Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

Wasnt that just a statement by an anonymous Whitehouse "insiders", So as usual no proof he actually said it.

On to another point.
As far as the protestors go and it is unfortunate there was any violence as that always needs to be condemned but at least they seemed to be mostly peaceful protests, When I first saw some of the footage it seemed like the whole thing was chaos but infact most of it was like the video below, More like an occupy protest than anything else.

If this had been a BLM/Antifa protest all those statues would have been pulled down and based on their usual MO the place would have be set on fire.

BUTBUTBUTBUT BLM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fixed your post for you.

Its not what they did, but the fact they were allowed in in the first place is the problem.

I also dont remember the Occupy movement carrying zip-ties, firearms and pipe bombs in with them! And lets not ignore them pulling down the American flag to raise a Trump 2020 one in its place.

The amount which dominion are suing Sydney Powell for

*brings little finger to the side of my mouth in a dramatic fashion*

1.3 BILLION DOLLARS

The police beat the crap out out members of the press just standing in the street during BLM protests

I would just like to point out once again that the unit you saw guarding everything in DC five troops deep during anti police brutality protests this summer - but was nowhere to be found during a coup attempt - and the one you've seen in every compare and contrast montage about the disparity of response was actually the dead attacker's former one.

robinph wrote: »

It won't be successful as there is no time, but it just needs to start the process and Trump leaves as a twice lost the popular vote, twice impeached, one term president who isn't invited to the inauguration of his successor.

The Republican party just have to figure out what is the better look for them in 3 years times when campaigning for 2024 starts and if having Pence as their last president and having done the bare minimum to deal with Trump, who by then is likely to be locked up, or if they want Trump to be seen as not dealt with in the slightest by the party.

Nothing to lose for the dems, nothing to win for the GoP.

There technically is time. The Democrats need to be careful but so do the Republicans - it's about gauging whether GOP leaders are willing/ready to throw Trump under the bus.

For DNC it's a game of chicken - if they bring impeachment proceedings and Republicans agree that a former President can be tried for impeachment it opens a potential can of worms for everyone including Democrats.

I agree though, if any later than Monday there's no time for a trial and it's pure optics (which I don't necessarily disagree with).

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

As the terrorists in the Capitol had much more than just molotovs, I'm sure you can agree that they're a much bigger threat than BLM?

Here is the unfortunate thing.


There are old clips of commentators saying that, for the BLM, people are forced to protest, perhaps even violently, because they are fighting a system that is against them and that is the only way they can push back to try to change it.


The nutjobs that storm the Capitol, or at least those that travelled to DC in protest, will feel and claim the same thing.




If you establish the principle that a group of people who feel aggrieved and genuinely feel that they are not represented or are being oppressed somehow, are allowed to protest, even violently, then you have set a precedent. You cannot decided unilaterally who can and cannot feel aggrieved.



I think the scenes we saw storming the Capitol were shocking. I'm simply making the point that any commentator who justified any other riot on the basis that people felt aggrieved, cannot really come down heavily on them

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

On to another point.
As far as the protestors go and it is unfortunate there was any violence as that always needs to be condemned but at least they seemed to be mostly peaceful protests, When I first saw some of the footage it seemed like the whole thing was chaos but infact most of it was like the video below, More like an occupy protest than anything else.

If this had been a BLM/Antifa protest all those statues would have been pulled down and based on their usual MO the place would have be set on fire.

The vassssssssssstttt majority of BLM protests and protestors were entirely peaceful but it didn't stop you and the other Trump supporters on here labelling them as entirely violent.

5 people died in the couple of hours this 'peaceful protest' lasted bear in mind and there are shots of some of the rioters having multiple sets of restraints with them and that they apparently were calling for Mike Pence as they went through the halls. Not to mention the discovery of a IED's in the area which thankfully failed to operate.

So, now you might say, 'Well both sides are at it.' so let me stop you before you do.

One side was calling for the fair treatment of all people at the hands of people specifically employed to keep people safe. The other was seeking to prevent the actions of elected officials in certifying the results of a democratic election despite over 70 court applications about the election being thrown out, many by Trump appointed judges.

