Is Trump his own worst enemy?
I believe that Trump is his own worst enemy. (I want to stress believe). He is driven by his malignant narcissism and his need to be a Master con-artist. Almost every problem he has, he created himself.
He thinks he is above the law, but in fact, he is an outlaw. He stole highly classified documents that he had no right to have and did not have the need to know. He made known Pentagon Plans of Attack to a person interviewing him, who did not have a need to know and did not have a clearance for that high level of classification.
He tried to steal the election from Biden, but it didn't work, He steals money from banks by inflating the worth of his assets. He steals the character of women who he has had affairs with, by paying hush money that he stole from his campaign donors.
He is trying to disqualify and steal the character of the Georgia District Attorney who is adjudicating his Jan. 6 actions. His MAGA lawyers claim she received money from one of the lawyers who is helping her judge Trump’s case.
He acts like he is Hitler and a mafia boss. He says he wants to be a dictator and he uses mafia tactics to intimidate the GOP congress and his opponents by threatening them to do what he thinks is the right thing. If Pence didn't do "the right thing" MAGA had built gallows and was ready to hang him.
His latest con is, he claims that he is being treated like Alexander Navalny who was just murdered by Putin. This is what cons do when they get caught doing the con. They play the victim and at the same time they attack the accusers.
The Trumpers think the country is going to hell because of Biden. I think Our Democratic Republic is being threatened because of Trump and The MAGA Cult. Many of the House Republican are jumping ship because of Trump and his intimidation tactics.
Many of the ones who are staying like MTG, Lauren Boebert, and Mat Gaetz think there is a place for them on his presidential staff. All three of them are illiterate when it comes to civics and operation of the government 101. They are power hungry millionaires who don't know the first thing about running a country.
Of course, all of this is my opinion, or is it?Let the games begin.
I can tell you right now who you are going to hear from.
Doesn't mean you aren't calling a spade a spade.Kathleen. I had to write this to get it out of my system. I'm so tired of Trump and his Trumpers when it comes to the excuses they make for this very sick individual. Actually, I pity him, because I don't think he can help himself.
peoplepower: I'm afraid I've stifled discussion on your post. Apologies, but I've been driven from this board due to the feelings you are also experiencing. Hang in there. Someone has to stay and post opposition.
You didn't stifle any discussion. They seemed to be focused on Trump's Criminal Trials forum right now.
I'm surprised that PeoplePower hasn't been banned from the forums. Try opposing the extreme MAGA powers and that's what happens. I got suspended for 3 days for hinting a was a spade a spade, yet the spade had libeled me so badly that I had to threaten a lawsuit against her and HP to get her posts removed. If this post gets me suspended again, so be it. At least you will know why.
Each of my bans usually span three to six months now because of how many I have. Thankfully, so many of my articles are picked up on their sub-networks that they haven't given me a 'Randy' ban yet (anyone remember him).
The brainwashing of many of the far-right members of these forums is sad to watch. But many of us refuse to let them spread their misinformation without some pushback. It's clear the motives for that misinformation stem from the belief that their enemies are now their fellow Americans and their own government when their party is not in control of the White House. In this way, they are nothing more than spoiled children full of hate for anyone not aligned with their needs and goals. They even align themselves and defend the leaders of countries that we consider enemies. That is also traitorous to America.
They believe they are the only patriots and that their policy goals are welcomed by the majority of Americans. Both are delusions. They are aligned with white nationalists and those committing domestic terror against their own country. And their policy goals are very unpopular with the majority of America.
For me personally, I have cut out every single Trump supporter from my daily life. I find them to be delusional, living in an alternate reality as mentally insane people often do. Their realities always omit facts and their leader is infallible in their eyes, something we know to be a ridiculous view.Valeant, I would love to do that, but that would be most of my family. I'll bet my dad is spinning in his grave.
I got banned for a few days only once after I posted that the MAGA crowd had lost their judgment.
We can disagree on politics, but when it gets to the point of disagreeing on basic right and wrong, character, values, it's time to ask what has America come to?
Richard Nixon broke so many laws he was driven to resign by his own party. What happened to that America?America is one nation, the United States of America. But the people there difedrs, yet it's God's own Country. All the many bad things written against Trump had been done by others. And of course, Trump may be his worst enemy or not. That I don't know. Has anyone tell Trump: "Thou art thine enemy?' his response yes or no settled the question.
PeoplePower --- While I appreciate your very open view, I must respectfully disagree with some of your assertions. It's indeed a fundamental aspect of American democracy that individuals have the right to express views that others may find disagreeable. Regarding your belief about Trump, it's evident that opinions on his actions and character vary widely in our current society.
You've highlighted concerns about Trump's behavior, including accusations of narcissism, dishonesty, and attempts to undermine democratic processes. These are certainly points of contention among different segments of the population. There is no getting around that.
