Can't blame Trump for everything (Unless you're a Democrat.....)
Prosecutor: Jan. 6 Defendant Can't Blame Trump
In closing arguments in a case involving a Jan. 6 defendant, a federal prosecutor urged a jury to turn down a claim that then-President Donald Trump caused the man to breach the Capitol,
Politico is reporting.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/prosecu...RAItEKALcE
The fact that Trump consciously goaded these people into breaking the law does not excuse them from breaking the law, I agree.
If Trump goaded these people into going to the Capitol the same way the media goaded you into thinking January 6th was a violent insurrection.
(04-15-2022, 10:05 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]If Trump goaded these people into going to the Capitol the same way the media goaded you into thinking January 6th was a violent insurrection.
When a person already
wants to believe something is true, all it takes is a ten-second video clip of a small portion of an occurrence to convince them that it is true. They'll never take an objective look at all of the relevant facts.
(04-15-2022, 10:44 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (04-15-2022, 10:05 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]If Trump goaded these people into going to the Capitol the same way the media goaded you into thinking January 6th was a violent insurrection.
When a person already wants to believe something is true, all it takes is a ten-second video clip of a small portion of an occurrence to convince them that it is true. They'll never take an objective look at all of the relevant facts.
I've watched hours of footage.
Protestors entered the Senate chambers and said a bunch of stuff but didn't hurt anyone. The Senate wasn't in session of course.
Other protestors attempted to enter the House chamber despite warnings to stop by armed guards. One was shot and the rest chickened out. But they were all attempting to disrupt government, which is insurrection.
In numerous other locations, these protestors attacked and injured police, which is violence.
Many other people were placing weapons caches nearby in case the unarmed insurrectionists got a beachhead
I don't understand how rational people deny these facts. Could it have been worse, yes.
Were some of the participants oblivious to the violence that was intended? Yes.
Was it poorly organized? Yes.
None of that negates the fact that it was an extremely dangerous insurrection intended to suspend the Constitution
(04-15-2022, 05:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (04-15-2022, 10:44 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]When a person already wants to believe something is true, all it takes is a ten-second video clip of a small portion of an occurrence to convince them that it is true. They'll never take an objective look at all of the relevant facts.
I've watched hours of footage.
Protestors entered the Senate chambers and said a bunch of stuff but didn't hurt anyone. The Senate wasn't in session of course.
Other protestors attempted to enter the House chamber despite warnings to stop by armed guards. One was shot and the rest chickened out. But they were all attempting to disrupt government, which is insurrection.
In numerous other locations, these protestors attacked and injured police, which is violence.
Many other people were placing weapons caches nearby in case the unarmed insurrectionists got a beachhead
I don't understand how rational people deny these facts. Could it have been worse, yes.
Were some of the participants oblivious to the violence that was intended? Yes.
Was it poorly organized? Yes.
None of that negates the fact that it was an extremely dangerous insurrection intended to suspend the Constitution
Rational people don’t take gray and try to make it black and white. Sure the gathering was orchestrated by him. And he said some things that could be interpreted the way you interpret them, but he also said something to the effect of “as we march toward the Capitol to protest peacefully” which is quite clear in its meaning and intent and from a legal basis very likely kills the insurrection narrative.
Bottom line is the left essentially attempted a nonviolent coup throughout his entire presidency with the help of a biased and sympathetic media. I’ll interpret any gray in his favor under those circumstances. If the media is no longer media, you should be very leery of what they are selling and whomever they are carrying water for.
(04-16-2022, 11:42 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: [ -> ] (04-15-2022, 05:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I've watched hours of footage.
Protestors entered the Senate chambers and said a bunch of stuff but didn't hurt anyone. The Senate wasn't in session of course.
Other protestors attempted to enter the House chamber despite warnings to stop by armed guards. One was shot and the rest chickened out. But they were all attempting to disrupt government, which is insurrection.
In numerous other locations, these protestors attacked and injured police, which is violence.
Many other people were placing weapons caches nearby in case the unarmed insurrectionists got a beachhead
I don't understand how rational people deny these facts. Could it have been worse, yes.
Were some of the participants oblivious to the violence that was intended? Yes.
Was it poorly organized? Yes.
None of that negates the fact that it was an extremely dangerous insurrection intended to suspend the Constitution
Rational people don’t take gray and try to make it black and white. Sure the gathering was orchestrated by him. And he said some things that could be interpreted the way you interpret them, but he also said something to the effect of “as we march toward the Capitol to protest peacefully” which is quite clear in its meaning and intent and from a legal basis very likely kills the insurrection narrative.
Bottom line is the left essentially attempted a nonviolent coup throughout his entire presidency with the help of a biased and sympathetic media. I’ll interpret any gray in his favor under those circumstances. If the media is no longer media, you should be very leery of what they are selling and whomever they are carrying water for.
Officials on the left pushed for him to be removed via impeachment.
Some pundits pushed for removal via the 25th amendment.
Both of these are constitutional processes. So neither would have been a coup.
A coup is anything that suspends or ends the Constitution.
Trump suspending the ordinary counting of votes would have been a coup.
The counting of votes in this election was anything but ordinary.
(04-17-2022, 09:24 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (04-16-2022, 11:42 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: [ -> ]Rational people don’t take gray and try to make it black and white. Sure the gathering was orchestrated by him. And he said some things that could be interpreted the way you interpret them, but he also said something to the effect of “as we march toward the Capitol to protest peacefully” which is quite clear in its meaning and intent and from a legal basis very likely kills the insurrection narrative.
Bottom line is the left essentially attempted a nonviolent coup throughout his entire presidency with the help of a biased and sympathetic media. I’ll interpret any gray in his favor under those circumstances. If the media is no longer media, you should be very leery of what they are selling and whomever they are carrying water for.
Officials on the left pushed for him to be removed via impeachment.
Some pundits pushed for removal via the 25th amendment.
Both of these are constitutional processes. So neither would have been a coup.
A coup is anything that suspends or ends the Constitution.
Trump suspending the ordinary counting of votes would have been a coup.
If you don't understand the definition of a word, you should look it up before you start tossing it around. That may help you frame a more intelligent response. Delaying a governmental function for a few hours is not a coup.
(04-17-2022, 11:33 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (04-17-2022, 09:24 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Officials on the left pushed for him to be removed via impeachment.
Some pundits pushed for removal via the 25th amendment.
Both of these are constitutional processes. So neither would have been a coup.
A coup is anything that suspends or ends the Constitution.
Trump suspending the ordinary counting of votes would have been a coup.
If you don't understand the definition of a word, you should look it up before you start tossing it around. That may help you frame a more intelligent response. Delaying a governmental function for a few hours is not a coup.
They didn't come there to delay it for a few hours. They came there to change the result from what the Constitution demanded, or to delay it indefinitely.
So what would that be?
They were attempting to achieve something that they fell short of achieving.
An attempted...
...
What's the word?