So no, these groups or events are in no way comparable to each other. And it goes further, all last summer we saw footage of preemptive attacks by police and by excessively violent behaviour by them on peaceful protestors while we listened to the President implore Governors to use the National Guard and to be forceful on these protestors and then on Wednesday heard that the Defense Dept headed by his newly appointed acting secretary rejected a call for the National Guard to be deployed to defend against the attack.

You guys lost your sh*t over people kneeling for during the anthem and pulling down statues of people who had fought against the USA but are seemingly ok with insurrectionists removing the American Flag from the capitol building and replacing it with the flag of reality TV personality and a failed business man while others walked with the flag of the Confederacy in the halls of the Capitol.

Trump, his family, his friends in the media, his donors, his supporters (including those on discussion forums thousands of miles away) cannot hide from the fact that he has been the worst President of the United States who is also a racist, imcompetent criminal.

History will ultimately look back on the 2 months after the US Presidential election in 2020 as being the time when the GOP had to face what it had become and take a step back or the time when the sitting President emboldened domestic terrorists which ultimately led to an increase in violence and conflict against the legislators of the country. Time will tell, and I don't need you to tell me which outcome you hope will emerge.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I think it's a good strategy, Dems know the 25th is never going to be invoked but now they can wait a few days and then go on national TV and claim they gave the Republicans time to do the right thing, they refused and continued to back a clearly unstable man so they have now been forced to start impeachment proceedings.

They come out of this looking like they tried everything they could to get an unhinged man out of the WH but they failed because the Republicans backed thier man to the bitter end.

The attack ads for the primaries and the the next election are all going to be focused on this. The next Republican presidential/VP nominees will have be squeaky clean and have zero ties to Trumps tenure or else the Dems will use that to attack whoever it is.

Eh. I can see your point in terms of 2022, but 2024 is too far off IMO in the political timeline for this to really be useful ammunition against moderate Republicans that they could swing (with the exception of Cruz and probably Graham if they run).

Overheal wrote: »

He did claim that.

I love that it was such an outright lie. We watched for what, two hours or so before the NG actually showed up. Even Fox news asked where they were.

robinph wrote: »

But it makes no difference if they wait until the 19th, impeachment still isn't going to remove Trump from office. He'll still be impeached though.

Meanwhile more cabinet members get to show themselves for the cowards they are in resigning rather than doing the 25th amendment thing and so show how spineless they are. Pence has a chance to recover some honour for the GoP and the dems are suggesting that it might be a good idea for him, but they have no need to force things. They can just sit and wait it out.

Would be safest if Trump is removed, but the dems don't have that option. It's only the GoP who can do that in the time left.

Respectfully disagree... I think it's way more important for the charges to be laid out on live television and the case to be made to the nation. IMHO from a political damage perspective that is way worse for the GOP than simply an impeachment at the buzzer.

Donald Trump wrote: »

I have seen this photo a few times used as proof of X/Y/Z and I think it is a lazy tactic.


At the time, there had been many violent scenes on the streets of many different cities across the US.


Had it been that these fellas on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial 2 hours after George Floyd way shot then it would be a good comparison.


Similarly, if Trumpers organise another protest on the National Mall over the coming days, you can be sure there would be heavy police, and other, presence there too.

Hang on hang on. Let's not forget that a lot of those violent clashes were due to so-called "proud boys" showing up to peaceful BLM protests to counter-protest.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Hang on hang on. Let's not forget that a lot of those violent clashes were due to so-called "proud boys" showing up to peaceful BLM protests to counter-protest.

Also a crap load were started by just all out anarchists (of all races) who just wanted to stir things up and cause havoc. They were caught on film repeatedly at each protest.

It just doesn't suit the narrative at all though.

seamus wrote: »

Devil could be in the detail here. D.C. has its own National Guard unit. Maryland is a different jurisdiction, so likely have to get approval at a federal level to deploy their National Guard to D.C..
Nevertheless, Trump was still lying when he said he deployed the NG to DC. Because we know Pence and the Defence secretary did it without Trump.

So there are still questions as to why that had to happen, and why Maryland was denied permission to get involved seeing as they're no more than 5km away.

It could be like every US cop movie ever made where the Federal Agents turn up and the local sheriff gets the hump and tries to tell them to piss off because it is his jurisdiction