However, it's crucial to recognize that opinions about Trump and his impact on American democracy diverge greatly. While many may share your apprehensions about his actions and influence, others may hold contrasting views. The complexity of political dynamics often leads to a wide array of interpretations and perspectives.
Ultimately, the discourse surrounding Trump's presidency underscores the diversity of opinions within American society. So, where do we go from here?PeoplePower
I truly value your perspective and the open communication we've maintained. Your effort in sharing your viewpoint is appreciated, and I always strive to respond respectfully. Please know that my comment was intended to provide another viewpoint, and I hope it was received without offense. Thank you for considering my thoughts.Thank you for dropping by. I think Trump's goal is to get elected before he is adjudicated by the courts and then he can pardon himself and all his cohorts in crime. I think Nikki Haley is also watching Trump to see if he will be taken out of the race by any of the courts actions.
His next stop is Michigan. It looks like the UAW has a pretty good stronghold on its supporters. The UAW got all the members wage increases after the strikes. I don't think Trump likes unions. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.I believe the ultimate authority will rest with the courts; there's little doubt about that. However, there's considerable debate about the fairness of our legal system in handling Trump's numerous legal challenges. Many scholars argue that it has not been impartial thus far. We've witnessed longstanding state laws being altered and precedents being disregarded. Nonetheless, in the end, it will be the court rulings that prevail, granting them the final say.
The results today in Michigan will be significant in gauging the level of support for Trump and could provide insights into how people may vote in 2024. Traditionally, union leaders have endorsed Democrats, but given the economic challenges faced by workers, including layoffs and rising living costs, their allegiance may not be guaranteed. If Trump secures a significant voter turnout, it could signal a shift in support toward him come the general election. Michiganders are pocketbook people when push comes to shove.
To the courts - where it is not a matter of opinion.
Well, peoplepower, you got your discussion. Any surprises?
Nope, no surprises. I think Shrarlee was very tactful in her views and did not dispute my opinions/facts.. I like your answer to her about, "where do we go from here?". It's to the courts, but he will do everything in his power to delay going to the courts.
While Trump, is really tactful like any reasonable human being. Let it be. Let his wish the November election materialized. He wish himself well. I heard last week from OperaNews, he flood a Florida governor to clitch the ticket further. Hurrah! Run, Trump, run.
"While Trump, is really tactful like any reasonable human being."
No sure where you are getting your information, but it doesn't sound accurate. Even his supporters would not describe him this way.
Good luck.
I find it so interesting how Dems pile on. You have zero candidates to be proud of, get behind, support or praise, so you spend your days dissing Trump and those whom support him!
If you hop over to another topic or two, you will read Republicans, Conservatives, non-Dems, disagreeing with one another, not always on the same page, butting heads at times, working it out respectively...each individual unique to the next, no matter what you all label us or what you all have convinced yourselves, we are guilty of.ab - I find it so interesting how Dems pile on. You have zero candidates to be proud of, get behind, support or praise, so you spend your days dissing Trump and those whom support him!
M - That's not true. We are proud of Biden and what he has done. If your only source is Fox, I can understand the way you feel. Apparently, you don't read or ignore what Biden supporters praise about Biden and his accomplishments on these forums.
ab - no matter what you all label us or what you all have convinced yourselves, we are guilty of.
M - Do you mean like socialist, communist, libitards suffering from TDS?
If you hop over to another topic or two, you will read Republicans, Conservatives, non-Dems, disagreeing with one another, not always on the same page, butting heads at times, working it out respectively...each individual unique to the next, no matter what you all label us or what you all have convinced yourselves, we are guilty of.Yeah, head over to any other topic and what you see is a confirmation loop of conservatives trying to convince each other that their alternate realities are actual reality. It'd be comical if not so sad.
You nailed it with the absolute failure of the MAGA crowd to acknowledge any of the many accomplishments Biden has under his belt. To be in that kind of denial is one of many examples we have of their complete brainwashing.
And here's Trump calling his current wife 'Mercedes' ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v2BnB6jn2g
But please, tell us again how he's all there cognitively.The sad thing is that many (most?) Dems really are proud of what Biden has done. They are proud of his opening the border to anyone wanting in that can pronounce the magic word. They are proud of the massive inflation Biden brought to us. They are proud that he put us into two different wars. There is actually quit a pile of actions Biden accomplished that Dems are proud of...and that caused considerable to massive harm to the country.
Labels; Dems certainly are not "communist" (yet, anyway) and "libtard" is nothing but a meaningless offensive label (much like Trumpster), but a great many really are the embodiment of modern Socialism (more like Marxism than Socialism) and certainly do suffer from TDS (inability to hold a conversation with bringing Trump into it: Trump and Trump hatred remains the focal point of their sad lives).There are two key factors to those who are so disdainful of Trump and who want to label those who support him.
They are 75% or more likely to believe MSM sources of information as legitimate and above reproach.
