About Those J6 “People”

[Mick2]

It doesn't matter what Biden's FBI Director's motives were.

So the motive of the FBI Director has nothing to do with with why he violated protcol with agents and their purpose of action?

Huh?

Your brain is utterly fried. LOL

 

[Political-Junkie]

So the motive of the FBI Director has nothing to do with with why he violated protcol with agents and their purpose of action?

Huh?

Your brain is utterly fried. LOL

Wow, that's not even what I said. What I actually said was it has nothing to do with the falsehood being spread that 274 agents were embedded to incite violence.

 

[Mick2]

Wow, that's not even what I said. What I actually said was it has nothing to do with the falsehood being spread that 274 agents were embedded to incite violence.

It's EXACTLY what you said, dunce. You are trying to talk out of both sides of your mouth here. You admit that you don't know Wray's motive for doing dumb shit is but then simulatenously try to claim to know for sure what the motive isn't. You haven't a f*ckin' clue. LOL

 

[Political-Junkie]

It's EXACTLY what you said, dunce. You are trying to talk out of both sides of your mouth here. You admit that you don't know Wray's motive for doing dumb shit is but then simulatenously try to claim to know for sure what the motive isn't. You haven't a f*ckin' clue. LOL

Despite you editing my quote, here is exactly what I said.

It doesn't matter what Trump's FBI Director's motives were. The point of all of this is about debunking the falsehood that 274 FBI agents were embedded in Trump's crowd to incite violence.

 

[Mick2]

It doesn't matter what Biden's FBI Director's motives were. The point of all of this is about debunking the falsehood that 274 FBI agents were embedded in Trump's crowd to incite violence.

You can't debunke a claim of bad actor motive if you admit that you aren't really sure of a motive but "presume" to know he acted inappropriately.

The only thing you're debunking is your own insane rambling. LOL

 

[Political-Junkie]

You can't debunke a claim of bad actor motive if you admit that you aren't really sure of a motive but "presume" to know he acted inappropriately.

The only thing you're debunking is your own insane rambling. LOL

Nonsense. Regardless of Wray's motive, we now know the 274 agents could not have incited the riot. We don't need to know of Wray's motives when we have other evidence proving they didn't incite the riot. You really should have known that.

 

[Mick2]

Nonsense. Regardless of Wray's motive, we now know the 274 agents could not have incited the riot.

274 is a significant number considering the relatively small number of people committing acts of violence that day. You think this was an army of 200,000 people or something? Dipwad. LOL

We don't need to know of Wray's motives when we have other evidence proving they didn't incite the riot.

We have pretty good evidence that Wray acted inappropriately. You even admitted that you "presumed" that was the case.

What was the intent of sending in hundreds of plain clothes agents into a crowd with relatively small number of violent actors for "crowd control" when its against FBI protocol and the agents aren't trained to do that? You've yet to provide any sort of explanation here. We can confidently "presume" then that you're a complete dumbass.

 

[Political-Junkie]

274 is a significant number considering the relatively small number of people committing acts of violence that day. You think this was an army of 200,000 people or something? Dipwad. LOL


We have pretty good evidence that Wray acted inappropriately. You even admitted that you "presumed" that was the case.

What was the intent of sending in hundreds of plain clothes agents into a crowd with relatively small number of violent actors for "crowd control" when its against FBI protocol and the agents aren't trained to do that? You've yet to provide any sort of explanation here. We can confidently "presume" then that you're a complete dumbass.

Again not true as I did already explain it to you. That's why you should have known those agents didn't incite the riot.

 

[Mick2]

Again not true

What's "not true"?

You saying you presumed Wray acted wrongly? Or you admitting that you don't really know why he did the stupid shit he did but then turned around and claimed to "know" his true motive?

LOL

 

[Political-Junkie]

What's "not true"?

You saying you presumed Wray acted wrongly? Or you admitting that you don't really know why he did the stupid shit he did but then turned around and claimed to "know" his true motive?

LOL

I already said I can only presume Patel is right. Why can't you understand that?

 

[Mick2]

I can only presume Patel is right

Patel was right. Wray was a dumbass. All that goes without saying.....but you are just circling in avoidance here.

What we need said is the answer to the following question or you just admitting you're a dumbass, too: Why did Wray violate FBI protocol and send hundreds of plain clothes agents in there for "crowd control" when the agents were not trained to do that?

If you can't reasonably answer that and cite actual facts that we know when answering, then the only thing you've debunked is your own drivel. Either answer or clam up.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Patel was right. Wray was a dumbass. All that goes without saying.....but you are just circling in avoidance here.

What we need said is the answer to the following question or you just admitting you're a dumbass, too: Why did Wray violate FBI protocol and send hundreds of plain clothes agents in there for "crowd control" when the agents were not trained to do that?

