fight, there are entrenched positions to defend here.

 

[Midwest]

Qui bono?

As always who benefits?

That most people do not know that many Republican senators were going to use, rightfully, the counting ceremony as an opportunity to air their objections and get them on record is very telling.

The fact that this "insurrection" allowed the process to be halted and subsequently waived through without contest tell us all we need to know.

My Latin stopped after we tried bombing the Latin teacher with books above the open door on April fools day, so you'll have to guide me here.

 

[Midwest]

The speech was heavy on rhetoric and bluster, but nothing that would ordinarily be considered unusual for a politician. I'm not going to claim that some people weren't driven on by his words, but that his words certainly don't come close to incitement of violence.

The contrast with words from many of his political opponents, over the past year, is stark:

Chris Cuomo (CNN Journalist and brother of Democrat Governor of New York) speaking about antifa protesting in NY: "Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful?"

Nancy Pelosi speaking at 2020 Democrat National Congress: "You've got to be ready to throw a punch."

Maxine Waters (democrat representative) addressing a crowd of supporters: "If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere."

Senator Cory Brooker (democrat) addressing activists: "Get up in the face of some congress people."

Eric Holder (unsuccessful democrat candidate 2020) addressing supporters: "When they go low, we kick them. That's what this new democratic party is about."

Madonna Speaking publicly: "I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the white house."

Robert DeNero speaking about Trump on video to followers: "I'd like to punch him in the face."

Jonny Depp at public rally: "When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?"

Kamala Harris during news interview about nationwide protests: "They're not going to stop.... and nor should they."

Nancy Pelosi (speaker of the house): "I don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the country."

Senator Tim Kaine (democrat): "What we've got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, and now there's the momentum to be able to do this."


The above quotes could all be considered as direct incitement to (or justification for) violence, but no one seems to be upset by them.


You mention Trump's achievements and that's something that many people refuse to acknowledge. I don't think anyone would deny many of his daft moments, but not starting a single war was unprecedented in recent times. His reigning in of North Korea would have been considered masterful if managed by anyone else. Restoration of diplomatic ties, cordial relations and direct flights between Israel and several middle eastern countries would have been rewarded with a nobel peace prize, again if it had been managed by anyone else - that process is still dividends.

Anyone who thinks that Trump was an unmitigated disaster would do well to pay attention to US foreign policy during the next four years. They'd also do well to watch employment figures in the US, but that will be heavily skewed by the pandemic.

What I'm trying to get at is that Trump wasn't an ideal president, but nor was he evil incarnate. The man bums and blows a bit, but he got stuff done for America and many other countries.

I'd have to google his achievements, think most of them were stated by someone else, including the Wall. Not sure what he achieved with North Korea, apart from a tourist trip.

 

[GBDamo]

My Latin stopped after we tried bombing the Latin teacher with books above the open door on April fools day, so you'll have to guide me here.

I did its in the second line, who benefits.

You see to believe events were as we are being told you have to believe that,

1, The fanaticalTrump supporters were more interested in torching the Capitol than listening to their Fuhrer speak.

2, They were so stupid that they didn't realise their actions would prevent their case being heard in a full official setting and allow the Dems to push through the electoral college count unopposed.

Or...

Trump deliberately delayed and dragged out his speech keeping the vast majority of his supporters a 45 minute walk away from the Capitol.

The Orchestrated 'insurrection' had to go ahead as there were too many unstoppable wheels in motion and the protest speeches were going on at the count.

The Agent Provocateurs were allowed entry followed by a rag tag buch of professional protesters in MAGA hats and possibly a few stray Trump supporters.

The count was suspended and completed behind close doors.

All the Republican planned challenges were not heard, the evidence of fraud is still not on record.

The media can continue to proclaim there are no credible allegations of fraud.


All the consequences of the "Insurrection" benefitted the Democrats and, despite the allegations laid out in the latest sham impeachment' Trump actually did everything in his power to keep his supporters away from the Capitol.

 

[Darkwood]

While every man and his dog in the media throw dirt at Trump, mainly for his loose lips here is a declassified investigation into the Biden's in particularly Hunter (Presidents son) while Joe Biden was Vice President for Obama.

It exposes corruption and fraud where Joe Biden was well aware and also part of the sequence of events.

The USA has now got a president that is closely linked to corruption and money laundering with foreign states while he was Vice president exposing very strong links to the CCP and in other documents we find his family in receipt of large financial sums through corrupt deals, it is no coincidence that some of the first Executive Orders Biden signed bring foreign nations in particular China back into the USA energy market reversing the independence Trump had created and why Biden shut down a pipeline link to Canada crushing 50,000 job, but of course you know that already, you saw that in the news didn't you ?????
Trump should not have ever been president as it wasn't the way it had been set up but so high was public anger at the establishment that even in the face of underhand tactics by the dem's and foreign states it still wasn't enough to stop Trump... a mistake they ensured would not happen again.

If you understand the names and the Burisma scandal you will be blown away at the level of corruption Obama and Biden were involved in, this is just a sample, it is lengthy and mentions names that you may be unfamiliar with which is key to understanding it all but for a concise conclusion go to P86

https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC%20-%20Finance%20Joint%20Report%202020.09.23.pdf

 

[nicebutdim]

And there are a couple of other serious scandals surrounding Hunter.

 

[Midwest]

While every man and his dog in the media throw dirt at Trump, mainly for his loose lips here is a declassified investigation into the Biden's in particularly Hunter (Presidents son) while Joe Biden was Vice President for Obama.

It exposes corruption and fraud where Joe Biden was well aware and also part of the sequence of events.

The USA has now got a president that is closely linked to corruption and money laundering with foreign states while he was Vice president exposing very strong links to the CCP and in other documents we find his family in receipt of large financial sums through corrupt deals, it is no coincidence that some of the first Executive Orders Biden signed bring foreign nations in particular China back into the USA energy market reversing the independence Trump had created and why Biden shut down a pipeline link to Canada crushing 50,000 job, but of course you know that already, you saw that in the news didn't you ?????
Trump should not have ever been president as it wasn't the way it had been set up but so high was public anger at the establishment that even in the face of underhand tactics by the dem's and foreign states it still wasn't enough to stop Trump... a mistake they ensured would not happen again.

If you understand the names and the Burisma scandal you will be blown away at the level of corruption Obama and Biden were involved in, this is just a sample, it is lengthy and mentions names that you may be unfamiliar with which is key to understanding it all but for a concise conclusion go to P86

https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC%20-%20Finance%20Joint%20Report%202020.09.23.pdf

I don’t see why you are obsessed with the idea that all news/media etc are always wrong and providing false information. You as an individual can’t be providing the sole source of information, for the forum to believe it’s true and factual. You see this report and decide, everything in it is substantial and true.

If a loved is missing or something you care about, and someone tells you they’ve seen them, you want to believe them.

I read & watch the news etc and make my own decision, knowing sometimes the truth can never get in the way of a good story.

I recall this report coming out before the campaign started. I recall it’s been based on a report by two Trump supporters, with countless claims, but would appear to have little actual evidence to support these claims.

If there is any truth in these claims, then further investigation should happen. This report, it is a report not a proper investigation, should be viewed carefully.

Seems not all Republicans agreed on its time of release;

Senator Ron Johnson pulls vote on subpoena in Biden/Ukraine investigation

The Senate Homeland Security Committee did authorize subpoenas related to the probe into the FBI's Russia investigation.

www.cbsnews.com