Almost every single person working in the MSM today is part of those University indoctrinated with woke-mind-virus, they truly believe your average American is an evil White-Supremacist for believing in America first, borders, patriotism, etc.
And they have bought into some form of the New Democratic mindset that America was built by evil white men, CRT, Victimology, Equity not Equality... those in control are actually regulating and enforcing this ideology into every aspect of Government they can reach into today... Federal, Military and Beyond.
This New Democratic ideology is completely and entirely opposite of all that the United States of America stood for at its best and brightest moments.Actually, there's a greater stat to explain those who are so disdainful of Trump and those that still support him. 100% of us watched him organize and incite a domestic terror attack on his own country to try and steal an American presidential election with easily identifiable lies. That his supporters are too idiotic to see through those lies is where they get that more than warranted disdain. That and their penchant for supporting the criminality that Trump has (allegedly in a few cases) engaged in.
The new Republican ideology is to follow a proven rapist, fraud, and domestic terrorist's whims. That is definitely opposite of all that the founders of the United States stood for.Valeant: I don't disagree but I do see a different dynamic at work. "That his supporters are too idiotic . . ."
Not idiotic. But they have painted themselves into a corner automatically supporting whoever the GOP supports. That's how they ended up with Trump. Now they have no way out short of admitting they were wrong.That's not true... the two sides have completely different values and no longer are at a place where compromise is possible.
Take Trump and Biden out of it.
Do you support Open Borders or do you want them shut allowing for only the lawful immigration of people?
Do you think Men should be allowed in women's shower rooms and sports, or do you think, no matter what derangement these Men suffer from, that women should be allowed their own shower rooms and sports?
Do you believe in Equality and Merit... or do you believe in Equity and Quotas?
The list goes on... forcing people to switch to EVs... banning Gas stoves... arresting people for using words that others find hurts their feelings...
The gap has widened between the two sides to the point where compromise is not possible... one side or the other will come to dominate and will attempt to eradicate the other, just like occurred in the 30s in Germany... occurred in China in the 40s... is occurring in America today.
No, 0% of us watched Trump "organize and incite a domestic terror attack on his own country". However, quite a few ("too idiotic to see through those lies") swallowed the lies that he did and then perpetuate those same lies by repeating them. They even repeat the lie that Trump is a convicted rapist; by re-wording a court verdict they promote this lie as well.
Continue to live in your own reality. Here on planet Earth, the things I stated are true. That one would feel the need to change my words from proven to convicted to allow that reality to become their truth did not go unnoticed. Sad, but not unnoticed.
Valeant: The things you stated ARE true. Alternate reality is the lifeline for some. Save your energy.
"No, 0% of us watched Trump "organize and incite a domestic terror attack on his own country". However, quite a few ("too idiotic to see through those lies") swallowed the lies that he did and then perpetuate those same lies by repeating them. They even repeat the lie that Trump is a convicted rapist; by re-wording a court verdict they promote this lie as well."
Wilderness: You are probably right about 0% of Trumpers watched Jan.6. If anything was repeated, it was Trump almost a year before the election talking about if he lost, then there was fraud. The closer it got to the election, he changed it to the election must be rigged. He had a whole year to indoctrinate his Trumpers.
Do you deny that Biden won the election and that Trump tried to steal it back from him? I don't care what you call it or what you didn't see. You can have your opinion, but you can't change the facts. They were there for God and the world to see and hear."Do you deny that Biden won the election and that Trump tried to steal it back from him? "
Do YOU deny that nearly every 4 years there are multiple demands for a recount; that the totals were inaccurate? If not you need to bone up your history lessons, if so why is Trump the only evil one for requesting such a vile thing?
And that doesn't even begin to address the gross exaggerations being made by the left about an "insurrection", an attempted take over of the United States by a handful of yahoos armed with a flagpole and a fire extinguisher. It doesn't address the lies saying Trump planned and orchestrated the entire mini-riot.
You're right - no one can change the facts. But the left has tried very hard to get people believe something happened there that did not.Wilderness: Ah yes, the old routine of answering questions by asking other questions. When will they learn? I have a feeling, you never even watched Jan.6. There was a hell of a lot more going on than just Yahoos armed with a flag pole and fire extinguisher.
And what was that? A small riot, breaking and entering, "insurrectionists" swinging from the chandeliers and sitting at the Pelosi's desk?
It is true that the rich and powerful finally had this kind of violence come to them rather than the peons they rule, and that it scared them. Badly. That is hardly an excuse to make it into a war on our nation rather than what it was; a tiny riot (compared to others throughout the nation about then) that was very quickly controlled and shut down (again, compared to those that went on for months).Well, that's what Trump represents, the peons, the working class.
The stiffs that don't support Open Borders, Endless Wars, and Increased taxation and limitations because of the 'Climate Change' emergency that justifies the efforts to control everything you see, hear, eat, own.
