Ask Your Question today
He is being held responsible for the incident by a large number of people and there is talk of trying to get him impeached again. What did he actually say to his supporters to encourage them to act in this sort of way (before the fact)? Does someone have a link to a tweet, article or video? I'm a teacher and I'm not American, or living in the US. I want to be able to present something to my class.
Isn't this a fun time in history!? Specifics only matter if he is to be prosecuted. However he has made gaslighting almost a household term. When you constantly tell someone that there is a monster in the forest, but have no evidence, you keep them alert. So when you send 40 search parties (lawsuits) into the woods to find this monster, but they come back empty handed, most would concede. Not trump. He insists they eat must be very clever at hiding their shit and insist the monster is still there. So when he says he will never stop looking for the elusive yeti, it is assumed he means to continue ignoring evidence.
Burden of proof is a bitch.
So when he calls those with torches and pitchforks Patriots who are doing the right thing. The human swarm gets its ego stroked. The flames are fanned. Truth is obscure and no one actually cares what it is, as long as they are self righteous in their cause.
And the man who thinks eating dogs is a good business tactic has no shame and humanity sinks into despair a little more.
I truly feel for these people who are drinking his koolaid.
I don't get the dog-eating reference, but I really like the monster in the forest analogy. The only slight change I'd make is that the person sending out the search parties keeps telling the villagers that he's the only leader who can save them from the monster.
While I do feel a little sympathy for members of the Trump Cult, my reserves of that have been drained almost dry over the last five years. I've watched all the evidence accumulate of just what sort of person Trump is ever since he came down the escalator to the cheers of his employees and hired extras, and I've seen how his supporters constantly dig in ever-deeper to deny, excuse and justify. Now, I see them as willing victims.
There's nothing anyone can say to a dedicated Scientologist that will make them see the reality of what they've gotten themselves involved in once they're heavily invested financially and emotionally. Similarly, there's nothing I or anyone else can say to someone who has been guzzling Trump brand Koolaid for the last four years (or more) that will make them see what sort of person they've hitched their rickety wagon to. Some of them will be able to eventually work themselves out of the cult, but I suspect that will most often happen as the result of some random, external event allowing them to see the light, not because of what non-believers keep telling them.
I'm basically surprised that you even have to ask this question. The video clips are widely available on the internet. Anyone who understands public speaking and rhetoric can hear and understand exactly what President Trump said.
My opinion is that President Trump clearly incited a violence prone riot.
Why not watch the videos and hear and see for yourself?
I strongly suspect that the OP is trolling.
It's a more subtle sort of trolling than most, but what they're asking for is proof that Trump said during his speech, "Right, everyone here go to the Capitol, kick the shit out of the cops and force your way through the crowd barriers. Then head up the steps and figure out some way to break into the Capitol. Once you're inside, do whatever the hell you want, but make sure the Electoral College vote tally is stopped. If you can, get hold of the certificates from the states, and destroy them."
Of course, he said no such thing. And in what passes for the minds of Trump cultists, that proves he didn't instigate what happened. For them, every lie Trump has told about elections in the USA since 2015 is the truth. His constant, evidence-free ranting about the results of the last election is all the proof they need that he was robbed of the presidency. The fact that he didn't immediately get on Fox and start Tweeting that the violence had to stop and he wanted the mob to back off is completely insignificant.
A large chunk of the American public clearly wants to believe - in spite of all evidence to the contrary - that Trump is a good man who always tells the truth and has their best interests at heart. Such people haven't a clue about the tricks authoritarian populists use to rile up crowds. If they did, they would never have supported Trump in the first place, since they would have been able to see that he has always been an ignorant, narcissistic, manipulative asshole who uses people for his own ends.
You're astounding, Boojum.
So we just went through the 2020 riots that claimed 30+ lives, children included, livelihoods utterly destroyed, reports of women raped in the CHAZ but due to cops not being able to get in could not do anything about it, and some poor dude was burned to a crisp in a property that was burned down. The democrat leaders and blue check marks continued to not only condone the unrest that resulted in such heinous acts but also told them to continue with the unrest that resulted in those crimes.
Nick Sandman, a kid that smiled while wearing a Maga hat had celebrities and all the blue check marks literally telling people not only to dox the kid but to physically harm the kid, nothing happened to them.
