Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It sure is. Inciting violence is not, but that requires words clearly intended to incite immediate violence, not a vague if-then statement.
So explain in your own words why you believe someone was trying to over throw an election without bringing guns?
Not quite THE fakest concept the Democrats ever invented, but it's right up there with the other whoppers.stochastic terrorism
[ stuh-kas-tik ter-uh-riz-uhm ]SHOW IPA
noun
- the public demonization of a person or group resulting in the incitement of a violent act, which is statistically probable but whose specifics cannot be predicted:The lone-wolf attack was apparently influenced by the rhetoric of stochastic terrorism.
Dude, Democrats didn't invent that. It's not a new word, nor is it a fake concept. One of the most used scholarly examples is of Henry II of england saying "will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?".Not the fakest concept the Democrats ever invented, but it's right up there with the other whoppers.
Irrelevant garbage since the question wasn't asked to you. I could careless what garbage you have to say
stochastic terrorism
[ stuh-kas-tik ter-uh-riz-uhm ]SHOW IPA
noun
- the public demonization of a person or group resulting in the incitement of a violent act, which is statistically probable but whose specifics cannot be predicted:The lone-wolf attack was apparently influenced by the rhetoric of stochastic terrorism.
Since November 2016 it's been democrat lie after lieAll of them?
It is fake to apply it to political speech in the U.S. the Democrats absolutely invented doing that.Dude, Democrats didn't invent that. It's not a new word, nor is it a fake concept. One of the most used scholarly examples is of Henry II of england saying "will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?".
View attachment 827266
Sadly you are incorrect.It is fake to apply it to political speech in the U.S. the Democrats absolutely invented doing that.
If you have examples of the term "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------"irrelevant garbage since the question wasn't asked to you. I could careless what garbage you have to say"
Let's test your theory!!
To overthrow the United States? I cant imagine you are pulling that off without at least 50,000,000 guns. It seems unlikely that just 50 million people with guns could defeat the entire US population of 300 million, but i concede that its possible.But, to explore your point ---- is there a minimum number of guns required?
"To overthrow the United States? I cant imagine you are pulling that off without at least 50,000,000 guns."
They may have wanted it to go to the states, but the january 6th protesters made no attempts to make that happen. They simply rioted, which i dont condone, but thats different from trying to overturn the election.Ummm, that's an answer to another question.
The J6Jackasses were not attempting to 'overthrow' the United States. They were there to maintain the existing United States government.....the Trump Administration.
The desire was to prevent the Constitutionally mandated Electoral College vote and throw the selection of the POTUS to the states.....the majority of which were Republican.
To wit: (from under oath testimony during the 5th J6 Committee hearing)
"Former President Donald Trump pressured acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to declare that the election was corrupt in an attempt to help Republican members of Congress try to overturn the election result, according to notes of a December 2020 call Trump held with Rosen and acting deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue.
During the December 27, 2020, call, Trump pressured Rosen and Donoghue to falsely declare the election “illegal” and “corrupt” even after the Justice Department had not uncovered evidence of widespread voter fraud.
“Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen,” Trump said on the call, according to Donoghue’s notes."
Because the country needs leadership that unites us. The sad thing is partisans, on both sides, see that as a bad thing.You just suggested that the Dems should put up a more likeable candidate. Why?
Indeed, they should. Do you think they will?If Joe is that bad then the Republicans should put up a more likeable candidate to beat him.
You're taking about the party. I'm taking about the people. In any case, when I talk about consensus government, that doesn't mean we all have to agree, it just means that government won't act unless we do. ie we won't pass laws that half the people hate.There is no consensus to be had with the Republicans the way they currently exist.
Lakota is awesome! However, all the violence these days comes from the right, as we have seen on Jan 6th the latest shootouts with the FBI. You have to go all the way back to the Vietnam War to find any violence on that level from the left.Exactly. Proof that Lakhota continues to lie in every post.
If Trump runs, he’ll lose by 20 million or more votes again and there won’t be any violence because all of the violence comes from the left when they don’t get their way.
Democrats invented?Not quite THE fakest concept the Democrats ever invented, but it's right up there with the other whoppers.
Simp your irrelevant garbage is still irrelevant since I didn't ask you---------------------------------------------------------------------------
O
Aaand…we circle back to the beginning.Since November 2016 it's been democrat lie after lie