If you can't reasonably answer that and cite actual facts that we know when answering, then the only thing you've debunked is your own drivel. Either answer or clam up.

I've already answered your question. Not really my problem if you don't like the answer. It still debunked the myth that the FBI incited the riot.

 

[Mick2]

It still debunked the myth that the FBI incited the riot.

Geezus, you're a pea-brained idiot. LOL You cannot debunk the possibility on ill-intent motive by Wray if you admit you really don't know the motive at all. This is especially true when you freely admit the motive (whatever it may be) likely got Wray to do other shitty stuff that he shouldn't have been doing. Look up the word "debunked" and then slither away.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Geezus, you're a pea-brained idiot. LOL You cannot debunk the possibility on ill-intent motive by Wray if you admit you don't really know the motive at all. This is especially true when you freely admit the motive (whatever it may be) likely got Wray to do other shitty stuff that he shouldn't have been doing. Look up the word "debunked" and then slither away.

The FBI arrived after the riot began, being sent in response to the riot. Meaning others, not the FBI incited the riot. It's funny to me that with all your name calling, you're the one who can't grasp such a simple concept.

 

[Correll]

This you?
View attachment 1263125

View attachment 1263126

Why is wanting to hold Trump accountable for his attack on Democracy considered something that more and more Republicans would translate to more violence? Why do none of you Republicans care about the terrible precedents that Trump has set in his attempt to steal an election?

What you just did there, where you insist on framing the question by your narrative, instead of our "lived experiences",

AND with your goal being MORE lawfare oppression?

Yes, that is you choosing civil war.

 

[Correll]

How can you deny his words incited violence? There were people saying they wanted to cut politicians' heads off if Pence didn't reject electors from some states Trump lost. Others were saying "hang Mike Pence."

That came after Trump spent an hour convincing them that Mike Pence could not count electors from states Trump didn't want counted so that Trump and Pence could remain in office. It's clear Trump incited violence. We all saw it happen. We all saw him tell that crowd they were robbed with a stolen election. We all saw him tell that crowd to fight like hell if you don't want to lose your country. We all saw him tell that crowd to go to the Capitol. And we all saw some in that crowd commit acts of violence at the Capitol. Fortunately it was relatively small number of people who did, but there's no question some did.

"Fight like hell" is common rhetoric in political fights.

You are being purposefully retarded, to avoid dealing with this realisticly.

You WANT to play a pretend game, where WE, republicans are the bad guys, to justify your abuse of power.


As a COPE, to deal with your internal guilt over your fascist methods, that might be fine.

As a way of convincing your victims that their abuse and oppression are JUST?

No, not so much.

You are on the path towards civil war. I have tried to talk to you about if that is a really what you want.

You have refused to engage honestly. But your intent is clear. You plan to keep down that same path, without a though in your head or a care in your heart.

 

[Correll]

Truly bizarre how you keep reading into my words things I never said. The right is not my enemy. I don't want them killed or taken as political prisoners. I'm not looking for violence but if there is violence, we all lose.

People are dying in the streets NOW. And when questioned as to whether you want more or less politicial violence,

your response is that you want to win.

That has been the response from all the leftards that have had a coherent response.


So... it is bizzare that you keep ignoring the clear message you are sending.

 

[Correll]

I'm not walking anything back. You're literally making up my positions. Quote me saying Trump told people to go into the Capitol. You won't be able to because I never said that. I never said I want civil war. In fact, I said I don't want violence. I never said I assumed victory if there is civil war. I said if there is then we all lose.

How can I get you to debate with what I'm actually saying?

You are playing word games while people are dying in the streets.

The choice is clear before you. Continue escalation, and have MORE political violence.

Or stop escalating, and hope that the violence decreases.



You keep coming at us, trying to arrest us, and imprison us, on bullshit excuses, in biases courts, with fascist and massive investigations,


you are making a choice there.


Do you give ANY thought to the consequences of this choice?

 

[Correll]

You are smart to not want a civil war. I agree.

Almost none of us are gun ready and loaded for fire bombing.

I am not so sure about the ALT folks.

We will see.

ALT is just an excuse for your side to not care about their victims.


So, if you want to cope, keep it in your head please.

 

[Correll]

There you go again. You make something up, a strawman, and assign it to your opponent when it said nothing of the sort.

What I said was that if you guys and gals start something we will surely sort you out in short time.

And here you again play retard to hide from the point.

I didn't say you SAID shit. I said that your behavior, SHOWS YOUR INTENT.

And it does.


Your want to have your way, and you are prepared to have a civil war to get it.

The idea that the other side, might be able to have a turn, and win on policy?

THAT is what is out of the question, not killing millions.


Killing millions, you are fully prepared to do. Giving maga it's turn, letting our voices be heard, that is TABOO, for you.

You would rather see our cities on fire, with blood in the streets.