Kathy Griffin literally held a fake decapitated Trump head, a clear message, and nothing happened to her.
Let's not forget the fuckin' ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT in the early days who barely got any fucking punishment at all, and you're going to try and claim the wild shit about Trump's side being the fucked ones?
You won't do or say fuck all about that but I'm supposed to sit here and believe this bullshit idea that Trump called for what happened at Capitol Hill instead of simply alluding to protesting there? You literally have to pull that shit out of thin-air to make such assersions, meanwhile we have documented proof of Democrats ACTUALLY doing the shit you're claiming Trump did which cause far more suffering.
He said no such thing because he didn't want them to do such a thing.
Also, "evidence-free". Just stfu. There's no way that at this point you haven't seen the evidence brought forward to question the legitimacy of the vote count, which means you're blatantly lying.
Then you go on about some fuckin' spiel about authoritarianism from the position of supporting the establishment. My dude, right now they're doing everything they can to ensure that platforms can't be used for people with different opinions from the establishment, they're right now booting people off of platforms and trying to destroy the platforms those booted people flock to in order to still have any ability to take part in the dialogue. You're not the fuckin' good guys in this and the fact your dumbass can watch all this shit happen, watch the establishment that YOU support crack down on people to ensure they can't take part on the online dialogue so that THEY have control over the dialogue is fuckin' astounding.
So please shut the fuck up, my dude. I can deal with shitheads like you being wrong but to be so fuckin' pompous in the process, to think you're the underdog fighting for good while doing fucking EVERYTHING to fuck people over from the position of the establishment is astounding.
Don't think I won't notice you not responding to this either, shithead.
Haha. Wow. Boojum made a similar point to the one I made with you: You're not going to accept anything less than, "This is Trump. Make sure the cameras are rolling as I unquestionably incite an attack. I am encouraging you to break the law. I am committing impeachable offenses. I repeat, I am inciting an attack on the Capitol. I, Donald Trump, am the one inciting an attack."
To be honest, even then you'd probably claim it was CGI because you're a brainwashed cultist.
You're right. He's probably not going to respond because he's above you and likely long realized you're too stupid to actually be persuaded, which renders debates with you mere arguments. I'm getting pretty close to it myself. As you're unfazed by facts, the only real reason to engage with you is to fact-check your various false claims for the benefit of other potential readers.
Noticing a trend now. I've irked you. I like arguing and debating, this is a passtime for me, demonstrating why you're braindead is just a bonus.
Boojum made similar points to you which is why Boojum also dropped any attempt at responding to defend his position after I responded. It's why your replies are becoming more frequent yet has far less actual arguments in them because you're too prideful without the capability to justify that pride, which is why you can't demonstrate why I'm wrong and somehow think just saying I'm wrong is a step-up.
Yup. I'm not going to accept anything that any reasonable person can refute. Trump stated to do actions that run counter to violence and Rudy referenced a "trial by combat" in regards to legal battles. The reason why you're too much of a dumb dumb to realize that context matters and that you can't just claim someone's intent based on another party's later actions is because counter to what you think of me, it is actually you that is in a cult, which is why I can rationalize and refute your arguments AND call you a cultist while you can only do the latter with the pitiful cries of, "What do you mean he has to actually instruct people to violence for it to be incitement to violence?! :'(". Language matters, shithead.
Nah, not CGI. I can explain it and I did, you're just too low-tier to realize I can watch the source of the quotes you're referencing and then explain that here where you have to either shut up and realize you're stupid or foolishly try to deny what I can literally link you to right here.
Ah, I getcha. He's not going to respond because he's better. How convenient. Almost as convenient as how you are trying so hard to argue the point here while trying to explain you don't have to argue the point so that you can just say "I'm right, you're wrong, Lalalalalalalalala". "It's not that I can't defend my position, it's that I'm better!"...Man, you weren't told to stfu enough as a kid, were you?
Please do feel free to not respond to me, like you did after I demonstrated that simply being able to link studies doesn't mean you know how to use them properly, ya dumbfuck. Haha. Anyway, feel free to ignore me. I didn't come to you looking to flex, it is you that came to me. You were so eager to pop in and tell me what's what, and now I've got you in a state of not even forming an argument and just trying to tell me I'm wrong. You came to me, and it looks like I've slapped you the fuck away from me.
