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

Overheal wrote: »

No. We will not bow to terrorism.

Covid 19 is not terrorism.

https://twitter.com/baothai1995/status/1347570577595265025?s=20

murpho999 wrote: »

It's not about terrorism , it's about covid safety and sending a different message out. Trump's rallies were dangerous in more ways than one.

flazio wrote: »

Covid 19 is not terrorism.

Covid wasn't going to prevent the inauguration from happening on the Capitol stage. They are still in the process of building it.

Terrorism won't, either.

Biden discouraged the public from gathering in masses on the mall. The ceremony itself will still take place.

flazio wrote: »

I'm relieved Trumps not going.

I also agree that the inauguration should be moved indoors to encourage people to stay safe at home. The events of Tuesday are likely to have caused a super spread.

Yes, indoors are notoriously awful areas to spread COVID... the virus HATES being in closed unventilated areas.

briany wrote: »

If Biden holds a small indoor event for his inauguration, is there any possibility that Trump could hold a rally in front of the Capitol building on the morning of Jan 20th that is essentially a parody of the traditional swearing-in ceremony? I mean, he would technically still be president up until 11:59 AM, as I understand it, and it's not as if Trump hasn't done things we have previously considered unimaginable and completely beneath the dignity of a sitting POTUS, so the question is whether there is any actual mechanisms beyond his control which would prevent him from doing something so crazy as that?

If you do anything less than the standard Inauguration, they will run hog wild with the "Biden wasn't really inaugurated" narrative. These idiots don't need much of an excuse to come up with such bull****. Obama and the Chief justice bumbled some of his first inagural oath and Republicans went into a spiral about it for 2 days before the Chief Justice performed the oath a second time just to shut them the **** up. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/23/barack-obama-oath-inauguration

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not going to bother responding to this aspect, it's so disingenuous it doesn't deserve a response.

The only "disingenuousness" is that on a day of disgraceful scenes in the US, and an attack and assault on the institutions underpinning their democracy, people want to score virtue signalling points on a completely separate agenda.



Perhaps people are trying to deflect from the seriousness of it..........by trying to create false equivalences so that people will talk about those false equivalences instead of the actual incident?


So what is your angle?

Overheal wrote: »

If you do anything less than the standard Inauguration, they will run hog wild with the "Biden wasn't really inaugurated" narrative. These idiots don't need much of an excuse to come up with such bull****

I don't think it matters how big or small an inauguration you have. Those clowns are going to state that they continue to recognise Trump as POTUS. It will be interesting to see exactly how much Trump continues to interact with such people and that concept after Jan. 20th.

briany wrote: »

I don't think it matters how big or small an inauguration you have. Those clowns are going to state that they continue to recognise Trump as POTUS. It will be interesting to see exactly how much Trump continues to interact with such people and that concept after Jan. 20th.

I reckon they won't bother with Washington, they tried but failed.

I reckon their next targets will be a few state capital buildings that they'll storm and take for Trump. Trump leaning states will be a push over but the battleground states could literally become battlegrounds.

Even though there are more licenced guns than there are citizens they're all in the hands of around 30%.

Foxtrol wrote: »

You're right, I predicted on here we'd see the usual two tier policing and soft touch on white mobs but I didn't predict that the level of collusion or utter incompetence of the police to go so soft to literally open gates, give directions, and take selfies with the white terrorists - risking the lives of their fellow officers, the entirety of 2 levels of government and most of the line of the presidential succession.

The mob could have been easily handled with even a fraction of the police response that it was clear in advance that the threat they posed deserved. The Capitol police were more prepared and stronger against disabled protesters than they were on these terrorists.

https://twitter.com/gutsywoman19/status/1346992180435574784?s=20

Again, as shocking as those scenes are, it is not the same scenario and your argument amounts to a tautology. It will always be easier to clear an actual genuine and peaceful protest



One of my best friends was arrested during a sit-down protest outside the Whitehouse. It was organised and she had received training and instruction on what to do after being arrested.

The cops gave them whatever warning to disperse and they did not and then the cops came in and lifted them one by one. Actually, she was about 30 at the time but she looked very young and the cops weren't going to arrest her as they though she was underage. So she had to correct them in order to be arrested.
They made their protest, got arrested, the group made their point and got their publicity over the issue (they were all photographed being arrested).



Had they tried to attack the cops in a mob, some would have gotten away. The fact that they were a genuine peaceful protest means that it is easy for the cops to deal with it.



The cops should have dealt with the recent storming far quicker and more harshly IMO. Comparing that to their ability to wheel out disabled people in wheelchairs and trying to use that as a proof of something is a load of bollix.

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

What I suspected would be the road they'd take after Donnie's Senate approved speech last night.. They will not convict him, AGAIN!

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1347568532951867392?s=19

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1347568806307258368?s=20

Confirms that he is playing Politics and not weighing the fact that the people he just named were very nearly hanged and quartered.

I don't think he understands that those 'patriots' probably would have put him on trial for perceived offenses as a RINO. Then killed him.

"Oh it's just 12 more days" and the rest of Trump's life to campaign and foment this **** over and over again. "Now now Mussolini, you gave it a good shot, but go home... come back next year though!"

Impeach him, make him forever ineligible, and disperse this violent, seditious cult.

For one President to go after another is not a good look. If Biden claims to be a President for all of America then he can't go after the 75m people who support Trump, needs to pardon Trump, the same way Nixon was pardoned . If he doesn't then he'll never heal the nation. One man v the nation. Put country before Trump, and bring peace with a pardon.

everlast75 wrote: »

Another disgraceful precedent set

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347569870578266115?s=19

That coward.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

For one President to go after another is not a good look. If Biden claims to be a President for all of American then he can't go after the 75m people who support him, needs to pardon Trump, the same way Nixon was pardoned . If he doesn't then he'll never heal the nation. One man v the nation. Put country before Trump, and bring peace with a pardon.

I could say a lot of choice words about that, or at you, but I will condense it:

F%ck no.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

For one President to go after another is not a good look. If Biden claims to be a President for all of American then he can't go after the 75m people who support him, needs to pardon Trump, the same way Nixon was pardoned . If he doesn't then he'll never heal the nation. One man v the nation. Put country before Trump, and bring peace with a pardon.

It's amazing that all the Trumpists are suddenly looking for unity and healing at the 11th hour. Pathetic.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Seriously, what is the hard on right wingers/Trump apologists have for statues?

They were losing their minds about them and any buildings being damaged over the summer and I've seen several posters here try to play down the incident this week due to how safe the statues were, basically ignoring the destruction to the buildings, attacks and the murder of police officers

They care about the statues about as much as Trump cares about the bible.

They are concerned because the removal of the statues would be seen to be a victory for people who they see as beneath them. Most of the statues in question were put in place in the mid to late 20th century as a counter to advances made by the civil rights activists.

Around the same time that desegregation was being enforced in schools, the same schools were being named after confederate era individuals so as to remind the newly admitted students just where they belonged.

It's a similar narrative from Conservatives in the UK and indeed in Ireland (as evidenced this platform at times), any progressive ideal towards others must be pushed back because it could mean a change in the world they have grown up in and are comfortable with.