Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Manic Moran

Nody wrote: »

A) Protestor trying to storm the senate, she was shot through the door by police/secret service after ignoring their commands to stop. It's the twitter pic earlier with drawn weapon.

Refusing to respond to police instruction is not itself dangerous to human life. The police reaction to the refusal can certainly be dangerous as a legitimate reaction to a perceived threat, but perception is not in itself applied to intent.

This does not include the police/guards/Secret Service people who've been hurt so far and there are multiple of them reported when trying to defend the building and of course the fact they ignored police orders.

Scuffles to include broken bones are not normally considered dangerous to human life. That's why there are charges like "Aggravated assault" or "battery" which are lesser than attempted murder, recklessness and the like.

They tried to storm the senate and congress to protest the count; that would fall under armed coercion for sure. So B ticked.

Protest and coercion are not necessarily the same thing. Coercion requires the intent to force Congress not to certify under threat. Protest can be an expression of disapproval and request. We've had most of a year of the latter. That does not, of course, absolve them from the crimes of trespass, disorderly conduct, destruction of property (as applicable), or provide immunity from the actions of law enforcement to remove them and regain control.

Thargor

B-b-b-but Antifa...

https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1346906369232920576

seamus

Nody wrote: »

Can you spot the difference?

It's not like they can claim they were caught by surprise. Today of all days was the time to have a large security presence around government institutions. Trump had implored his supporters to go to DC on the 6th.

This was a deliberate decision to have an insufficient police force at Capitol Hill today.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Manic Moran wrote: »

Refusing to respond to police instruction is not itself dangerous to human life. The police reaction to the refusal can certainly be dangerous as a legitimate reaction to a perceived threat, but perception is not in itself applied to intent.



Scuffles to include broken bones are not normally considered dangerous to human life. That's why there are charges like "Aggravated assault" or "battery" which are lesser than attempted murder, recklessness and the like.



Protest and coercion are not necessarily the same thing. Coercion requires the intent to force Congress not to certify under threat. Protest can be an expression of disapproval and request. We've had most of a year of the latter. That does not, of course, absolve them from the crimes of trespass, disorderly conduct, destruction of property (as applicable), or provide immunity from the actions of law enforcement to remove them and regain control.

Mental gymnastics at its finest. But sure keep on digging.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Refusing to respond to police instruction is not itself dangerous to human life. The police reaction to the refusal can certainly be dangerous as a legitimate reaction to a perceived threat, but perception is not in itself applied to intent.



Scuffles to include broken bones are not normally considered dangerous to human life. That's why there are charges like "Aggravated assault" or "battery" which are lesser than attempted murder, recklessness and the like.



Protest and coercion are not necessarily the same thing. Coercion requires the intent to force Congress not to certify under threat. Protest can be an expression of disapproval and request. We've had most of a year of the latter. That does not, of course, absolve them from the crimes of trespass, disorderly conduct, destruction of property (as applicable), or provide immunity from the actions of law enforcement to remove them and regain control.

This is delusional. They stormed government buildings to the point where elected officials had to go into hiding for their own safety. They have been vocal at wanting to change the election result, which would be fine if they were outside.

Again. Whether or not they are successful is irrelevant for their status as terrorists. They are using the threat of violence to try and change the results. That they will fail does not change the intent.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

seamus wrote: »

It's not like they can claim they were caught by surprise. Today of all days was the time to have a large security presence around government institutions.

This was a deliberate decision to have an insufficient police force at Capitol Hill today.

Absolutely, not even in question. You'd even have to question if the initial storming of the building was planned by a certain group to instigate the chaos.

listermint

Christy42 wrote: »

This is delusional. They stormed government buildings to the point where elected officials had to go into hiding for their own safety. They have been vocal at wanting to change the election result, which would be fine if they were outside.

Again. Whether or not they are successful is irrelevant for their status as terrorists. They are using the threat of violence to try and change the results. That they will fail does not change the intent.

Let's not forget the bombs disposed off in the RNC..... Let's not forget

Rjd2

Nody wrote: »

BLM protest:

White Sunday Warriors for Trump protest:


Can you spot the difference?

Roughly how many citizens or BLM supporters were kidnapped that day ?

The response today wasn't great obviously, but that was more due to Trump been in control of so much rather than troops going all Nazi.

Manic Moran

sdanseo wrote: »

What on earth is intimidation and coercion if it's not storming a parliament?

People deliberately shooting indiscriminately from the visitor's gallery into Congress, hitting five Representatives, with the political goal of Puerto Rican independence? Someone deliberately killing three and wounding over a dozen on the parliamentary floor with the goal of Quebeqian independence?

This unruly mob came that close to attacking members of congress in their work that it looks like the Capitol Police has had to shoot someone as a result.

If that's not intimidation.. nothing is.

By that argument, anything scary and illegal can be coercion or intimidation. How many people does it take to change an unlawful protest in the Capitol to become a coercive storming?

paul71

Just listening for the last hour to 1 republic after another, the republican party HAS now split. Ted Cruz signed his political death warrant today.

Nody

Manic Moran wrote: »

By that argument, anything scary and illegal can be coercion or intimidation. How many people does it take to change an unlawful protest in the Capitol to become a coercive storming?