Don't come back. It doesn't change, I can and will continue to demonstrate why you're a dumbfuck every single time you reply to me so do yourself the favor and don't respond to me, like you alluded to possibly doing.
Your frustration in dealing with my inured points is understandable, so naturally how appealing the thought of no longer having to is as transparent as it is.
You strike me as someone who could be punched and shout, "And don't come back or I'll headbutt your fist again! I totally kicked your ass!"
No matter how often your false assertions of having demonstrated something, they will never manifest so as to constitute reality.
Quite to the contrary, a great deal of your statements are demonstrably either a red herring, straw man, or ad hominem. The rest are just silly.
"Yup."
So your position is indeed that it's not possible to incite violence without directly specifying that it's what you're doing? One can't instill an emotion in someone else and indirectly manipulate them? If that's really your position then we can't really go any further regarding that point but it's clear to any reasonable person that it's just foolish and naive, abundantly so. You repeatedly claim we haven't defended our position but our position has been made clear and is defended by this sort of thing having been recorded in history: One can indirectly instigate a riot and it appears to us that it's what Trump did.
"What do you mean he has to actually instruct people to violence for it to be incitement to violence?!"
I'll take it. Absolutely. If you don't think it's possible to less directly instigate things then frankly you're insanely naive.
As for CGI, I said that's what you'd claim /if/ Trump had directly asked for violence. Pay attention.
Since you brought up the studies here, I'll go ahead and respond to our other thread here and keep this all in one place. You claim I don't know how to use the studies I cited. Well, I do, but frankly even if I didn't, candidates more likely to know how to than either of us would be the scientists who conducted the studies and the researchers thereof, and I think their conclusion was rather clear, wasn't it? Tended to be the headline, huh? Stressing the minute consolation prizes for conservatives, which do exist, doesn't detract from the primary takeaway of the studies, which was, no matter how little you like it, that the higher a child's IQ is the more likely they are to lean left later in life. If you can't see that plain as day then you're in denial or it's in fact /you/ who can't use the studies. I've literally never seen anyone even attempt to pretend it's not the takeaway as if the sky wasn't blue, only to attempt to rationalize the reasons for the disparity in a less damaging way.
Again, yes, it's thought to primarily relate to social conservatism much more than economic conservatism, and no, that wasn't a detail I attempted to obscure as I presented this to you precisely /because/ you are socially conservative. None of this was ever about economics. I know tons of intelligent fiscal conservatives but have only met two highly intelligent social conservatives in my entire life. They're a horrible type of person as they can't even blame their behavior on their ignorance like most Trump supporters can.
Im just dropping by to say how really truly sad it is that people still think either political party exists to help them.
I've learned that Twitter ordered him to delete his first tweets, one of which allegedly called the rioters 'patriots'. But did he mean just the rioters or was he referring to everyone who believed he was the rightful winner of the election? I wish I could read the whole tweets. Grrr. This is the problem with removing/destroying offensive material: you are destroying the evidence.
Yes its a slippery slope to censor. If all the claims and videos were not banned from facebook and twitter and the media people would possibly feel their voice is heard and wouldnt feel the need to go extreme. If something isnt real it should be easier to debunk. You cant control peoples thoughts. I think the censoring is just making the country more divided. Why not just debate them? Have a tv show where every night 2 of the experts in their fields come in to debate. No host cuts them off when they say something they dont like. Just let the other debater debunk. Let the people decide. Dick Colbert used to do this a lot. The KKK member made himself look stupid. Didnt need help with it
Well, it all started when trump lost the election. He claimed fraud and only a handful of less powerful Republicans agreed with him, along with the bandwagon trump supporters who align themselves with their perception of trump.
Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, said Biden won and made empty promises to trump to get him to sign the last 600 dollar stimulus. Trump is upset there isn't a bigger movement to keep him in office.
Did he orchestrate the assault? Probably not. Maybe one of his underlings, but what we can say without the benefit of doubt is that these brainwashed people thought they could force the government to keep trump in.
