|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States42685 Posts
On March 08 2022 12:11 Doc.Rivers wrote:
As with everything else to do with Trump, many are prone to exaggerate the events of Jan 6th. The allegation that the crowd had intent to kill politicians, or was certain to do so, is one example. They were there to try to stop the certification of electors, not kill people. All of the known facts are consistent with that interpretation.
Stop the certification how?
|
I love how he tries to stake "all of the known facts" as something real and not just the facts that he acepts as being real.
People were arrested with guns we've seen the pictures of people having zip ties. they had lists. Its incredible the extent that you are trying to go to create a narrative anyone can easily figure out isn't true by doing the most basic google searches that they teach middle schoolers.
|
The people calling to kill government officials while hunting for government officials where the government officials work and equipped with weapons with which to kill the government officials would never ever kill government officials, don't be ridiculous.
|
On March 08 2022 13:35 Severedevil wrote:
The people calling to kill government officials while hunting for government officials where the government officials work and equipped with weapons with which to kill the government officials would never ever kill government officials, don't be ridiculous.
Its plain and simply not a good faith argument. This is why I tell people to ignore them and move on.
|
On March 08 2022 13:35 Severedevil wrote:
The people calling to kill government officials while hunting for government officials where the government officials work and equipped with weapons with which to kill the government officials would never ever kill government officials, don't be ridiculous.
It's easy to make an argument when you exaggerate every aspect of the facts. All you are actually saying is that you strongly disagree with me. I'm just saying that when there's a crowd of a couple thousand and it's estimated by NPR that 3 dozen had weapons, but mostly makeshift blunt objects, no guns, no knives, etc, that crowd did set out with the intent to hunt and kill people.
|
On March 08 2022 15:52 Doc.Rivers wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2022 13:35 Severedevil wrote:
The people calling to kill government officials while hunting for government officials where the government officials work and equipped with weapons with which to kill the government officials would never ever kill government officials, don't be ridiculous. It's easy to make an argument when you exaggerate every aspect of the facts. All you are actually saying is that you strongly disagree with me. I'm just saying that when there's a crowd of a couple thousand and it's estimated by NPR that 3 dozen had weapons, but mostly makeshift blunt objects, no guns, no knives, etc, that crowd did set out with the intent to hunt and kill people.
As WombaT pointed out, the vast majority of the mob probably had no “real” intention to kill and I think most people would agree with that. Taking this assumption, drawing the conclusion that no one was going to kill government officials and then stating it as a fact, is fundamentally wrong (and dishonest unless you really believe it). The onus to present some real facts, proving they wouldn’t have killed anyone is still on you.
All plans they might have had aside, do you really believe that, in a scenario where they came in contact with the officials, there was zero chance for them to kill anyone? Consider how excited and revolutionist they must have felt, when they entered the hall, and the hatred they surely had for these politicians. Wasn’t it grossly negligent and strikingly suspicious, that the Capitol was not better protected?
|
On March 08 2022 08:58 Doc.Rivers wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2022 08:11 Artisreal wrote:You don't want to brush it aside and then do it anyway. If secret service shooting and therebykill killing an insurrectionist who was trying to get to the Congresspeople is not enough of a sign for danger to life for you, I really don't know what is. And also: just no On March 08 2022 07:57 Doc.Rivers wrote:
Yeah a couple people built a gallows for show, one guy brought bear spray, a couple people had stun guns, others had flagpoles. Still it was more of an unruly mob than an ISIS terror cell. When they actually made it to politicians, they got very quickly stopped by the people who were armed (the police). This post just shows how disingenuous you appear to me (or simply unaware of facts, that works too). Always fun when people trot out the "bad faith" or "disingenuous" arguments online in order to express strong disagreement. But it is a reasonable conclusion from the available facts that the mob was not there to slaughter politicians and would not have started slaughtering politicians if they came into contact.
There's no fun involved on my part, I can assure you of that.
And you should be cautious to take reasonable in your mouth with all the falsehoods you've already spewed
|
On March 08 2022 12:11 Doc.Rivers wrote:
As with everything else to do with Trump, many are prone to exaggerate the events of Jan 6th. The allegation that the crowd had intent to kill politicians, or was certain to do so, is one example. They were there to try to stop the certification of electors, not kill people. All of the known facts are consistent with that interpretation.
