Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Water John · 13-02-2021 12:23am

Sen Cornyn not getting the answer he was hoping for. He's pushing the line that Trump should be tried elsewhere but Raskin nailed it.

Headshot · 13-02-2021 12:33am

Well that's over

The house managers really destroyed Trump lawyers

It's like Trump went to the bargain bin for lawyers because no one else would represent him

Tell me how · 13-02-2021 12:40am

Headshot wrote: »

Well that's over

The house managers really destroyed Trump lawyers

It's like Trump went to the bargain bin for lawyers because no one else would represent him

They're still going to be able to claim a win in a Presidential impeachment trial on their record next week given the way the votes are aligned.

Pretty strong marketing tool even if the evidence of their competency is very weak based on this performance.

aloyisious · 13-02-2021 12:50am

CNN is reporting on a phonecall from Kevin McCarthy to Trump on the 06th Jan asking for him to call off the attackers, which might tempt GOP senators to review any adult response to what happened at the Capitol that day. Allegedly there are multiple members of the GOP conversant with the content of the call, having being informed by Mc Carthy of the content. Trump "they are antifa" McCarthy " they are not, they are your people" Trump "Well' you don't care about election as much as me" McCarthy "Who the F**K do you think you are talking to?"....

Headshot · 13-02-2021 12:51am

Tell me how wrote: »

They're still going to be able to claim a win in a Presidential impeachment trial on their record next week given the way the votes are aligned.

Pretty strong marketing tool even if the evidence of their competency is very weak based on this performance.

I could even win this trial which doesnt say alot about competency.

These guys will still continue to represent small time clients who got hit by a bus

Headshot · 13-02-2021 12:52am

aloyisious wrote: »

CNN is reporting on a phonecall from Kevin McCarthy to Trump on the 06th Jan asking for him to call off the attackers, which might tempt GOP senators to review any adult response to what happened at the Capitol that day. Allegedly there are multiple members of the GOP conversant with the content of the call, having being informed by Mc Carthy of the content. Trump "you don't care about election as much as me" McCarthy "Who the F**K do you think you are talking to?"....

Ya listening to it now

Very strange it's coming out now on the eve of the vote

Itssoeasy · 13-02-2021 12:54am

Nice to see the senate honour eugene goodman for his heroic actions on January 6th. There’s video of rand Paul not applauding. Jesus how much of a pain in the hole do you have to be to not even fake applaud for the cameras ? He makes Mitch McConnell look somewhat reasonable.

Water John · 13-02-2021 12:55am

Dana Bash CNN wondering will Hererra Butler or Kevin McCarthy will be called as witnesses?

Itssoeasy · 13-02-2021 12:56am

Someone is telling jake tapper on CNN that at no time did Trump show any concern on the day. Shock horror.

Itssoeasy · 13-02-2021 12:58am

Water John wrote: »

Dana Bash CNN wondering will Hererra Butler or Kevin McCarthy will be called as witnesses?

Well unless there’s a rule against calling leader McCarthy then the dems should call any witness with direct knowledge of the presidents mood and motives on the day in question.

aloyisious · 13-02-2021 1:04am

Headshot wrote: »

Ya listening to it now

Very strange it's coming out now on the eve of the vote

Something done so it'll be roaming around in the minds of GOP senators overnight while they are trying to get some sleep. It definitely is a public display of the split between the House and the Senate GOP members. It also seems that after the challenging of Tommy Tuberville's phonechat with Trump by Trump's lawyer in the senate, Tuberville is standing by his version of the call content, that he told Trump that Mike Pence had been escorted out of the capitol. The Trump team are reportedly claiming that Tuberville is lying and that the call took place on the 05th Jan. It does explain why Senator Lee was at pains to make sure the record shows he did not know about the call content even though it's accepted that Trump called Lee's phone and Lee handed the phone to Tuberville so Trump could speak to him.

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 1:04am

Tell me how wrote: »

It's beyond a reasonable doubt for me.

was there 1 big piece of evidence that i missed?

i dunno, most reasonable people would agree trump did not incite a riot based on evidence.

what specifically, in your mind, did he do?

Water John · 13-02-2021 1:07am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

was there 1 big piece of evidence that i missed?

i dunno, most reasonable people would agree trump did not incite a riot based on evidence.

what specifically, in your mind, did he do?

Then you didn't listen to the evidence presented by the House Managers.