Trump just told them to be peaceful, he could say they were exercising their first amendment right or whatever or claim to have not known the full story until well after it developed. It took an hour for that "be peaceful" tweet and like 3 or 4 more hours for the national guard or whoever to be called in. They were first told not to deviate from their original orders, and who would have had authority and motive to issue that order? Trump
He's a bitter defeated loser with megalomania who justifies his actions on his opinions which he forms based on how they'll help him
This needs to be a lesson on electing celebrities into office
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/let-us-what-happened-after-trump-told-his-supporters-storm-n1253168
Apparently he did, but he could talk his way out of it I'm guessing
Actually it all started when the DNC helped fund the Steele dossier. Then in Jan 2017 John Lewis proclaimed "I don't see this president-elect as a legitimate president." and led a bunch of democrats to boycott Trump's inauguration. I find the democrats equally at fault for the current state of the US government.
It won't ever get better until we recognize where we're at right now and how we need to be. We could go back to the beginning of time assigning blame for what happened, or we can move forward in peace together
We are all to blame for the current atmosphere. It's time we reflect on how we treat each other as Americans. I worry though that nothing is going to improve for quite some time. Today Biden was stirring the pot by trying to bring race into it. He completely ignores the fact that the leader of The Proud Boys self-identifies as Afro-Cuban and that there were black Trump supporters in yesterday's events.
Shut the fuck up trump lost get the fuck over it just like you told the Clinton supporters to get over Clinton losing. People like you are fucking hypocrites.
You're talking about the same sources that vilified him for having two scoops of ice cream so as a rule just believe they're bullshitting by default.
Trump said at his rally to go there but he in no way stated that they should take over Capitol Hill, at most he called for a protest there.
It honestly astounds me how they can try to portray Trump as promoting this when not only did he disavow and ask people to go home peacefully but the people calling him out for it just spent the last year condoning and encouraging the riots, oh sorry, "peaceful protests" that destroyed lives.
So telling a bunch of red necks with rifles to peacefully protest his election loss is a totally sound judgement?
This kind of thing plays out very two dimensionally in like high school
But do they have the right to storm the Capitol?
I thought the same thing back when buildings were burned, you remember that night too right?
No, they DON'T have the right to storm the White House, and I certainly don't support that. I also don't think anyone ever has the right to burn down buildings, loot and riot either.
The kind of people who stormed the White as well as the kind of people who set buildings on fire, and loot are all the garbage... human garbage! I don't care about those people, and their damn feelings about the government, or whatever.
I think protesting is one thing, and rioting is something entirely different.
Ah, so not only is your side the only side allowed to riot but yours is also the only side that's allowed to call for protests?
Thats rich if I recalled correctly you people got angry when that mixes football guy protested peacefully. You conservatives are all over the place with your logic and its insane to me that you act like the left is like that. Yeah the left can be retarded at times but its the right that has gone full retard. Trump lost and yall are acting worse then the crybaby clinton supporters in 2016 with their cringe vagina hats.
And? Where the holy fuck is it written that just because I believe in your right to protest that I can't think what your protest is about is bullshit? Believe it or not, I can disagree with what you're doing while still thinking you have the right to do it, it's called being an adult, a foreign concept to many I'm being reminded day by day.
"It's the right that's gone full retard."
I ain't going to pretend the right doesn't have their moments but nothing will top the fact that the left has stood infront of buildings being burned down and called it peaceful. The fuck outta here with that shit, bro.
Right, but did you just think it was a bullshit thing to protest about (also wow how shitty to think) or did you think he should lose his job?
Also stop treating the right and left as entirely collective entities. I don't think there's anything peaceful about burning buildings just like how some Republicans aren't trying to pretend they don't know damned well that Trump incited that attack.
Just be quite I think American right and left leaning people are equally retarded. Both sides will be the death of america at the rate things are going.
I start putting in crazy hours at work and I can feel the mental fatigue more so than the physical
How long have McConnell, Pelosi, Schumer, and whoever the Republican House leader is held their positions? McConnell and Pelosi both look aged, I read this might be Pelosi's last term as speaker.
