American Politics

[QUOTE=Tavares;2524755]After telling his supporters over and over again that the elections were rigged and asking them to "stop the steal"? Isn't it enough? What the next step would be to "stop the steal" except for storming the Capitol and preventing the Congress from certifying the results? You are in bad faith. Or you want to pull us mongers' leg?[/QUOTE]I would say that you're in bad faith.

I understand what this is about, you liberals supports political violence and terrorism as long as it's carried out by your own people. What you haven't realized is that conservatives do not condone political violence no matter of the perpetrators political affiliation.

[QUOTE=Detwing1;2524725]So you're still drinking the kool aid?[/QUOTE]So you actually believe that Biden wants to unite the nation? LMFAO!

In a way it's actually true, he wants to unite the nation but without having to compromise on a single issue. Joe Biden is the most radical left wing president USA ever seen.

[QUOTE=Tavares;2524755]After telling his supporters over and over again that the elections were rigged and asking them to "stop the steal"? Isn't it enough? What the next step would be to "stop the steal" except for storming the Capitol and preventing the Congress from certifying the results? You are in bad faith. Or you want to pull us mongers' leg?[/QUOTE]I took that to mean to demonstrate, peacefully, outside the Capitol. As did the vast majority of the tens of thousands / hundreds of thousands of Trump supporters who went on the protest. It was just a tiny minority of Trump supporters that got carried away and entered the Capitol Building, along with some anti-fa agitators. Some of the protestors broke in, some were waved in by the security who were guarding the building. But But the very idea that Trump wanted an insurrection is simply preposterous. Those protestors that broke the law will have to face the consequences of their actions and Trump has condemned those that broke the law.

As for the allegations that the election was rigged, Biden could have stepped up back in November and announced that his first act after he was sworn in as President would be to set up an independent audit of the voting and invited Trump to participate. But Biden didn't. It's almost as if he, and the Democrats, are frightened of what such an audit might dig up.

[QUOTE=Mdemde;2524806]I took that to mean to demonstrate, peacefully, outside the Capitol. As did the vast majority of the tens of thousands / hundreds of thousands of Trump supporters who went on the protest. It was just a tiny minority of Trump supporters that got carried away and entered the Capitol Building, along with some anti-fa agitators. Some of the protestors broke in, some were waved in by the security who were guarding the building. But But the very idea that Trump wanted an insurrection is simply preposterous. Those protestors that broke the law will have to face the consequences of their actions and Trump has condemned those that broke the law.

As for the allegations that the election was rigged, Biden could have stepped up back in November and announced that his first act after he was sworn in as President would be to set up an independent audit of the voting and invited Trump to participate. But Biden didn't. It's almost as if he, and the Democrats, are frightened of what such an audit might dig up.[/QUOTE]Hundreds of judges, many of them republicans appointed by Trump, officials galore from every state, many of them republicans as well, confirmed Biden's win, several files, submitted by Trump's legal team, were laughed out of court after court.

You are a second edition of Shoo Bree? If not, stop beating about the bush and tell us once and for all WHO in your opinion did win the election?

[QUOTE=Mdemde;2524745]My questions were: What exactly did Trump say or do to encourage people to riot? Can you show me this clear evidence including any direct quotes?

You haven't answered the questions. But yes of course he knew there would be a protest, because he was the one who called for the protest! But he did NOT incite or encourage these protestors to commit violence or to engage in any illegal activity.[/QUOTE]If Trump did not intend for his lies and rant to rile up his mob to storm and invade the Capitol Building then when the case is made at his Impeachment trial in the Senate he can present the evidence that he immediately picked up his well worn phone to call out the military and demand all effort be made to stop them the minute he saw on live TV like the rest of us that his mob was doing exactly that.

Surely there must be plenty of evidence that he was shocked and dismayed by behavior he never, ever intended, in real time, when he saw them climbing the walls, breaking windows, getting a blow-by-blow report for what they were actually doing when they arrived at the Capitol Building on his orders. And he must have gotten that intel sooner than almost anyone else in the country. So there must also be a phone record and lots of documentation of President Trump making those calls at an emergency pace within a minute of the first sound and report of broken glass.

Now, if instead, there is only evidence and testimony of him sitting back on his couch watching the rioters storm and invade the place without him springing into action to call out the troops to respond to what he later called "defiling the seat of American democracy", well then that behavior will go a long way to substantiating the most difficult aspect to prove for the crime of inciting a riot with ones words; intent.

