What are people thinking as they hear the Senate arguments?

[Correll]

@Correll’s authoritarian RULE for REDRESS of GRIEVANCES 26671726 reply to 26670831

You call for a demonstration and it gets out of control ONCE, that is believable.

YOu do it twice and you are being reckless.

You do it several hundred times, and it is obvious that when you say "demonstration" you mean, "riot".

I see you have abolished the peaceful assembly part of the First Amendment to the Constitution. at least for black Americans.
....

1. No, I did not.

2. Blah, blah, blah, wace. Dismissed.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1. No, I did not.

1

You surely have.

If a local, city, state or the federal government, or a counter protest group, or any non-aligned criminal element responds to take advantage of a peaceful protest over a grievance against the Government, thereby causing violence to break out under @Correll’s authoritarian RULE for REDRESS of GRIEVANCES 26671726 the aforementioned protest must cease and desist and never to be assembled again anywhere in the country.

The intent to peacefully protest is nevermore in your authoritarian society.

You you have essentially eliminated the opportunity for peaceful protest by empowering the government, opposition to the protest, or a criminal element to put and end to it simply by committing violence in the vicinity or directly against the protest.

You are a goddamn fool for not thinking you’re anti-protest rule through.

 

[Correll]

1. No, I did not.

1

You surely have.

If a local, city, state or the federal government, or a counter protest group, or any non-aligned criminal element responds to take advantage of a peaceful protest over a grievance against the Government, thereby causing violence to break out under @Correll’s authoritarian RULE for REDRESS of GRIEVANCES 26671726 the aforementioned protest must cease and desist and never to be assembled again anywhere in the country.

The intent to peacefully protest is nevermore in your authoritarian society.

You you have essentially eliminated the opportunity for peaceful protest by empowering the government, opposition to the protest, or a criminal element to put and end to it simply by committing violence in the vicinity or directly against the protest.

You are a goddamn fool for not thinking you’re anti-protest rule through.

That is not what I said. Nor any reasonable interpretation of how what I said should be applied.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

That is not what I said. Nor any reasonable interpretation of how what I said should be applied.

You are saying that anyone who organizes a peaceful protest is responsible if violence breaks out the first time and that they are Responsible for all and any violence if they protest ever again. It does not matter to you who or what or what why the violence came up. They need to stop protesting so therefore their first amendment rights have been canceled.

 

[Correll]

That is not what I said. Nor any reasonable interpretation of how what I said should be applied.

You are saying that anyone who organizes a peaceful protest is responsible if violence breaks out the first time and that they are Responsible for all and any violence if they protest ever again. It does not matter to you who or what or what why the violence came up. They need to stop protesting so therefore their first amendment rights have been canceled.

I specifically said that if antifa or BLM called for a peaceful protest and violent riot broke out ONCE, that would be credible.


If it happened TWICE, that would be reckless


If it happened over and over again, then their denials would not be credible.

Ask me what I would think that the next step should be, say, when it became less and less credible that they were truly calling for peaceful protests.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I specifically said that if antifa or BLM called for a peaceful protest and violent riot broke out ONCE, that would be credible.

If it happened TWICE, that would be reckless

If it happened over and over again, then their denials would not be credible.

When violence breaks out the first time there is no need for denial.

When violence breaks out the second time there still is no need for denial.

When violence breaks out on the third time there still is no need for tonight. And on and on and on.

They are not responsible for the first time and they are not responsible for it ever.

If they are as you say then what is their recourse. . They must stop.

The violent people win in your authoritarian society.

There is no other logical reasonable or intelligent scenario.

Much of the violence over the summer was in response to the George Floyd killing. There is no early organizing. Those who commit violence are criminals and should be caught and prosecuted that’s it. Those committed to peaceful protest or not.

You have no way to separate the two.

 

[Correll]

I specifically said that if antifa or BLM called for a peaceful protest and violent riot broke out ONCE, that would be credible.

If it happened TWICE, that would be reckless

If it happened over and over again, then their denials would not be credible.

When violence breaks out the first time there is no need for denial.

When violence breaks out the second time there still is no need for denial.

When violence breaks out on the third time there still is no need for tonight. And on and on and on.