They brought weapons, were violent, and literally said they wanted to kill politicians. These are the facts. You seem to be the only one incapable of acknowledging the facts. You're understating the severity of this.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25318 Posts
On March 08 2022 22:36 JimmiC wrote:It is coming more clear how much damage Trump did when he was withholding Aid from Ukraine to try to get them to investigate and find wrong doing from Biden, well find wrong doing regardless of the investigation, in Ukraine. Remember what Trump said about Zelenskyy? That is not aging well. Also, his new brillant plan of the US bombing Russia with Chinese flags on there planes to trick the Russians into fighting China, another top notch strategy right up there with a big wall. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/08/1085023029/russias-invasion-puts-a-new-light-on-trumps-ukraine-pressure-campaign
It’s brilliant, the Russians won’t know what hit them. Well they will, they’ll think it was the Chinese. I’m full of smart ideas, I call this fake flag
|
On March 08 2022 23:05 WombaT wrote:It’s brilliant, the Russians won’t know what hit them. Well they will, they’ll think it was the Chinese. I’m full of smart ideas, I call this fake flag
That is in fact the plan of the moron.
"And then we say, 'China did it,' " Trump told Republican donors Saturday
I don't know if we should keep talking about Trump whenever he does a stupid thing, though. That seems to be what he feeds of, and somehow he seems to be able to turn people laughing or facepalming at his idiocy into voters voting for him, which should be avoided at all cost.
|
Northern Ireland25318 Posts
On March 08 2022 15:52 Doc.Rivers wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2022 13:35 Severedevil wrote:
The people calling to kill government officials while hunting for government officials where the government officials work and equipped with weapons with which to kill the government officials would never ever kill government officials, don't be ridiculous. It's easy to make an argument when you exaggerate every aspect of the facts. All you are actually saying is that you strongly disagree with me. I'm just saying that when there's a crowd of a couple thousand and it's estimated by NPR that 3 dozen had weapons, but mostly makeshift blunt objects, no guns, no knives, etc, that crowd did set out with the intent to hunt and kill people.
Why are you saying that though?
People aren’t saying a mob gathered at the Capitol intent on murdering everyone within. They’re saying the situation was so escalated and inflamed, with people who had (or didn’t, mobs can do plenty of damage unarmed en masse), could plausibly have done harm to legislators.
It’s a shifting of the goalposts, typical of how you make points here, so no it’s not actually a matter of mere disagreement. A similar previous paraphrased example below:
Proposition - ‘Trump should face more internal pressure and rebuke from his own party after ‘Stop the Steal’ and January 6th’
Counter - ‘Well he didn’t commit any crimes and he shouldn’t go to jail’.
The counter may, or may not be true. At a base level it has very, very little connection to the proposition though.
|
|
|
I think there's a difference between 'what Trump did was wrong' and 'what Trump did was illegal'.
I think it is reprehensible to argue that Trump did nothing wrong on Jan 6. To say that he broke the law is premature.
Those of you who claim he broke the law, what you have proposed is an opinion. It is not supported by any ruling from a court, or even an indictment.
|
many people break laws without support from a court ruling or an indictment. that’s not how things work. and this isn’t an opinion.
most people (here) are arguing whether he can, should, will be prosecuted for the laws he certainly broke during his presidency, jan 6 or otherwise. though it seems/has seemed for quite a long while, that he will not.
|
Northern Ireland25318 Posts
On March 08 2022 23:55 gobbledydook wrote:
I think there's a difference between 'what Trump did was wrong' and 'what Trump did was illegal'.
I think it is reprehensible to argue that Trump did nothing wrong on Jan 6. To say that he broke the law is premature.
Those of you who claim he broke the law, what you have proposed is an opinion. It is not supported by any ruling from a court, or even an indictment.
It would be a moot point if the GOP and their voters had a spine and some moral fortitude.
If that option from removing Trump from meaningful public political life is demonstrably off the table, there is death or him being nailed with a criminal charge, of some kind.
Knowing little of much of US law, much less state variations it would be rather silly of me to comment as to those particulars.
More generically, financial settlements functionally serve as a means to pay your way out of breaking the law, so there is that.
|
|
|
Silver lining: There's no way Biden is resuming student loans during all this
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
