Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
And I say if these idiots (I agree with you) did this it was not because of one man. Show me where I claim full stop there was election fraud. I said the optics are bad. That was it. And the optics are bad.

I am not a leftist sheep. You are. Loser.
WTF?? It wasn't because of one man?? Who else's name did those insurgents parade other than Trump's?

 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,331
Reaction score
3,676
Points
290
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
And I say if these idiots (I agree with you) did this it was not because of one man. Show me where I claim full stop there was election fraud. I said the optics are bad. That was it. And the optics are bad.

I am not a leftist sheep. You are. Loser.
WTF?? It wasn't because of one man?? Who else's name did those insurgents parade other than Trump's?

Total coincidence.
 

BlindBoo

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
36,232
Reaction score
5,574
Points
1,130
Nope, nice try, in reality the next thing he did was to tape an interview for 60 minutes......but do go on....
What do you mean nice try. Your claim is that he didn't go to Vegas for a fund raiser. Your claim is that he didn't go to bed. He wasn't even in the situation room. He didn't care and told everybody else to handle it.
You were the one who parroted the old debunked talking point that he went to bed because he had jet to Vegas the next morning. You're 0 for 2.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Until they showed that women being hauled out on a stretcher, bleeding, then I bet his anal sphincter started puckering up a bit......
Trump didn't murder an unarmed woman in cold blood.
A still unidentified police officer did with the approval and backing of leftist cheer leaders like you.

If anyone's sphincter should be closing up it should be yours. You and your fellow travelers.
Nobody murdered her. She committed suicide by cop when she attempted to breach the House chamber where lawmakers were holdup. She was shot to protect them.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
He and most of his listeners were still at the WHITE HOUSE when the riots started at the Capital, he finish his speech around 15-20 AFTER the riot started, which was 1 1/2 MILES away.
His Speech ended a little after 1. The rioter didn't breach the police lines to invade and shut down Congress until around 2. Plenty of time for the crowd to move the mile and a half.
And many, if not most, were already at the Capitol or heading towards it while watching his rally on their phones.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
37,350
Reaction score
12,124
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
That's a weird reply. I meant the mob of gullible deplorables who believed Trump and Q anon lies for 4 years.
So a tiny %. Like the assholes on the left who support BDS? Both parties have asshole fringe groups. Hence I am an Independent. I make up my own mind and I am not controlled by party rhetoric or the News Entertainment Media. You on the other hand are a gullible sheep.
A majority of the Republican party think the election was stolen. There is no comparison to how fringy the GOP became under a single grifter.
They do? LOL

Majority? Not a small minority that the News Entertainment Media portrays as the majority? So does the majority of Dems support the Green New Deal? Fox says yes. You’re such a loser. How do you live with yourself? Sheep.
I'm not sure if a majority of Democrats believe in the Green New Deal or not. Just the same it's not a conspiracy.
You are sure it’s a tiny minority? You’re just playing coy. The optics are bad and lead to the conspiracy theory. Same as the JFK murder...one shooter or conspiracy? Optics are bad
Did I say 'tiny minority'? Nope. I'm not even sure you read my post.
Meant majority. I believe It’s a tiny minority.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
LOLOL

No, ShortBus, people like you as in rightards.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
37,350
Reaction score
12,124
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
And I say if these idiots (I agree with you) did this it was not because of one man. Show me where I claim full stop there was election fraud. I said the optics are bad. That was it. And the optics are bad.

I am not a leftist sheep. You are. Loser.
WTF?? It wasn't because of one man?? Who else's name did those insurgents parade other than Trump's?

Trump is just their symbol for dissatisfaction. It could be anyone. They see him as the resistance to crazy leftist policies. They are crazies themselves so both sides of crazy deserve one another.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
37,350
Reaction score
12,124
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
LOLOL

No, ShortBus, people like you as in rightards.
Assflap. Why do you always get nasty? Can you try to have a polite debate? Such a pussy as in real life you’d say none of that shit.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,331
Reaction score
3,676
Points
290
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
LOLOL

No, ShortBus, people like you as in rightards.
Assflap. Why do you always get nasty? Can you try to have a polite debate? Such a pussy as in real life you’d say none of that shit.
Faun's response was appropriate to someone who tries to make another poster's post look anti-Semitic to score cheap points.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Trump didn't murder an unarmed woman in cold blood.
Believing his lies led her to her death.

A still unidentified police officer did with the approval and backing of leftist cheer leaders like you.
Justifiable homicide, deserves a medal for protecting Congress.