They are not responsible for the first time and they are not responsible for it ever.

If they are as you say then what is their recourse. . They must stop.

The violent people win in your authoritarian society.

There is no other logical reasonable or intelligent scenario.

Much of the violence over the summer was in response to the George Floyd killing. There is no early organizing. Those who commit violence are criminals and should be caught and prosecuted that’s it. Those committed to peaceful protest or not.

You have no way to separate the two.

Nothing I said justifies your response. AND, I specifically told you to ask me my "next step" and instead you cut that from my post, so that you could instead address a strawman.


That shows that you know that you have to misrepresent my position to try to make your position look like the more reasonable one.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Nothing I said justifies your response. AND, I specifically told you to ask me my "next step" and instead you cut that from my post, so that you could instead address a strawman.

You are a liar. I made a point you need to deal with before I get to the rest of your racist vomit.

And I see you didn’t respond to this point all.

“When violence breaks out the first time there is no need for denial.​

When violence breaks out the second time there still is no need for denial.​

When violence breaks out on the third time there still is no need for tonight. And on and on and on.”​

 

[Correll]

Nothing I said justifies your response. AND, I specifically told you to ask me my "next step" and instead you cut that from my post, so that you could instead address a strawman.

You are a liar. I made a point you need to deal with before I get to the rest of your racist vomit.
....

I like that you feel a need to keep pretending that I have not lumped antifa and blm together. It indicates a rare desire on your part to have your wace baiting to have some relation to reality.

Being concerned that the rioters I condemn should be mostly black before you accuse me of wacism, shows a level of concern your slurs to NOT look like nothing but a handful of monkey shit thrown by a ill mannered and brain damaged monkey,


is something you don't normally see with liberals.


Good for you.


My point stands of course. You have some collection of assholes, call for "peaceful demonstrations" that just happen to turn into riots hundreds of times, and their pretense of surprise has no credibility.


What would you do, if say, TRUMP, instead of calling for ONE demonstration that burst into a riot, had called for HUNDREDS, that caused over a billion dollars in damages and killed dozens of people, over his entire term?


Would you really just give him a pass, because of some words he said?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Nothing I said justifies your response.

You don’t get to dismiss my response with no explanation. If BLM calls for a peaceful protest and violent riot breaks out ONCE, you say that they would be a credible peaceful organization. If it happens three times or more they are a violent organization. That is bullshit because you assign guilt on BLM based on forces that are not under BLM’s control and with no consideration as to who causes the violence at that first protest.

The organizer is not obligated to establish credibility for persons outside of their organization. Youare ignorant when you say they are.

For example BLM is not responsible for criminals who decide to take advantage of the protest activities because police are preoccupied with the protesters.

Same goes for second protest and the third for as long takes.

And you’re full of shit anyway because 96% of BLM protest I’ve been found to be peaceful. You run from that fact too.

So how in the fuck are they supposed to know When the Boogaloo boys, or rioters, or police with an intent to commit violence on them are going to show up?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I like that you feel a need to keep pretending that I have not lumped antifa and blm together. I

Do you want them together because you’re a racist.

I have already told you I support BLM. I do not support antifa. You only love ANTIFA most likely because they have a scary sounding name. Like OBAMA like MAFIA like PELOSI like Al QAEDA. M

There are no connections between the two groups and no shared goal.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

What would you do, if say, TRUMP, instead of calling for ONE demonstration that burst into a riot, had called for HUNDREDS, that caused over a billion dollars in damages and killed dozens of people, over his entire term?

There is no counterpart like trump in the BLM movement. You’re an idiot, your arguments are stupid, and all you are trying to do is somehow justify your freaking racism.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I like that you feel a need to keep pretending that I have not lumped antifa and blm together. It indicates a rare desire on your part to have your wace baiting to have some relation to reality.

ANTIFA is not a peaceful protest movement. BLM is . Why you lump them together is your problem. But your need to link a peaceful protest movement to one that is not tells me all I need to know about your dishonesty.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

My point stands of course. You have some collection of assholes, call for "peaceful demonstrations" that just happen to turn into riots hundreds of times, and their pretense of surprise has no credibility.