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 1:12am

aloyisious wrote: »

CNN is reporting on a phonecall from Kevin McCarthy to Trump on the 06th Jan asking for him to call off the attackers, which might tempt GOP senators to review any adult response to what happened at the Capitol that day. Allegedly there are multiple members of the GOP conversant with the content of the call, having being informed by Mc Carthy of the content. Trump "they are antifa" McCarthy " they are not, they are your people" Trump "Well' you don't care about election as much as me" McCarthy "Who the F**K do you think you are talking to?"....

if true, doesn't reflect well on trump at all but irrelevant to the case at hand; which is, did he incite a riot.

actions after the riot are not a factor, as he has not been charged with anything other than inciting a riot.

Tell me how · 13-02-2021 1:12am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

was there 1 big piece of evidence that i missed?

i dunno, most reasonable people would agree trump did not incite a riot based on evidence.

what specifically, in your mind, did he do?

He planted the seed that the only way he would lose would be if there was fraud.
He told the Proud Boys to stand back and stand by.
He claimed victory on the night of the election.
He refused to acknowledge Biden's victory.
He kept telling his supporters that the election had been stolen.
He told them that this was only the start of a Radical Left agenda to control them.
He told them that they needed to fight to ensure that the integrity of the election was upheld.
He invited them to Washington for a Protest specifically timed to coincide with the counting of electoral votes.
He spoke at the protest and told them they needed to go to the Capitola and stop what was happening.
He name checked the Vice President who he said was failing to do what needed to be done.
He told them that they needed to fight, and to be strong.
Several Protestors are on camera saying they were they ere there at his behest.
He told them that he would be there with them.
He sent tweets encouraging them while the insurrection was happening.
He told them he loved them after it was over.

Beyond. A. Reasonable. Doubt.

aloyisious · 13-02-2021 1:15am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

was there 1 big piece of evidence that i missed?

i dunno, most reasonable people would agree trump did not incite a riot based on evidence.

what specifically, in your mind, did he do?

As it's not a criminal trial, it's left to the adults in the senate to look at what was in front of them on the 06th in the Capitol and what has emerged since then in the public domain to make a reasoned and reasonable estimate within the non-criminal trial setting of what Trump did and didn't do in respect to the events at the Capitol. They are not limited by the rigours of criminal evidence law in reaching personal decisions as to Trump's responsibility for the actions of his supporters at the Capitol.

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 1:19am

Water John wrote: »

Then you didn't listen to the evidence presented by the House Managers.

watch the video i posted, and how free speech does not incite any riot unless you explicitly tell people to go out and hurt people right now.

that from a youtuber who is a big dem and a criminal lawyer in DC.

what did trump do? go out and peacefully and patrilocally protest.

Water John · 13-02-2021 1:23am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

watch the video i posted, and how free speech does not incite any riot unless you explicitly tell people to go out and hurt people right now.

that from a youtuber who is a big dem and a criminal lawyer in DC.

what did trump do? go out and peacefully and patrilocally protest.

It's not a criminal trial, don't you get that?

dublin49 · 13-02-2021 1:23am

Trump IMO stayed just inside the line ,unfortunately. A jury of his peers may have found him responsible,no chance with partisan politics involved.

Tell me how · 13-02-2021 1:27am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

watch the video i posted, and how free speech does not incite any riot unless you explicitly tell people to go out and hurt people right now.

that from a youtuber who is a big dem and a criminal lawyer in DC.

what did trump do? go out and peacefully and patrilocally protest.

We've been watching and listening to and reading Trump for 5 years now. And I was watching the whole thing live on the 6th, including his speech before the riot.

I'm under no illusion as to why the people were in that place, at that time, thinking what they were thinking and doing what they were doing. And it was all Trumps fault.

If he had said at any point after the election that there was no fraud and that he had been beaten. The march, the speech and the riot would not have happened on 6th of January. Simple.

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 1:50am

Tell me how wrote: »

He planted the seed that the only way he would lose would be if there was fraud.
He told the Proud Boys to stand back and stand by.
He claimed victory on the night of the election.
He refused to acknowledge Biden's victory.
He kept telling his supporters that the election had been stolen.
He told them that this was only the start of a Radical Left agenda to control them.
He told them that they needed to fight to ensure that the integrity of the election was upheld.
He invited them to Washington for a Protest specifically timed to coincide with the counting of electoral votes.
He spoke at the protest and told them they needed to go to the Capitola and stop what was happening.
He name checked the Vice President who he said was failing to do what needed to be done.
He told them that they needed to fight, and to be strong.
Several Protestors are on camera saying they were they ere there at his behest.
He told them that he would be there with them.
He sent tweets encouraging them while the insurrection was happening.
He told them he loved them after it was over.