They absolutely will use every means available to destroy him and all those that stand with him, because they stand against their corruption.
But there is the brilliance of what they have done...
Consider in 2016 they never thought a Trump could occur... they never thought someone could rally the peons to the point where they could get a disruptive figure like Trump into the Oval Office.
Everything they have done since that time has been in effort to get Americans to fight one another while at the same time working to destroy Trump and any and all that support him.
The problem, is they have pushed so much BS so quickly down everyone's throats that America is fraying, States are seriously considering seceding, the topics of the day really have little room for compromise... including how they are persecuting a former President and current frontrunner.
This is why this Administration and those in Control of DC today are so brutally bad for the world, not just America... they are at war with EVERYONE... Russia, China, Americans... tell me where this Adminstration has anything positive going on... its all conflict and disruption... our way or you're the enemy.
But what you omit is that the crowd went to Trump's rally first, all but ensuring they could not be carrying firearms due to the presence of secret service.
Looking at Oxford's definition of the word insurrection, one sees it as: a situation in which a large group of people try to take political control of their own country with violence.
Was there violence on that day? Yes.
Was there a large group of people? Yes.
Were they trying to stop the certification of the count of electoral votes to try and take back political control for Donald Trump? Absolutely.
Where in that definition does it say guns are needed? It doesn't. That's the far-right addition to try and change the definition of what happened.
It's not the media that is exaggerating, it is Trump's supporters that fail to understand the basic definition of words like insurrection.You have given a simplistic definition of the word insurrection. --
The events of Jan 6th, while undoubtedly tumultuous and concerning, do not fit the definition of an insurrection when analyzed in detail. An insurrection typically entails a coordinated and deliberate attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or authority through violent means. However, the events at the Capitol lacked the strategic coordination and unified purpose typically associated with such an uprising.
The attack on the Capitol lacked clear centralized leadership. Unlike historical insurrections where there is often a well-defined chain of command directing the actions of participants, the events on January 6th involved a diverse array of individuals with varying motivations. While certain figures may have played influential roles, there was no unified command structure guiding the actions of the attackers.
It was apparent the objectives of the attackers were limited in scope. Rather than seeking to seize control of government institutions or infrastructure, the primary aim appeared to be disrupting the certification of the electoral college results. Once this goal was thwarted, many of the individuals involved dispersed rather than attempting to consolidate power or establish control over key government functions. They simply left.
The response from law enforcement and other authorities was relatively swift and effective in restoring order and securing the Capitol. While there were undoubtedly failures in intelligence gathering and preparation, the fact remains that the attackers were ultimately repelled without significant casualties or widespread damage to critical infrastructure. Congress was back at work by 7 pm...
From a legal perspective, the charges brought against individuals involved in the attack do not universally include charges of insurrection. While some have been charged with sedition and conspiracy, these charges are specific legal terms that require a high burden of proof regarding intent and coordination.
In my view, while the events of January 6th were undeniably serious and alarming, labeling them as a full-fledged insurrection may oversimplify the complex motivations and dynamics at play.'You have given a simplistic definition of the word insurrection. --'
Actually, I have given the official definition of the word, as Oxford is the recognized dictionary of the English language. Hence its usage.
We will agree to disagree that there wasn't a coordinated and deliberate attempt to take political control. Trump set the date, his campaign organized the rally, and he made a secret plan to set his crowd on the Capitol, without telling Capitol Police of that plan. He had planned to be there at the Capitol, but Secret Service stopped him.
'While some have been charged with sedition and conspiracy, these charges are specific legal terms that require a high burden of proof regarding intent and coordination.'
Charged? Update your information, many have been convicted of seditious conspiracy (not sedition and conspiracy as you try to separate them). Meaning there were multiple plans to interfere with the electoral count by the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, to name two groups whose leaders have been convicted already.
Now, just because this insurrection used overwhelming force of numbers and not guns does not absolve it of the stipulations I noted in my previous post that qualify it as an insurrection. It had violence, it had a political motive against its own government, and it was done by a large group of people. And the timing and location aspects are critical - at the very moment that Congress was set to certify an American presidential election and confirm a transfer of power to a new administration."It had violence, it had a political motive against its own government, and it was done by a large group of people. And the timing and location aspects are critical - at the very moment that Congress was set to certify an American presidential election and confirm a transfer of power to a new administration."
While I agree with the observation regarding the event's characteristics, it's worth noting that if there was any planning involved, it seems to have been loosely coordinated. Currently, there's no conclusive evidence implicating Trump in orchestrating the attack on the Capitol. His request for Vice President Pence to halt the count could have been a strategy to disrupt the proceedings rather than a direct incitement to violence. Moreover, the individuals who engaged in violence at the Capitol seemed more like a disorganized group rather than part of a coordinated effort. It appears that what began as a protest may have been inflamed by a subset of individuals aiming to escalate it into a riot.'Currently, there's no conclusive evidence implicating Trump in orchestrating the attack on the Capitol.' This I must concede as well. His motivation prior to the attack may have been wanting to try to intimidate members of Congress with a show of force outside. Currently, there exists no links between the Trump Campaign and those convicted of seditious conspiracy. But there were clearly plans to attack the Capitol on that day, hence the seditious conspiracy convictions, and the label that fits every definition of insurrection.