If anyone's sphincter should be closing up......
Yeah ol'Trumpybear probable didn't snap to it until his lawyer, whose anal sphincter was working overtime, told him what that means.
They should send her husband a bill for the bullet they had to use and to cleanup the blood she spilled.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
LOLOL

No, ShortBus, people like you as in rightards.
Assflap. Why do you always get nasty? Can you try to have a polite debate? Such a pussy as in real life you’d say none of that shit.
If you weren't such a retard, I wouldn't call you ShortBus. But what else can be said when you suggest someone is being antisemitic when they said nothing at all about Jews? I don't even know if that poster knows you're Jewish?
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,331
Reaction score
3,676
Points
290
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
"People like you"...Jews?

How Nazi of you. Keep broad brushing. That is the tool of the left. I have Dragonlady's quote in my sig. She is people like you...Fair? If you combine us all together then I can do the same for you. Great.
LOLOL

No, ShortBus, people like you as in rightards.
Assflap. Why do you always get nasty? Can you try to have a polite debate? Such a pussy as in real life you’d say none of that shit.
If you weren't such a retard, I wouldn't call you ShortBus. But what else can be said when you suggest someone is being antisemitic when they said nothing at all about Jews? I don't even know if that poster knows you're Jewish?
For the record, didn't know, don't really care, probably forget by tomorrow.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
I really don't know. Francis Beevers of the Carolinas really doesn't want us to find out what Trump did and chose not to do on an insurrection. If we call it treason, that has unfortunate connotations because Trump led the calls that the election was illegal and must be stopped. But what Trump did and didn't do specifically about preplanning an assault on congresspeople … and then sending in help to protect congress …. hopefully the impeachment trial will make that clear
I doubt if there will even be any impeachment trial. It's a shame taxpayers have to waste money like this just so the commies can try to stop Trump from running again. Of course it's not the first time they've used our money yet alone our agencies for their political agendas. If they try, I'm sure Trump will see it to the Supreme Court because you can't remove a President who's already out of office.
According to the Constitution, removal from office isn’t the only consequence of conviction. And Section 2 Article 3 states specifically that the Senate has the sole power to conduct a trial of all impeachment’s. Note the WORD all. It offers no exclusions.
They don't even need impeachment to keep him from running again. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment already prevents him from running again.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
According to the Constitution, removal from office isn’t the only consequence of conviction. And Section 2 Article 3 states specifically that the Senate has the sole power to conduct a trial of all impeachment’s. Note the WORD all. It offers no exclusions.
Tell that to Democrat constitutional expert Alan Dershowitz. He said if they try to pull a stunt like that, he would gladly offer his services because the entire intent of impeachment IS to remove a President from office.
If Dershowitz said that, he's an idiot. Then again, he already revealed he's an idiot saying in 1998 that no crime need be committed to impeach a president; but then in 2019 saying a crime must've been committed to impeach a president.

And of course, we have the Constitution...

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
36,707
Reaction score
5,160
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
I really don't know. Francis Beevers of the Carolinas really doesn't want us to find out what Trump did and chose not to do on an insurrection. If we call it treason, that has unfortunate connotations because Trump led the calls that the election was illegal and must be stopped. But what Trump did and didn't do specifically about preplanning an assault on congresspeople … and then sending in help to protect congress …. hopefully the impeachment trial will make that clear
I doubt if there will even be any impeachment trial. It's a shame taxpayers have to waste money like this just so the commies can try to stop Trump from running again. Of course it's not the first time they've used our money yet alone our agencies for their political agendas. If they try, I'm sure Trump will see it to the Supreme Court because you can't remove a President who's already out of office.
According to the Constitution, removal from office isn’t the only consequence of conviction. And Section 2 Article 3 states specifically that the Senate has the sole power to conduct a trial of all impeachment’s. Note the WORD all. It offers no exclusions.
They don't even need impeachment to keep him from running again. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment already prevents him from running again.
Hell, after his riot, he's dead. The dems have an hour of commercials.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
68,861
Reaction score
17,087
Points
2,290
Assflap. Why do you always get nasty? Can you try to have a polite debate? Such a pussy as in real life you’d say none of that shit.
No, he really can't. I've tried in the past. That's why he's been on my iggy list for at least a year. I suggest everybody do the same. It's not worth the aggravation.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
68,861
Reaction score
17,087
Points
2,290
You were the one who parroted the old debunked talking point that he went to bed because he had jet to Vegas the next morning. You're 0 for 2.
Then where was he? Why wasn't he in the room? Of course he went to bed, and yes, he went to Vegas the next day for a fund raiser.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
74,259
Reaction score
14,078
Points
2,210
Quote the part where WaPo absolves Trump.
They are not in a position to absolve anything. They are in a position to report actual facts.
And? Where did they state Trump wasn't responsible? Here's your chance to prove your right wing sources got something correct. Stop trying to weasel out.
They report, you decide. And if you had a lick of common sense, even you have to conclude what they (and others) reported was that this was not a spontaneous attack, which means it had absolutely nothing to do with Trump's speech given at the same time. It was planned as the FBI reported. In other words, the commies impeached a President for bogus reasons. They made the entire thing up, just like Republicans are going to do when we impeach creepy Joe after we get control of the House in 2022. But......I don't want to hear you sheep crying about it, because remember, it's the commies that created this new impeachment precedent.
It had everything to do with these clowns listening to Trump for two months talk about a stolen election. If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.
It may not have happened. You don't know this. Are we going to guess together until you are triggered again and begin swearing?
Begin swearing? Oh, you're dainty ears.

