Right Wing Death Squad: Active duty Marine plotted to bomb DNC, murder blacks

[Faun]

Why was AA created?

The intent was to help black people catch up with whites

And that was good, right?

 

[woodwork201]

Claiming that something is racist against you doesn't make it a fact, you still have to prove it.

Remember that.

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

Because he never told them to hunt down Pence. The mob decided that on their own. Do you think that the BLM mobs were directed to set fire to buildings or did that happen as a result of mob hysteria in the moment?

They decided to do that because he lied to them that the election was stolen and then lied to them that Pence could still save the election for them and then lied to them that Pence didn't have the courage to save his presidency. Is he not responsible for whatever actions are taken by the mob he assembled at the Capitol based on all the lies he spoon-fed his supporters?

You mean the one he told to protest peacefully? Here's why I continue to cite "insurrection", because anything short of that goes nowhere in court, and remains nothing more than opinions spread on a message board. Are you willing to apply that same standard to all politicians and hold them all responsible for actions taken after they utter inflammatory rhetoric? Should high ranking democrats be held accountable for the riots they encouraged? Are you going to take this to its logical conclusion or is it just another Orange Man Bad?

 

[Faun]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

Because he never told them to hunt down Pence. The mob decided that on their own. Do you think that the BLM mobs were directed to set fire to buildings or did that happen as a result of mob hysteria in the moment?

They decided to do that because he lied to them that the election was stolen and then lied to them that Pence could still save the election for them and then lied to them that Pence didn't have the courage to save his presidency. Is he not responsible for whatever actions are taken by the mob he assembled at the Capitol based on all the lies he spoon-fed his supporters?

You mean the one he told to protest peacefully? Here's why I continue to cite "insurrection", because anything short of that goes nowhere in court, and remains nothing more than opinions spread on a message board. Are you willing to apply that same standard to all politicians and hold them all responsible for actions taken after they utter inflammatory rhetoric? Should high ranking democrats be held accountable for the riots they encouraged? Are you going to take this to its logical conclusion or is it just another Orange Man Bad?

Again, I'm not even arguing whether or not that was insurrection. I believe it was, but even if it wasn't, that has nothing to do with Trump's culpability.

And you can play whataboutisms all you want, they also don't apply because there's never been anything like this where a president lied for months about a stolen election, then lied that his VP could still save the election, then lied again claiming his VP let his supporters down because he lacked courage. It's also unprecedented in scope. It's not like someone talking about PizzaGate and then some lone lunatic shoots up the place. We're talking about thousands of people who swarmed the Capitol with some 800 going inside. They did that for no reason other than Trump's inspiration to "stop the steal."

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

Because he never told them to hunt down Pence. The mob decided that on their own. Do you think that the BLM mobs were directed to set fire to buildings or did that happen as a result of mob hysteria in the moment?

They decided to do that because he lied to them that the election was stolen and then lied to them that Pence could still save the election for them and then lied to them that Pence didn't have the courage to save his presidency. Is he not responsible for whatever actions are taken by the mob he assembled at the Capitol based on all the lies he spoon-fed his supporters?

You mean the one he told to protest peacefully? Here's why I continue to cite "insurrection", because anything short of that goes nowhere in court, and remains nothing more than opinions spread on a message board. Are you willing to apply that same standard to all politicians and hold them all responsible for actions taken after they utter inflammatory rhetoric? Should high ranking democrats be held accountable for the riots they encouraged? Are you going to take this to its logical conclusion or is it just another Orange Man Bad?

Again, I'm not even arguing whether or not that was insurrection. I believe it was, but even if it wasn't, that has nothing to do with Trump's culpability.

And you can play whataboutisms all you want, they also don't apply because there's never been anything like this where a president lied for months about a stolen election, then lied that his VP could still save the election, then lied again claiming his VP let his supporters down because he lacked courage. It's also unprecedented in scope. It's not like someone talking about PizzaGate and then some lone lunatic shoots up the place. We're talking about thousands of people who swarmed the Capitol with some 800 going inside. They did that for no reason other than Trump's inspiration to "stop the steal."

And you can hold that belief. I saw some of his quotes and never felt any urge to go to a rally, storm the castle or even wear white after Labor Day. The idea that an American president would actually expect the public to assassinate his own VP is in my mind ludicrous. Thus far, this is seriously coming across as just another Orange Man Bad.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

No. I saw the speech and I ssy his words incited an insurrection. History shows that I am correct.

Yet, no where did he say commit violence, or insurrection...lol!