We might need some fresher blood in the game
I'm a registered independent
People are allowed to protest, not riot
The videos and articles I saw all showed people breaking down doors and destroying government buildings because they think they can just tell McConnell and Pelosi to keep Trump in office, or to enact some revenge on Trump's behalf for... for what, him not winning?
There's ignorance everywhere, Republican, Democrat, whatever. If you can't talk your point out logically and feel like you need to break down doors and force police to open fire, then your opinion is probably worthless no matter what you're fighting for
We don't have dictatorship, we don't have communism. Maybe there's control that goes beyond the obvious, but we still live in a society that would respond to logic
Trump should show proof of fraud before claiming it, he didn't but we still entertained him, but that entertainment gave way to people seizing the capital because they think there's fraud when really the only reason people think there's fraud is because trump baselessly claimed it, and after that he told people to protest
Maybe it's because I'm so learned in psychology I can see how trump telling his supporters to protest would have or could have led to the events that played out, maybe I invest too much in stereotyping and generalities, maybe I'm cynical, but either way we can agree that what happened was amoral, right? I'm sure there's a bunch of stuff democrats have done we can agree was also amoral. But how do we improve? Assigning blame, or recognizing what could have been better?
I'm not saying it's the right call or the wrong one but if the Democrats prevented an audit every single time when there was evidence of irregularities, if not outright fraud, then what is left for the people to do if any and all attempts to validate the vote through ideas and conversation isn't even being taken seriously? If we're going to play the blame game then the blame goes on the people that ensured the vote wasn't accounted for when requested.
I've not come to a conclusion yet. Looking at their happy faces like they achieved something by merely breaking in has started to piss me off since they achieved nothing but a field day out but I'm not going to pretend that the blame starts with them.
I'm sure I've read articles where Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the Senate, has also prevented recounts or whatever
What Trump is trying to do is get states to claim fraud as well and possibly have election results tampered with so when there is that recount or whatever it'll say he won
Does he not seem like a man who would buy his way into office? He did last election, there were ads everywhere saying Hillary already lost hours before the election was over. Can you see how that would dissuade voting for Hillary?
McConnell even said there needs to be a change, we have elections where "only the winners accept the results"
Yes, both sides have done bad things, but how do we proceed now that we know that? Replace everyone? Start a new government? Kill the ones we can prove are guilty? Engage in flame wars? These don't seem like real answers to me.
Society should be aware of injustices and use all the information when deciding who to vote for, be it senators, representatives, presidents, local officials. Smarter people will vote smarter, smarter people will take office, slowly but surely the injustices cease.
To pull from The Office, if we had less Dwights and more Jims, we wouldn't have as many Michaels in power
The riots you're referring to regarded whether or not the very lives of black people mattered or not. Yours are over the most unpopular president of modern history losing an election fair and square.
Didnt republicans do that to Obama for 8 uears? I remember republicans flipping out over obama having dyson mustard and wearing a tanned suit. Fuck trump the big baby deserves the criticism he gets and worse. You Americans are very selective with your outrage and its not funny anymore. Also saying "go home but we were cheated" is not disavowing you stupid fuck.
Probably said "action" to the actors before the cameras clicked on for that completely obviously staged event. A 5 year old can tell it was a staged event. People need to stop watching the news.
I don't watch the news, because I don't have time to waste getting riled up about one thing, or another just so I can get stressed out, and have a flare up of my myofascial pain, and IBS.
Please explain what scientific process a five year old would use to verify claims of space travel. What a dumb comment dude, you gotta try harder.
The same ones used in the multitude of videos that have been made to help break it down for people like you.
Watching and believing a video isn't scientific proof. That's basically the same thing as telling somebody who says giant talking anthromorphic birds don't exist to "Just watch Sesame Street, bro." I can break down exactly how they could fake the space station videos with openly existing technology. It's all fakeable, so there's no reason to believe it's real.
Demonstrating a rocket landing on a boat with a model would be science. But they can't do that. As shown by the fact that nobody has been able to do it.
So you have a source for your claims? I dont trust the media but Trump and his base have lied so many times that I domt trust them either.
Look at the source material.
I dont support any government. Im not a trump base person. You're telling me people stormed a federal building and weren't shot? Damn, tell me they went to the moon next.
You realize five of them were killed, one a woman shot directly through the neck, right?
