- Dec 16, 2017
- 17,743
- 8,822
- 475
I could care less what you say and don't say. Too much evidence against Trump for inciting this insurrection plays against him.Wait, so you're saying that when a democratic president does atrocious acts, the left has the convenient privilege of being able to separate themselves from that person, but when trump does something, anyone who supports him is guilty of those things? How does that double standard work?Dude, your distraction is not going to help you. Whatever Clinton did or didn't do, I don't support the bad. And those things have no equal footing to what Trump did. He incited an insurrection for God's sake. Are you friggin kidding me? You assume that everyone on the Left kneels at the alter of Bill Clinton. Think again.Nope, its not a false comparison, its an exact comparison. I'm not denying anything trump may or may not have done, im saying that, the left loves to play the guilt by association game, that if you support trump, then you are obviously supporting everything he does. So, if that's the case, then the left, as well, has a lot of problems in their own corner.Did I forget to mention evil? 've thought about this hundreds times after discovering Trump stole charity money from children with cancer. How could any real Christian vote for someone who could do something like that to sick and dying children? The only logical answer is these people sold their souls to the devil, and use Christianity as a way to circumvent the evil they do. No human being with a moral compass would ever vote for another human being who involves him or herself with activity like that, then label themselves Christians. They aren't Christians and they never were. It's used as a facade to hide who they are.No, most republican Christians are not crazy. For the most part, you choose to think of them that way because your left wing echo chambers program you tinting that way, and your hatred for anything that disagrees with you reinforces it.Most Republican evangelical Christians are crazy. 75 million Republicans voted for crazy. They also voted for a criminal. One can only conclude that these 75 million no longer, or never had any self respect.Ah, so the real reason for your post is simply an attack on religion. Religion had nothing to do with the attack in the capital. Space lasers? I don't believe greene actually uttered those words.
Swords, six headed snakes? Where is all that coming from?
Your real goal here is an attack on religion and to paint all Republicans as crazy. You should have just said "I hope this gun legislation passes so we can try and get all Republicans disqualified from owning firearms.
I've thought about this hundreds times after discovering Trump stole charity money from children with cancer. How could any real Christian vote for someone who could do something like that to sick and dying children? The only logical answer is these people sold their souls to the devil, and use Christianity as a way to circumvent the evil they do.
It's not an attack on religion you idiot. It's the Right-wing crazies taking religion hostage.
I do love this guilt by association though. So, if you voted or supported trump, then you are crazy. OK, let's just take that a bit further, shall we. So, Clinton was a serial sex offender, and he was associated with epstein, a known pedophile. You guys supported and voted for Clinton, so I guess that makes all democrats pedophiles and serial set offenders.
See how that works?
And I do love your false association comparisons, along with your lies. First off, we don't know if Clinton was a pedophile. Secondly, if he was, then we'll put Trump in that same camp, and you voted for him right? LOL! Your comparisons have nothing to do with the evil of stealing money from a cancer charity that went straight to children.
Your whataboutism /false association comparison, was meant for losers like you. Thanks for the heads up.
It doesn't matter if Clinton was ever proven to have done any of those things. There are plenty of unproven accusations the left have levied against trump, and even with lack of any evidence, they still are adamant that trump is guilty of them, and anyone who supported trump is also guilty of the same.
So, with that method, it doesn't matter if Clinton was proven guilty of anything. He was accused of it, so that means he is guilty of it, and leftists by association, are guilty of if too. There were plenty of allegations against Clinton, and one confirmed case of sexual impropriety with the Lewinsky scandal.
"There are plenty of unproven accusations the left have levied against trump, and even with lack of any evidence, they still are adamant that trump is guilty of them, and anyone who supported trump is also guilty of the same." These are just examples of the blatant lies by you and your ilk. There are many proven accusations against Trump. Anytime you want to go over them, while I link the proof, I want you to provide counter information where I am wrong. And if you don't, then we all know you are full of it.
Trump didn't incite a riot. How many times does it have to be said. He said "peaceful and patriotically make your voices heard". How does that translate to incitement? I know your left wing echo chambers tell you to think that. Trust me, I know, I listen to a LOT of left wing talk radio. I know what they are saying.
[You assume that everyone on the left kneels ar the alter of Bill Clinton...
Did you read what you just wrote? Again, how does this double standard work? The left has been accusing the right of "kneeling at the feet of trump" for 4 years. Again, the left seems to have the unique privilege of being immune from the ills of their parties leadership.
You can link all the "proof" you want, and I'll say the same thing that you will say to my rebuttals to it "fake news, get a credible source".
Vox, salon, cnn, and MSNBC, etc.. are not going to be credible sources of information just like you'll say about fox, blaze, Newsmax etc.
For every accusation that was levied against trump, there has been an argument written to refute it. In the game.of partisan politics, there are no winners.
At the end of the day, my post had nothing to do with who did what wrong. My post was about the hypocrisy of the left in that they try to blanket associate the right with anything wrong with a single thing someone did, but refuse to even admit when their side does something wrong.
And by the way, there are no arguments in Trump's favor. This one in particular; Neal Katyal puts the smack down on Trump's defense lawyer, just to show how stupid Trump's defense is.
What Trump did is not protected by the First Amendment;
Aaand again, you cite CNN. Should I pull a page out of the partisan playback and say "fake news, find a credible source, you're citing an obviously biased article".