However, Trump's tweet at 2:24pm, a full hour after the violence began, that Mike Pence was not going to stop the certification, seems to condone the violence already taking place. He might not have planned a violent attack, but he sure as hell threw gas on the fire once it had begun. How anyone in their right mind would support him after doing that is unconscionable. It was widely reported that a tweet 15 minutes later asking for respect for Capitol Police was sent by an aide and not Trump.
And while riot (a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd) fits some of the definitions of January 6, it excludes the political narrative and the where and when of the attack - at the Government's Capitol and at the moment of the certification of an election. Hence why insurrection is the more applicable term for what happened on that day. As the goal, thanks in part to the chants to 'hang Mike Pence' as well as the rally being labelled 'the stop the steal rally,' was clearly to stop the certification of Trump's election loss and to prohibit the peaceful transfer of power.My common sense leads me to believe that the violence was politically motivated. From my view, those who forcefully entered and incited others likely understood that disrupting the vote count would halt proceedings.
I believe we're dealing with two distinct matters here. First, there are Trump's numerous allegations and legal actions regarding what he alleged to be electoral fraud. Second, there are the supporters who attended his Jan 6th rally, where some marched to the Capitol and departed afterward, while others remained and may have been encouraged by those seeking to cause disruption. This ultimately led to clashes with law enforcement, Congress seeking safety, and the delay in the certification of electoral votes by Pence.
The basic definition of 'insurrection' by the Oxford, Webster, or any other authoritative dictionary, is purely for the laity sack, to grasp the idea of a revolution. But insurrection is also a legal and constitutional term. The Courts will determine the basic, legal, constitution, and sometimes the 'technical' aspects. Significantly, all that we've been discussing about insurrection could fail to satisfy the law. they'll be consider as laymans opinion.
K -There are two key factors to those who are so disdainful of Trump and who want to label those who support him.
K- They are 75% or more likely to believe MSM sources of information as legitimate and above reproach.
M- Just like you and Trumpers believe Fox an MAGA news
K- Almost every single person working in the MSM today is part of those University indoctrinated with woke-mind-virus, they truly believe your average American is an evil White-Supremacist for believing in America first, borders, patriotism, etc.
M-Please give me an example of woke-mind-virus. We don't believe that the average white person in America is an evil white supremist. However if they are brandishing Nazi symbols, that is different.
K- And they have bought into some form of the New Democratic mindset that America was built by evil white men, CRT, Victimology, Equity not Equality... those in control are actually regulating and enforcing this ideology into every aspect of Government they can reach into today... Federal, Military and Beyond.
M- I don't know what history books you read, but what you said is complete BS, The truth is we all want the same things. It's just that you and your ilk have been brainwashed with Trumpism which is more of a threat to our democratic republic.
K -This New Democratic ideology is completely and entirely opposite of all that the United States of America stood for at its best and brightest moments.
M- The truth is we all want the same things as defined in the preamble to the constitution, but Trumpism has divided this country into two forms of government, a democratic republic and whatever Trump and his cult-like, brainwashed supporters want.
As usual, Wilderness changes the words to suit his own narrative. The original statement was that he organized and incited, but notice how he changes the words to 'planned.'
That he thinks there were just a 'handful of yahoos' there that day is another attempted failure to rewrite the history of that day. Nor does he ever admit the timing of that domestic terror attack - that it took place exactly during the certification of a presidential election - where the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next is confirmed.
His omissions of these details are comical at this point. Let alone the many other illegal avenues Trump and his surrogates tried to overturn the election at both the state and federal level. You won't hear him mention any of these, ever.What is really comical is that declaring that same handful of idiots, armed with a flagpole and fire extinguisher, tried to take over the government of the US.
We all know better, but the fantastic tale continues to this date...in an obvious effort to remove a political opponent from the scene.Wilderness: I don't think the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and the governors standing by with a fake electoral college slate would appreciate being called a handful of idiots.
You are right about the fantastic tale continuing, but it is Trump and all his brainwashed Trumpers who continue to spout lies about losing an election. Trump is a sick puppy who can't accept losing anything. That's why he delays court proceedings and appeals judgments against him.PP, why shouldn't Trump appeal? It's a judiciary process...until appeal is final at the USA Supreme Court. Yes you know that, and I know too. And as for his delay tactics, in cases and appeals, its obvious he wants to get to the November elections.
'Handful of idiots' is lie number one. There have been hundreds charged and convicted.