"This going to be hard to live down.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer got a rise out of lawmakers on the Senate floor Friday when he fumbled his words and said that they will have to decide if former President Donald Trump incited the "erection" against the US.

"Make no mistake, there will be a trial and when that trial ends, senators will have to decide if they believe Donald John Trump incited the erection against the United States," Schumer said. . . " NY Post.

Commenters: "Gads. Maybe he has whatever Biden has. " "Erections have consequences."

"is it constitutional to impeach someone not in office? This seems like a pretty straightforward yes or no question. If it's unclear, and they move forward, I can't wait until the trial for Obama once the MAGA party moves in."

Is that Jeffrey Toobin's defense? Trump incited his erection? LOL.

"That was Freudian. Chuckie has always had a hard on for Trump since Day One. " "In before the Toobin remark. " "Is that Jeffrey Toobin's defense? Trump incited his erection? LOL".

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2524821]If Trump did not intend for his lies and rant to rile up his mob to storm and invade the Capitol Building then when the case is made at his Impeachment trial in the Senate he can present the evidence that he immediately picked up his well worn phone to call out the military and demand all effort be made to stop them the minute he saw on live TV like the rest of us that his mob was doing exactly that.

Surely there must be plenty of evidence that he was shocked and dismayed by behavior he never, ever intended, in real time, when he saw them climbing the walls, breaking windows, getting a blow-by-blow report for what they were actually doing when they arrived at the Capitol Building on his orders. And he must have gotten that intel sooner than almost anyone else in the country. So there must also be a phone record and lots of documentation of President Trump making those calls at an emergency pace within a minute of the first sound and report of broken glass.

Now, if instead, there is only evidence and testimony of him sitting back on his couch watching the rioters storm and invade the place without him springing into action to call out the troops to respond to what he later called "defiling the seat of American democracy", well then that behavior will go a long way to substantiating the most difficult aspect to prove for the crime of inciting a riot with ones words; intent.[/QUOTE]

So, what's in the letter Trump left for Biden? I know! "I won sleepy Joe"! LOLOLOL!

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2524821]Now, if instead, there is only evidence and testimony of him sitting back on his couch watching the rioters storm and invade the place without him springing into action to call out the troops to respond to what he later called "defiling the seat of American democracy", well then that behavior will go a long way to substantiating the most difficult aspect to prove for the crime of inciting a riot with ones words; intent.[/QUOTE]There are a lot of accounts (I believe corroborating more than a dozen sources) of WH staff and government officials present in the White House when Trump finished inciting on January 6th and went back inside the White House. The Trump White House leaks more than a 1992 Cadillac with over 180,000 miles on the odometer.

Donald Trump riled up the crowd with his first words at around 12:15 until his final words to the Eclipses' crowd around an hour later at 1:15 PM. Before TrumpShit finished his speaking, crowd members began heading to the Capital. The first of five barricades at the Capital was breeched at 12:53 PM and by 2 PM essentially all the different barricade boundaries had been crossed by groups of rioters.

He was delighted with the rioting he was seeing on TV and he seemed confused (like not understanding) that the people around him were not as gleeful about what was unfolding as he was.

He expressed his pleasure and enjoyment with the insurrection.

Numerous WH people were encouraging TrumpShit to call in the National Guard, but for around two hours of repeated encouragement from the folks there, TrumpShit made no call to the National Guard.

Mike Pence, securely guarded with other Pence family members in the Capital grounds was the one to eventually call for the National Guard.

The National Guard mobilized after a brief delay, the delay used to confirm they would act this time on Pence's request alone.

If you remember, around a half dozen people who work in the Trump administration, and who were witness to all this fucked-up crap from the President, resigned in less than 24 hours.

What is the literary comparison?

Maybe Roman Emperor Nero fiddling as Rome burned?

[QUOTE=Mdemde;2524806]I took that to mean to demonstrate, peacefully, outside the Capitol. As did the vast majority of the tens of thousands / hundreds of thousands of Trump supporters who went on the protest. It was just a tiny minority of Trump supporters that got carried away and entered the Capitol Building, along with some anti-fa agitators. Some of the protestors broke in, some were waved in by the security who were guarding the building. But But the very idea that Trump wanted an insurrection is simply preposterous. Those protestors that broke the law will have to face the consequences of their actions and Trump has condemned those that broke the law.