The burden of proof is on you asshole. You need to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that every organizer of every one of the 7000 BLM peaceful protests nationwide rather intended that the protests include initiating violence and encouraging looting and other forms of mayhem that would harm the cause that necessitates the protests in the first place.. You don’t have a single suspect who called for violence yet you label the entire BLM movement as a criminal and violent.

And you absurdly dismiss legitimate studies that found about 3% violent..

And you wonder why you are identified as a racist.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

My point stands of course. You have some collection of assholes, call for "peaceful demonstrations" that just happen to turn into riots hundreds of times, and their pretense of surprise has no credibility.

The burden of proof is on you asshole. You need to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that every organizer of every one of the 7000 BLM peaceful protests nationwide rather intended that the protests include initiating violence and encouraging looting and other forms of mayhem that would harm the cause that necessitates the protests in the first place.. You don’t have a single suspect who called for violence yet you label the entire BLM movement as a criminal and violent.

And you absurdly dismiss legitimate studies that found about 3% of BLM protests turned violent..

And you wonder why you are identified as a racist.

Was the January 6 Trump protest wreckless conduct from Trump.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

What would you do, if say, TRUMP, instead of calling for ONE demonstration that burst into a riot, had called for HUNDREDS, that caused over a billion dollars in damages and killed dozens of people, over his entire term?

Do you really think Trump has enough white supremacists, Militant anti-government types and just plain stupid cult followers to assault the Capitol Bldg hundreds of times more?

They are already like going - Where was Trump? He told us he was coming to the Capitol too - The man has no balls And now he is out golfing while we are having our stupid stop-the-steal asses arrested.

 

[Correll]

Nothing I said justifies your response.

You don’t get to dismiss my response with no explanation. If BLM calls for a peaceful protest and violent riot breaks out ONCE, you say that they would be a credible peaceful organization. If it happens three times or more they are a violent organization. That is bullshit because you assign guilt on BLM based on forces that are not under BLM’s control and with no consideration as to who causes the violence at that first protest.

The organizer is not obligated to establish credibility for persons outside of their organization. Youare ignorant when you say they are.

For example BLM is not responsible for criminals who decide to take advantage of the protest activities because police are preoccupied with the protesters.

Same goes for second protest and the third for as long takes.

And you’re full of shit anyway because 96% of BLM protest I’ve been found to be peaceful. You run from that fact too.

So how in the fuck are they supposed to know When the Boogaloo boys, or rioters, or police with an intent to commit violence on them are going to show up?

Do you think that the hundreds of riots under the direction of antifa and blm should be investigated by the FBI for any signs of purposefully organizing the riots?

 

[Correll]

I like that you feel a need to keep pretending that I have not lumped antifa and blm together. I

Do you want them together because you’re a racist.

I have already told you I support BLM. I do not support antifa. You only love ANTIFA most likely because they have a scary sounding name. Like OBAMA like MAFIA like PELOSI like Al QAEDA. M

There are no connections between the two groups and no shared goal.

I lump them together because they are both far left organizations responsible for hundreds of riots, over the last 5 years.

Your wace baiting is about you being a bad person. It has nothing to do with me.

 

[Correll]

What would you do, if say, TRUMP, instead of calling for ONE demonstration that burst into a riot, had called for HUNDREDS, that caused over a billion dollars in damages and killed dozens of people, over his entire term?

There is no counterpart like trump in the BLM movement. You’re an idiot, your arguments are stupid, and all you are trying to do is somehow justify your freaking racism.

There is a leadership of BLM. Someone or someones, is/are making these calls.

That you pretend otherwise is you being silly.


That you are increasingly wace baiting, is you realizing how badly you have lost this debate.

 

[Correll]

I like that you feel a need to keep pretending that I have not lumped antifa and blm together. It indicates a rare desire on your part to have your wace baiting to have some relation to reality.

ANTIFA is not a peaceful protest movement. BLM is . Why you lump them together is your problem. But your need to link a peaceful protest movement to one that is not tells me all I need to know about your dishonesty.

I honestly consider both blm and antifa to be violent far left organizations.


It would make sense for you to calll me "wrong" and demand that I support my claims about blm.


To call me a liar, though, is fucked in the head of you.