Beyond. A. Reasonable. Doubt.

not quite/quiet (never know which is correct) sure what you are talking about here?

this is about 1 thing, did trump incite a riot? if you are happy he did, you can say how?

not a wall of text, something specific that he did.

some of your points...

1. trump condemned everyone for violence which included the prided boys.
2. so has every past running president.
3.as did biden and all the dems for the prior 4 years
4. see above
5. i agree. media has far too much sway, and media going 1 way. its called the 4th wall for a reason.
6. well obviously you need to know the integrity was upheld.
7. people were arriving in Washington regardless. trump asked for peaceful and patriotic protests.
8. but peacefully do there, no?
9. re mike pence, i actually dont know what happened there.
10. context.
11. let them go on the record. i was told by nanci to go there and cause trouble, just make sure i was wearing a maga hat.
12. ? okay, he would be there? expand on that.
13. haven't seen those tweets, but do present to the senate if it was already happening. cant be incitement.
14. okay. he loves his voters.

some decent observations in fairness; but the question remains, how was trump responsible for inciting a riot?

EltonJohn69 · 13-02-2021 1:56am

Headshot wrote: »

Ya listening to it now

Very strange it's coming out now on the eve of the vote

Any chance there is audio/ a recording of this call en route ???

StringerBell · 13-02-2021 2:10am

Free speech doesn't come into it. The first amendment is there to limit the government "the Congress shall make no law" and this was extended with the 14th amendment to state and local government. Of course he could use it effectively probably as a shield from criminal or tort liability, but has no bearing on whether the Congress can take action - the constitution is very clear in the language, high crimes and misdemeanors, very broad language too.

In terms of the balance of probabilities

Incitement as per the USSC in that case that everyone has surely heard about the last couple of weeks - "advocacy directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and likely to produce such action.”

I would be of the opinion that a reasonable person could conclude that on the balance of probabilities, the actions of Donald John trump both leading up to, and including the 6th of January meet the criteria for incitement.

I could also accept how a reasonable person could conclude that though what trump did was reckless, inflammatory, downright wrong in fact that proving it rises to the level of Incitement would be difficult.....

If this were a criminal case, which it isn't. This was a political crime and the man should be held accountable for his actions, but as with so many other instances in life he won't be. And they wonder why so much of the country is in the ****ter with charlatan's covering for other charlatans and laughing at their constituents.

trump knew what he was doing with his scorched earth speech, he knew what his supporters were capable of, Lansing Michigan? It isn't like we just have one isolated event where trump may or may not have gone overboard. We have a large body of evidence to work with.

Ultimately it's for nothing and I genuinely think they may have been better going after him for the phonecall, because it's very hard to paint that as anything other than what it is, but hey, that one they may very well go after him on criminal charges.

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 2:14am

Tell me how wrote: »

We've been watching and listening to and reading Trump for 5 years now. And I was watching the whole thing live on the 6th, including his speech before the riot.

I'm under no illusion as to why the people were in that place, at that time, thinking what they were thinking and doing what they were doing. And it was all Trumps fault.
If he had said at any point after the election that there was no fraud and that he had been beaten. The march, the speech and the riot would not have happened on 6th of January. Simple.

while you were watching, you seem eagle eyed, did you make more money?

i know this will be tough for you to answer...was there any fraud?

StringerBell · 13-02-2021 2:18am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

while you were watching, you seem eagle eyed, did you make more money?

i know this will be tough for you to answer...was there any fraud?

Besides knowing that obviously there would be some fraud in an election of that size we have also publicly seen the trump supporters who have been arrested for election fraud surely?

There was no evidence to support the claims of large scale fraud like the trump and his trumpettes were alleging of course. None, if there was they might have produced it in one of the court cases. Course what they said outside court and inside was very different. "This is not a fraud case your honour"

y0ssar1an22 · 13-02-2021 2:48am

StringerBell wrote: »

Besides knowing that obviously there would be some fraud in an election of that size we have also publicly seen the trump supporters who have been arrested for election fraud surely?

There was no evidence to support the claims of large scale fraud like the trump and his trumpettes were alleging of course. None, if there was they might have produced it in one of the court cases. Course what they said outside court and inside was very different. "This is not a fraud case your honour"

this is one thing i have against these big monopoly tech companies.

trump tweeted that there was election fraud. 1 example of election fraud, is election fraud, no?