Lie number two is 'tried to take over the government.' This insurrection was an attack aimed at stopping the peaceful transfer of power on January 6.
Apparently, you don't know better and are the one spinning fantastic tales not ground in the facts.I do agree -- In my view, the Jan 6th protest escalated into what some might label a "riot." However, if the intention truly was to overthrow the Government, one would expect armed individuals to have utilized firearms. The media coverage of the events has been exaggerated to such an extent that it strains credulity. Many have latched onto terms like "insurrection" without fully examining what transpired. In truth, the events of January 6th did not match the severity of the death toll, destruction, and blatant violence witnessed during what was dubbed the "summer of love."
What if the real certification was stopped, by "rioters" and the Governors replaced it with their fake slate of electors? Biden would then be removed from office and replaced with Trump...What would you call that?
It is important to note, if Pence refused to certify the real slate and replaced it with the fake slate, Trump and the "rioters" would have been successful in their mission.
Again, what should that be called? Because their intention and goal was to stop our sacred government process and the peaceful transfer of power to the next duly elected president.
The fact that they were not successful should not minimize the gravity as to what they and Trump were trying to do to our government process. You can call it whatever you want, but no matter how you slice it , it would be in violation of our Constitution. Our constitution can't defend itself. That's why there is a sworn oath to protect it."What if the real certification was stopped, by "rioters" and the Governors replaced it with their fake slate of electors? Biden would then be removed from office and replaced with Trump...What would you call that? "
Please consider that what you described did not happen in reality. In the 2020 United States presidential election, there were no instances where the certification process was truely stopped by rioters, nor were there any fake slates of electors substituted by governors. Joe Biden won the presidential election and was duly certified as the winner by the Electoral College and Congress. Any hypothetical scenario suggesting otherwise would not align with the factual events that took place. Yes, the procedure was held up by a matter of hours due to the riot, but ultimately certification was completed that evening. Our democracy held steady.
It's important to acknowledge that VP Pence fulfilled his constitutional duty during the certification process on January 6, Despite immense pressure and public scrutiny, Vice President Pence upheld his oath to the Constitution and carried out his responsibilities as prescribed by law. There is no credible evidence to suggest that he ever considered deviating from his duty to certify the legitimate electoral results.
Pence's commitment to upholding the rule of law and respecting the outcomes of free and fair elections played a crucial role in safeguarding the integrity of our democratic process. His actions on that day demonstrated a steadfast dedication to the principles of democracy and the peaceful transfer of power, despite the challenging circumstances. This is what I witnessed... The what-ifs did not occur, I trusted Pence would do the right thing, as he did.
"Again, what should that be called? Because their intention and goal was to stop our sacred government process and the peaceful transfer of power to the next duly elected president."
Is it not essential to assess the events of January 6, with a balanced and objective perspective? While there were undoubtedly individuals who sought to disrupt the certification process and undermine the peaceful transfer of power, it's also important to examine the overall impact and intentions of those involved.
It's true that the riot did not ultimately halt the certification process, and there were no formal attempts to establish control over the government through overt actions such as seizing the building or appointing alternative leadership. Additionally, the legal system has been actively engaged in holding accountable those responsible for unlawful behavior on that day.
We should also perhaps acknowledge the effectiveness of our legal system in addressing criminal behavior is crucial. It reflects the strength of our democratic institutions and the rule of law. However, it's also important to remain vigilant against any attempts to undermine the democratic process and to address the underlying factors that contributed to the events of January 6th to prevent similar incidents in the future.
Several of those arrested faced charges related to sedition and conspiracy. Whether these charges constitute a violation of our Constitution is uncertain. While the Constitution does not explicitly mention "sedition" and "conspiracy," it does address similar concepts and establishes the legal framework for governing such offenses.
Considering your concerns regarding the allegations against Trump regarding the events of January 6th, should we maintain trust in our legal system to thoroughly address these charges and ensure justice through a fair trial?I agree with you comments. However, the argument that was made is not calling Jan.6 an insurrection. If it was not an insurrection, then what was it and what should the sum total of the actions taken by Trump and his cohorts to steal an election be called?
All the actions the Japanese took at Pearl Harbor were called, "A day that will live in infamy". It had a lot of moving parts just like Trump's attempt to steal an election also has a lot of moving parts.
This is a compilation of the definition of an insurrection from Meriam Webster and Britannica:
"An insurrection is an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It involves organized and often violent actions taken by a group of people to challenge or overthrow the ruling authority. The term implies a significant uprising that aims to disrupt the existing order and may lead to social or political change. The historical context of insurrections varies, but they typically involve resistance against oppressive regimes or perceived injustices."" If it was not an insurrection, then what was it and what should the sum total of the actions taken by Trump and his cohorts to steal an election be called?"
I think we are getting somewhere...