As for the allegations that the election was rigged, Biden could have stepped up back in November and announced that his first act after he was sworn in as President would be to set up an independent audit of the voting and invited Trump to participate. But Biden didn't. It's almost as if he, and the Democrats, are frightened of what such an audit might dig up.[/QUOTE]No there was a coordinated attack on the capital building. Yes some protestors may have just come along for the ride. No there was no antifa presence. All those arrested have long social media histories of Trump support.

The Federal government has no say in how states conduct there elections. Trump already did an audit in 2017 and found nothing. Many states just told him to go jump. Biden could not institute an audit without cooperation from the states. Georgia did several recounts and an audit and it did not change the result. The bottom line is Trumps behavior antagonizes more people than it wins.

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2524800]I would say that you're in bad faith.

I understand what this is about, you liberals supports political violence and terrorism as long as it's carried out by your own people. What you haven't realized is that conservatives do not condone political violence no matter of the perpetrators political affiliation.[/QUOTE]So all those militias Trump so loves just like to play with those guns and go marching with them but of course they would never use them.

[QUOTE=Mdemde;2524745]My questions were: What exactly did Trump say or do to encourage people to riot? Can you show me this clear evidence including any direct quotes?[/QUOTE]The way you ask this question, it's as if you are under the impression that impeachment hearings are criminal trials in which evidence must be provided to prove guilt "without a doubt."

The reality, however, is that while impeachment is a legal hearing, it is not necessarily a criminal trial. The standard of proof is much lower than, say, a murder trial, despite multiple numerous defense teams' attempts to try a case otherwise.

As such, if a reasonable case can be made that, even if Trump did not directly instruct the crowd to cause violence, his actions leading up to the 6th of January (knowingly promoting unwarranted claims, coercing election "officials to find votes," the inflammatory speeches and tweets, etc) it would be reasonable for the Senate to find him responsible for "incitement of insurrection" even without direct verbiage to promote violence. In this case, it is a case of personal conduct, one that betrays "public trust. " Even if his words cannot be proven to be direct incitement, his cumulative actions from the election to the riots are being evaluated in their totality, not just the speech on the 6th of January.

(I am no constitutional legal expert but I can read Wikipedia and the sources that it references.)

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2524801]In a way it's actually true, he wants to unite the nation but without having to compromise on a single issue.[/QUOTE]As opposed to Trump, who would just get outmaneuvered by politicians in both parties that could easily wipe the floor with Trump when he would stubbornly refuse to compromise, like a confused, frustrated & powerless child. Easy to outmaneuver the outmatched and unaware.

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2524801]Joe Biden is the most radical left wing president USA ever seen.[/QUOTE]Funny, I hear him always described as a moderate democrat by people who are professionally employed as political analysts.

Not amateur blind fools.

[QUOTE=Canada;2524921]Did you think of this on your own or did you have to go to a liberal school to think this stupid crap up?[/QUOTE]No schooling at all should be necessary to figure out if Trump just sat on his big rump and watched his mob invade and vandalize the Capitol Building on TV rather than spring into action to call out the troops to stop them the first minute he saw that happening then they were obviously doing exactly what he intended his lies and rant to incite them to do.

Really? Something so obvious never once occurred to you in the weeks since the insurrection until I mentioned it here?

[QUOTE=Travv;2523894]

Joseph Biden's "inauguration" is empty.
Compare the images from 2017 (Trump's inauguration) and 2021 (Biden's) for yourself. . . "

[/QUOTE]Why not compare with Obama inauguration? Insted the half empty Trump. Or was it the Kukuksclan white dress? - that make it look so empty during Trumps inauguration?

An opinion piece by Douglas Murray, published today in the Daily Mail (link below).

In what way is this policy a good idea? Is this not open to abuse? Would you Liberals be happy to let your daughter or your granddaughter or your girlfriend share a restroom / changing room with a male?

"During his first hours in office, Biden signed an executive order calling on all federal agencies to ensure that people who identify as the opposite sex should be free to use whatever changing room or 'restroom' they wish to. And that school sports must sign up to 'combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity'.

There is something of the late Roman empire about this, the arrogance of a ruling elite in terminal decline. The world's most powerful man gets into office at a time of unprecedented crisis and one of his first priorities is to ensure that men who identify as women should be allowed to use female changing rooms and pulverise any woman he comes across in competitive sports. All in the name of equality, obviously. ".

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9179953/DOUGLAS-MURRAY-Left-stop-fawning-Joe-Biden-fear-wont-end-well.html[/URL]