Tell me how · 13-02-2021 4:51am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

not quite/quiet (never know which is correct) sure what you are talking about here?

this is about 1 thing, did trump incite a riot? if you are happy he did, you can say how?

not a wall of text, something specific that he did.

some of your points...

1. trump condemned everyone for violence which included the prided boys.
2. so has every past running president.
3.as did biden and all the dems for the prior 4 years
4. see above
5. i agree. media has far too much sway, and media going 1 way. its called the 4th wall for a reason.
6. well obviously you need to know the integrity was upheld.
7. people were arriving in Washington regardless. trump asked for peaceful and patriotic protests.
8. but peacefully do there, no?
9. re mike pence, i actually dont know what happened there.
10. context.
11. let them go on the record. i was told by nanci to go there and cause trouble, just make sure i was wearing a maga hat.
12. ? okay, he would be there? expand on that.
13. haven't seen those tweets, but do present to the senate if it was already happening. cant be incitement.
14. okay. he loves his voters.

some decent observations in fairness; but the question remains, how was trump responsible for inciting a riot?

Genuine question, is English your second language? If so, then that's fine, if not, and you struggle with the correct usage of quiet/quite, then there probably is going to be a lot which has gone on in this trial which you are not going to be interpreting in the correct context.

Your responses to my reasons as to Trumps culpability lead me to think that this is the case.

Leroy42 · 13-02-2021 5:33am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this is one thing i have against these big monopoly tech companies.

trump tweeted that there was election fraud. 1 example of election fraud, is election fraud, no?

The biggest fraud ever seen, he said the election was stolen.

He didn't simply say he thought there were a few cases of mistaken identity!

robinph · 13-02-2021 8:33am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

not quite/quiet (never know which is correct) sure what you are talking about here?

this is about 1 thing, did trump incite a riot? if you are happy he did, you can say how?

not a wall of text, something specific that he did.

some of your points...

1. trump condemned everyone for violence which included the prided boys.
2. so has every past running president.
3.as did biden and all the dems for the prior 4 years
4. see above
5. i agree. media has far too much sway, and media going 1 way. its called the 4th wall for a reason.
6. well obviously you need to know the integrity was upheld.
7. people were arriving in Washington regardless. trump asked for peaceful and patriotic protests.
8. but peacefully do there, no?
9. re mike pence, i actually dont know what happened there.
10. context.
11. let them go on the record. i was told by nanci to go there and cause trouble, just make sure i was wearing a maga hat.
12. ? okay, he would be there? expand on that.
13. haven't seen those tweets, but do present to the senate if it was already happening. cant be incitement.
14. okay. he loves his voters.

some decent observations in fairness; but the question remains, how was trump responsible for inciting a riot?

You've really not been paying even the slightest bit of attention to anything going on in the US for the last 5 years if you are claiming ignorance to all those points. Let alone what was happening in the senate this week. I didn't manage to catch all of their videos as they were giving them, but the clips I've seen covered most of those points and showed the historical tweets from Trump.

They certainly included the tweets that he made during the riot telling his people he was proud of them, and saying to the people running from them in The Capitol that this is what you get when you don't do what Trump wants. You may have been confused as the tweets were actually videos though.

Cody montana · 13-02-2021 8:37am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

not quite/quiet (never know which is correct) sure what you are talking about here?

this is about 1 thing, did trump incite a riot? if you are happy he did, you can say how?

not a wall of text, something specific that he did.

some of your points...

1. trump condemned everyone for violence which included the prided boys.
2. so has every past running president.
3.as did biden and all the dems for the prior 4 years
4. see above
5. i agree. media has far too much sway, and media going 1 way. its called the 4th wall for a reason.
6. well obviously you need to know the integrity was upheld.
7. people were arriving in Washington regardless. trump asked for peaceful and patriotic protests.
8. but peacefully do there, no?
9. re mike pence, i actually dont know what happened there.
10. context.
11. let them go on the record. i was told by nanci to go there and cause trouble, just make sure i was wearing a maga hat.
12. ? okay, he would be there? expand on that.
13. haven't seen those tweets, but do present to the senate if it was already happening. cant be incitement.
14. okay. he loves his voters.

some decent observations in fairness; but the question remains, how was trump responsible for inciting a riot?

‘stand back and stand by.’

Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Comments