It's important to acknowledge that any planning involved in the Capitol attack appears to have been poorly executed and loosely coordinated among the perpetrators. Consequently, I am hesitant to attribute the violence we witnessed to a plan in which Trump was directly involved. Presently, there is no concrete evidence implicating Trump in orchestrating the Capitol attack. ( as of yet)
Regarding Trump's request for Vice President Pence to halt the count, it could be interpreted as a strategic move to disrupt the proceedings rather than a call for violence. In my view, Trump's pre-January 6th actions, including his claims of election fraud, are distinct, and separate from the events of the riot. The handling of the riot through arrests and legal consequences demonstrates appropriate law enforcement response.
Separately, Trump's legal matters will unfold through the upcoming trial, and it remains uncertain what evidence will be presented or the verdict reached.
Additionally, the individuals involved in the Capitol violence appeared disorganized rather than part of a coordinated effort, suggesting that the escalation into a riot may have been driven by a subset of instigators within the protest.
As for the characterization of the January 6th events as an insurrection, I have reservations. While it was a serious breach of security and lawlessness, the term "insurrection" implies a coordinated attempt to overthrow the government, which doesn't seem to align with the chaotic nature of the events.
And as we now know because of legitimate reporting that came months after the fact, and released videos that came out months after the fact, there were people within the ranks of those police protecting the capital that were INSTIGATING the crowd. People who were not part of the Capital police, according to eyewitness testimony of police on the scene that day.
Throwing dangerous flash bangs and tear gas into the crowd PRIOR to the crowd ever making the effort to overrun their ranks... instigating the crowd into action, especially after one of those protesting died from cardiac arrest after a flash bang went off right next to him.
Then there was also the lack of communication with the FBI, the lack of co-ordination with the National Guard, the stand down order sent so that none arrived on the scene, etc.Please cite these " legitimate" sources. Thanks
People within the ranks of the police, but who were not police. They wanted to instigate the crowd to try and stop an election that Joe Biden won. Is it just me, or is that as ridiculous as it sounds?
I am sure if it is not from CNN or its like, you do not consider it "legitimate".
Former Capitol Police Chief Testifies on January 6 Security Failures
https://www.c-span.org/video/?530535-1/ … y-failures
Ex-Capitol Police Chief Sounds Alarm That Jan. 6 Was 'Cover-Up'
https://www.newsweek.com/ex-capitol-pol … er-1817365
Jan 6 Narratives CRUMBLING As VIDEO EVIDENCE Exposes Democrats’ LIES: Trump
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzHKtXwZrzo
I am sure anyone interested can peruse the internet if they want, plenty of interviews done by Tucker on X, in non-MSM media, regarding the actions of the FBI on the scene for instance.Ken: The National Review, Drudge Report, Wall Street Journal: 3 of the 23 newspapers I read every day.
Be wary of making accusations.Touche
Fair enough, I read those on occasion myself, and when information wasn't so easy for me to find on the internet, I read the NR and WSJ as regularly as I could.
Ken: Nice try at putting out red herrings there. Do you deny that Trump and company was trying to steal the election from Biden who was the duly elected president? Please post the sources for your claims. You never answered my questions. What would you call Jan. 6 if Trump and company would have been successful in replacing Biden as president by using a fake electoral college slate?
Anything Trump these days will be twisted. Leave Trump alone, or give him some breath. Obviously, I'm tired of all the bad things Trump, is being label with. I wish his case was fast track to the USA Supreme Court. And of course, Trump, will do anything tactful to delay case(s) to the Supreme Court. That's his business. Who else here can deny that? 'Good luck' to him.
Noting that Trump's supporters no longer believe that he can receive a fair trial. He has completely undermined the credibility of the legal system in their eyes. First, he undermined faith in our elections, now he's undermined faith in the judicial.
This is what authoritarian brainwashing looks like. In this, the two parties stand in stark contrast.Or perhaps, it is simply a matter of either believing the Mail In Ballot changes made allowed for fraud (a stolen election) or you don't.
Same for Jan 6, you can review testimony and video and believe it was an insurrection or not, and then following that, you can listen to Trump's speech and decide he instigated it or not.
What I find... is that people's opinions on these matters fall pretty regularly toward whatever their political bias is.
I have not seen anyone that identifies as Democrat standing up and saying the election was rigged, or that the justice system is being weaponized (until the recent fraud case, now even some Democrats are yelping, but those are businessmen and investors).
And those that claim the election was rigged, that Trump is being railroaded by an out of control Justice system, are now labeled Republicans, though people like Elon Musk, not so long ago, were very much in the Democrat column.Allowed for fraud is not fraud. So MAGA believes without a shred of actual evidence - they have theory and supposition. And believing it was only swing states, whereas 31 states made pandemic-related changes in 2020. Believing then that only one side would be committing fraud. Believing that changes made that late in an election could lead to the levels of fraud that would be both undetectable and could change an election. And believing that those committing such fraud would only aim to affect the election of a president and not also down-ballot races. This is what we call conspiracy theories and one party specializes in this type of thinking, if you want to call it that.