That's exactly the point; if they had been standing behind the police lines protesting peacefully that's not an attempt to coerce. When they actively assault and invade a federal government facility where the current politicians are deciding on the outcome of the election forcing the politicians to have to be evacuated while armed that's coercion and intimidation. That you can't see the difference between that is on you I'm afraid and you may want to think it over the implications. Now here's a fun scenario for you; replace the Trump supporters with Muslims with long beards; how do you think that would have been called in the news if they did exactly the same thing as the Trump supporters are doing currently? Would that then be considered terrorism or would it be misguided protestors? And do you think there would be as many people hurt and killed as now?

Tpcl20

CNN reporter being intimidated by people with MAGA flags "we are not rioters"

ancapailldorcha

I appreciate that this is an extremely tense time but I'm not having personal abuse here. Bans issued and posts deleted.

rosser44

Manic finally completes the journey, from patriotic member of the armed forces, sworn to uphold the constitution, to equivocating and talking down a terrorist attack on the core of the US government.

froog

surely twitter will ban him tonight. why wait two weeks?

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

People deliberately shooting indiscriminately from the visitor's gallery into Congress, hitting five Representatives, with the political goal of Puerto Rican independence? Someone deliberately killing three and wounding over a dozen on the parliamentary floor with the goal of Quebeqian independence?



By that argument, anything scary and illegal can be coercion or intimidation. How many people does it take to change an unlawful protest in the Capitol to become a coercive storming?

You aren't really comparing the storming of a government building to a protest outside it? It takes actually attempting to get within arms reach of elected officials while they were working. Police had to physically lock the doors to stop them getting near. We had a bomb in the rnc. We had multiple failed attempts on elected officials in Michigan and elsewhere.

I said before and will say again. There inability to get at the elected officials does not stop their intent.

Thargor

Do they really have no lockdown or emergency plan in place in that building? Or even just locks and bars on the doors? The plan if theres trouble is to shove a piano in front of the door and hope for the best?

seamus

DC are imposing a curfew. 6pm to 6am. That's just over an hour from now.

This is going to get ugly. With citizens off the street, it will turn violent.

The damage done to the US today is huge. It'll take years to repair this, if ever.

extra gravy

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1346934098384793606?s=19

*grabs popcorn*

listermint

Christy42 wrote: »

You aren't really comparing the storming of a government building to a protest outside it? It takes actually attempting to get within arms reach of elected officials while they were working. Police had to physically lock the doors to stop them getting near. We had a bomb in the rnc. We had multiple failed attempts on elected officials in Michigan and elsewhere.

I said before and will say again. There inability to get at the elected officials does not stop their intent.

Tearing their offices apart.

Planting devices in local RNC offices nearby.

Tpcl20

Police let protestors in.

https://twitter.com/anastasiakeeley/status/1346934751018541057?s=20

seamus

seamus wrote: »

This is going to get ugly. With citizens off the street, it will turn violent.

90+% will stream away in the next hour. More likely to see locals in the hood get batoned for going to the store after dark.

mm_surf

Nody wrote: »

That's exactly the point; if they had been standing behind the police lines protesting peacefully that's not an attempt to coerce. When they actively assault and invade a federal government facility where the current politicians are deciding on the outcome of the election forcing the politicians to have to be evacuated while armed that's coercion and intimidation. That you can't see the difference between that is on you I'm afraid and you may want to think it over the implications. Now here's a fun scenario for you; replace the Trump supporters with Muslims with long beards; how do you think that would have been called in the news if they did exactly the same thing as the Trump supporters are doing currently? Would that then be considered terrorism or would it be misguided protestors? And do you think there would be as many people hurt and killed as now?

Their intention was to change the outcome of the presidential election, Their behavior was in neither peaceful nor lawful.

While Manic may be claiming its not terrorism under the definition of the Patriot Act, it certainly is terrorism under the general description of that.

And arguably, it's damn close to sedition. In the legal sense.

Equally culpable (although I doubt it was their intent) are the Senators objecting today. I live in Missouri, Josh Hawley isn't going to come out of this without political taint.

M.

listermint

Tpcl20 wrote: »

Police let protestors in.

https://twitter.com/anastasiakeeley/status/1346934751018541057?s=20

Extremely poor video. The police there were surrounded left and right behind them so backed off. Look at the entire video...

Kermit.de.frog

Tpcl20 wrote: »

Police let protestors in.

https://twitter.com/anastasiakeeley/status/1346934751018541057?s=20

I don't think they had any choice numbers wise.

They were overwhelmed.

SouthWesterly

Just watching CBS news.
The DC Mayor has just announced that the 6pm curfew will be enforced.

Congress has said its going back into session at another location.
I wonder will the objectors still object after this.

LessOutragePlz

listermint wrote: »

Extremely poor video. The police there were surrounded left and right behind them so backed off. Look at the entire video...

But haven't you heard ACAB! All cops are bad!

irishrover99

The policing has been unbelievably slow today. Really reminds you of the chaos on 9/11(obviously without all the deaths) but serious review will be needed after this.

irishrover99

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Just watching CBS news.
The DC Mayor has just announced that the 6pm curfew will be enforced.

Congress has said its going back into session at another location.
I wonder will the objectors still object after this.

They will object about the new location

Rjd2

irishrover99 wrote: »

The policing has been unbelievably slow today. Really reminds you of the chaos on 9/11(obviously without all the deaths) but serious review will be needed after this.

The police aren't perfect obviously, but their slow response is more due to Trump's cronies deliberately hamstringing them today.