![]()
No, Donald Trump Did Not Incite An Insurrection
Democrats and their media allies are milking a tragic riot for all it's worth.thefederalist.com
![]()
DOJ Announcement Provides Huge Evidence Trump Didn't Incite Insurrection - Republican Gazette
Impeachment is, at its heart, a political matter. There may be a veneer of the legal proceeding to it, but as the last few years have made clear, it’s effectively a matter of how many votes you can rustle up. If you can convince enough people that the offense was grave enough to merit impeachment …republicangazette.com
![]()
DOJ Announcement Provides Huge Evidence Trump Didn't Incite Insurrection
Of course.thefederalistpapers.org
Ok, there's some articles refuting your articles. Now, its time for you to say "your articles are fake news/biased/right wing conspiracy theory/etc...."
So, my whole point here is, there has never been any PROVEN fact that trump either colluded with Russia, or incited a riot. You have biased news sources whos main goal is to discredit, demonize, and make the right look bad. CNN is, from what I understand, in an active campaign to try and get fox news off the air, and you guys would cheer if that happened.
My point is, there is no such thing as factual reporting anymore. Nobody knows the news. We only know whatever echo chamber we listen to tells us. That should scare each and every one of us. If you listen to one side only, then you are going to know only what they tell you, including any implied bias they spin into their stories.
So, when CNN runs a story saying "trump is guilty!", you have to expect, given their obvious bias and agenda, that one would be a bit skeptical of what they are saying.
The Federalist and the Republican Gazette? Are you high on drugs? LOL! This is why you and your ilk have no credibility.
Just for shits and giggles; Legally speaking, incitement has an incredibly high bar that none of Trump’s actions since the election come close to meeting. These standards were set by the Supreme Court in its landmark Brandenburg v. Ohio case. Among other things, the decision held that in order to constitute incitement to violence, speech must include intent and specific, not abstract, instructions to act. It also required that the speech in question would likely produce “imminent lawless action,” which went a step further than the previous legal tests for incitement. According to the ruling: This is from your first article. But I said something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore. You want intent, that is intent with instructions. Trump is saying something is really wrong with the election, and he has no proof, while telling the crowd to fight like hell, and if you don't, you aren't going to have a country. Anyone who has a functioning brain knows exactly what Trump was saying. And for further proof, Trump runs the other way, does not walk to the Capitol, and proceeds to an undisclosed tent area, supplied with multiple TV's, his butt buddies, his family, and dancing bimbos, cheer leading to fight. That's all I need to see and hear. Sickening footage of Trump viewing party
The Federalist and the Republican Gazette? Are you high on drugs? LOL! This is why you and your ilk have no credibility.
Yup, called it. How about this:
CNN and vox? Are you high on drugs? LOL! This is why you and your ilk have no credibility.
You have failed to see what I was trying to say, which is, what gives your sources any more credibility than any others? Your sources employ as much bias as any right wing site does.
Fight? Really? You're using that as "intent"? You realize he was using that figuratively. I mean, if were going to say the word "fight" is an incitement to violence, then every sports team who says they are going to fight to win should be charged with a crime. Every politician who used that word to describe the urgency of their campaign should be brought up on criminal charges. How is it that every Democrat misses the "peaceful and patriotically" part of his speech?
That video you posted doesn't show any rioting. The tvs they are watching don't show any rioting. I'm not sure where that footage came from but it appears it wasn't of the riots.
Butt buddies? Where did you get that from? Trump has a butt buddy? Thats interesting, point him or them out. I've not seen this yet. Also, you say that as if its a bad thing? Butt buddies is a derogatory term for gay people. Are you, a liberal, here disparaging gay people? Are you really sitting here engaging in hate speech against gay people? This is interesting. You accuse the right of these horrible things....and you're sitting here doing it yourself.
After that 13 minute video I watched today by Jamie Raskin, I don't need any more confirmation of Trump's guilt. Case closed. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...-video-played-in-trump-impeachment-trial.html
And speaking of figuratively, I suppose it was just figuratively that Trump was lying about the election being stolen, when Trump himself exposed his own admission that the election was not stolen, when he asked the Georgia election official for 11,780 votes? He even pedaled that lie again numerous times in front of his own angry terrorist mob.
The guy admitted the election wasn't stolen, and he didn't even know it. Trump himself called on Georgia election officials to steal 11,780 votes.
Come on now...you didn't need to watch a 13 minute video to solidify your opinion on trumps guilt, you had that locked away months ago.
You're right, I did. The very minute he was asking to steal votes for an election he claimed was stolen, was all I needed to hear. He sunk his own battleship with no help from anyone but himself. The fact that he took it a step further to lie to his base repeatedly about how the election was stolen, with exaggerated rants to go with those lies, only solidifies the guilt of the insurrection.
[/QUOTE]
No, again, you can't convict someone on inference. You have no proof that trump intended for people to riot. Nothing in what he said gave any instruction to anyone to commit violence. All you have is his claim that the election was stolen and that that somehow inspired the mob to riot, but there is no correlation to trumps intentions.
Now, if you have PROOF that trump actually planned the riot, or intended that his words would incite people to commit violence, then show that to me and ill join you in your support of action against him.