As for January 6, relying solely on Trump's ellipse speech (which did have words that incited the crowd), without considering his secret plan to send the crowd to the Capitol, that he stopped Secret Service from searching for weapons, and the tweet he sent after the violence had already began that targeted Mike Pence is really the political bias that defines some people's opinions on whether his actions would constitute incitement. Actions that a plaintiff proved in a court of law constituted engagement in an insurrection.
And you haven't seen anyone that is Democrat standing up and saying the election was rigged because there has been no credible evidence to back up those claims from Trump's MAGA supporters - which now includes Elon Musk, after he purchased Twitter to allow white supremacists to freely post their hate publicly.
All we do see is his supporters coming on these forums and denying most of the damning evidence that leads to his failures in the courts. Which is just a further display of them either lacking the educational foundation to discuss the topic well or making a choice to ignore the facts of the cases in another gross show of political bias. The jury is still out on those two options.Infomullet.com: "Former President Trump is not being prosecuted for habitual fraud because of his politics, he's being prosecuted for habitual fraud because he is a habitual fraudster.
There's a lot of noise surrounding Trupm's conviction, and penalty, for fraud in New York. One of those concepts circulating is that the statute Trump was prosecuted under, New York Executive Law § 63(12), is a law that is almost never used, is weighted in favor of securing convictions for prosecutors, and because it is so rarely used, and so unfair, its use in this case is purely political.
Except it's 63(12) is not used rarely. It's just used less frequently than garden variety fraud for the same reason mass murders are less frequent in the FBI reports than individual murders. You have to have killed multiple people to get labeled with mass murder.
Likewise, statute 63(12) is designed for habitual repeat offenders. You have to already have a track record, or lots of evidence of significant patterns of sustained fraud in a given case to qualify for it. It can't be used for a one-off single act.
And within that context, it's not rarely or almost never used. It's been used against Earnest Young (2014), Exxon (2018), Amazon (2021), Shrekli and many others."
With this, I agree.
And it is worth noting:
Pence upheld his oath to the Constitution and carried out his responsibilities as prescribed by law
As opposed to Trump.
Pence's commitment to upholding the rule of law and respecting the outcomes of free and fair elections played a crucial role in safeguarding the integrity of our democratic process.
Again, as opposed to Trump.
Yet, Trump is your (GOP) candidate, and Pence is deemed a coward, traitor, RINO, etc.
Huh.An 'insurrection' is too technical a word to describe Jan 6th. So are other synonyms like mutiny, which is also technical. Riot or rising in a civil setting are both akin. So is 'uprisimg' too. Consequently, these aspects are quickly contained within minutes or hours. Had the former Capitol Police Chief had not resigned, he could have prevent the riot. Thnse that did the best to put down the rising are brave and heros.
Related Discussions
- 55
Greater Idaho? When it comes to Rightwinger be prepared for the absurd
by Credence2 2 years ago
A little background, folkshttps://www.opb.org/article/2020/11/16/ … -now-what/Have a look at that revised Greater Idaho, is that not ridiculous?I say to those dispossessed types, if you don't like Oregon and its politics, just move to Idaho!!We had such a move in Colorado with the sod...
- 342
Better hang on to your MAGAT hats, Rightwingers!
by Credence2 19 months ago
Republicans feign outrage over Biden's recent comments?It's enough to make you dizzy, isn't it? Here we have evidence of Republicans routinely calling Democrats fascists (and communists and even pedophiles etc.) yet they are, once again having a hissy fit over Biden using the same word to describe...
- 122
Will 2024 Arrive in Time to Save our Country/World?
by Ken Burgess 2 years ago
The obviousness that we need new leadership in Washington has never been clearer.The corrupt Crony System that has long ruled DC got its way and thrust upon the American people their selected stooge (Biden) who, as of this year, has been involved in DC politics for 50 years... 50!!!Biden first...
- 35
Why do people risk death to get into America?
by Scott Belford 12 months ago
Most conservatives, especially of the MAGA variety, have loudly laid out a NOT WELCOME sign to anyone who is not white and wealthy from immigrating, legally or not legally, into America. This mind-set is a main platform of the Republican party today.But I ask you, why wouldn't America welcome...
- 13
For Conservatives Only, WHERE IS AMERICA GOING or HAS AMERICA GONE?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 9 months ago
What is the current state of America? Do you believe that America will get much worse before it becomes better? Or do you believe that America will fall as a country?
- 18
Weaponization & Fascism: The Dangers of Another Trump Presidency
by Annegray 9 months ago
I realize this is an OP --- I must ask do you have any form of routes to back this comment "Trump has a detailed plan to consolidate power if he retakes the White House. He is planning to completely overhaul how the government works if he wins the 2024 presidential election, which would...