The OP made a claim and the source material doesn't show that.
Not what your post said. Your post stated this:
If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

That is a 100% guess on your part. I believe our News Entertainment Media caused this vs. Trump. Opinions are allowed to vary. The optics were bad and therein lies the problem.
If you removed the spark you don't have a fire. The responsbile media never claimed the election was stolen which was the cause célèbre of the redneck revolt.

Going back to the OP. WaPo never "admitted" that Trump wasn't responsible.
Neither you nor I are the experts on "responsible media". Maxine Watters incited violence when Trump won in 2016 and CNN stated on air that no one said protests have to be peaceful. You really need to get in the real world. The News Entertainment Media is dividing this country. If you cannot see that you're blind.

Did WAPO state that "Trump was 100% responsible"?
Sure, bud. Take your sad sack feelings and slither away.

The WaPo didn't say what the OP stated and you appear to have given up arguing that point because as per usual, you guys usually lose.
You're moving goal posts. The OP stated the article inferred it. You may take it up with him. Maybe you should stop making definitive statements on your educated guesses. You're such a sad excuse for a human being. Snowflake.
The title of the thread more than just infers it. However the article doesn't even go that far.

Now the Washington Post Admits Trump Did Not Incite the Capitol Riot

My educated guess consisted of reading the article and comparing it to the claims of the OP and seeing they do not match. If your only argument against that is I'm just guessing then you have just lost every future argument you make on this board.
So you didn't say this?

If Trump had simply conceded this wouldn't have happened.

Yes or no?
I did. If Trump had conceded there wouldn't have been a cause for the riot since they were there to interfere with the election process.
And my point is that is a 100% guess on your part. Stop making your guesses seem like definitive statements.
We already knew some who were arrested (like coyote boi) stated they were following Trump. If you remove the reason for the insurrection there would be no reason for the attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.


Speaking of this definitive statement argument of yours, it appears desperate since you're not known to stick to the facts. And if you're only interested in definitive statements then you'd have to agree that the OP is making a declaration that hasn't been proven.
you're not known to stick to the facts.

LMAO....says the person who makes up their own facts. Give me ONE example where I do not stick to facts. You're such a cowardly leftist.
Haven't made up anything.

Just pointing out that the reason these idiots committed acts of insurrection just happens to align with Trump's claims of election fraud. Often spouted here by the likes of people like you.
And I say if these idiots (I agree with you) did this it was not because of one man. Show me where I claim full stop there was election fraud. I said the optics are bad. That was it. And the optics are bad.

I am not a leftist sheep. You are. Loser.
WTF?? It wasn't because of one man?? Who else's name did those insurgents parade other than Trump's?

Total coincidence.
Or maybe they meant Ivanka Trump?
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
68,861
Reaction score
17,087
Points
2,290
There has to be a trial ray. Those are the rules. But the senate could vote to limit the issue to simply whether the House managers (prosecutors) have any evidence that Trump knew what was going to happen or intentionally chose to do nothing to stop it because he wanted the insurrection to continue.
If they want to waste taxpayer money and time on childish nonsense, then it will see it's way to the Supreme Court. Professor Dershowitz is 100% sure that they will tell them it can't stand, especially since it's for political purposes and not a real impeachment given there are no impeachable offenses or crimes committed by President Trump.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top