Ignore them. They do/did hard drugs and thinks that makes them more enlightened.
I dont really care if you slag me on here but I'm not a they/them, Im one single male person.
As for the current topic I didn't mention any hard drugs, and I've never represented myself as anything other than an alcoholic handyman on here, Im as "enlightened" as anyone who can drink a few beers and go change a wall outlet.
The US defense budget can't defend police stations from "rioters" and cant even defend the capitol building from random hillbillies. You're going to take the debate point that all these things aren't being allowed to happen? They really couldn't have just shot the hell out of all these guys storming congress? Everyone's so dumb theyre arguing over the moraity of these psyops.
Real groups of people would've been ventillated trying to storm US federal buildings. But ok, A kid can get enough guns and ammo to shoot up a school but the US government can't defend their own buildings, riiiight.
Its amazing to watch people who still participate in society justifying how any of this makes sense. Imagine storming your local courthouse with 30 of your friends (DONT. I AM NOD ADVOCATING DOING THIS TO ANY FBI WATCHING) but imagine how that would go. Now apply it to a fucking DC federal building. Jesus mary satan fucking crist bro.
Evidence found.
https://youtu.be/6quOC6McLZU
BBC video edits to juxtapose Rudi Giuliani's address with Trump's.
Giuliani: "Let's have trial by combat"
*segment of US national anthem*
Trump: "After this we're gonna walk down to the Capitol... and I'm gonna go with you... and we're gonna cheer on our brave Senators..."
Okay so the BBC put the 2 segments together to make viewers interpret Trump's words through Giuliani's word 'combat' when in reality they might have been speaking at completely different points in the rally...
But what was Trump even DOING inviting the people to walk down to Capitol with him, and when he walked with them and saw them wreaking havoc, why didn't he denounce them IMMEDIATELY? This is as good as evidence that he incited the violence.
He told them to "keep fighting" and that they were "very special". I wanted Trump to win. I put money on him, but he really should have chastised them hard. I think it's unfair to say he encouraged them to break into the building, but he seemed somewhat happy that they did.
Breaking into the bloody building where congress gather and forcing an in session congress to flee is bordering treason, if not treason. Did he encourage them to do that? I'd say no. Did he act grossly inappropriately to them once they did? Yes, absolutely.
Trump has been pushing the idea that elections are crooked since before he was selected to be the Republican candidate. In February 2016, he claimed he lost the Iowa primary to scumbag Cruz because of unspecified voter fraud. He claimed that Clinton got three million more votes than him due to fraud. He claimed that there was unspecified fraud in the 2018 elections. And of course he constantly ranted about the evils of postal voting for most of 2020, and his minions at Fox and his enablers in the Republican party joined in because they didn't want to piss him off.
Trump spent years telling his supporters that the electoral system is corrupt and that he is a winner (which makes them winners, too). So the people who swallowed that crap were primed to be triggered to outrage when things didn't go the way they believed they should.
I would have thought it stupid and self-deluded, but I might have had a little bit of respect for Trump if, after a few days of reflection and investigation following the election, he announced that he was annoyed that he'd lost, but he accepted the result. A normal person wouldn't have huge problems gritting their teeth, swallowing their pride and doing that. Given Trump's inner demons, it would have required a lot more of him.
But that's not what he did. Instead, he kept stoking the fires of outrage by claiming the election was an enormous, systematic fraud when the facts indicate that there was hardly any fraud at all.
While I'm pretty sure Trump doesn't meet the legal definition of being guilty of instigating civil disorder, he's definitely morally responsible for what happened at the Capitol. He's been pandering to and exploiting the lunatic right fringe (militias and QAnon, for example) for years. His speech on Wednesday fed the fury of his audience. He told them to keep on fighting, and he told them to go to the Capitol.
He didn't tell them what to do, but since he claims to be such a fucking expert at reading people and getting them to do what he wants, he should have understood that something unpleasant was very likely to happen.
I am watching from outside the USA and while I do believe that these people have the right to protest. There's this phenomenom calls polarization where people would act differently when they are part of a crowd sharing the same thoughts about a subject.
I was not surprised at all.
And I do believe that violence is quite necessary sometimes.
aint seen you in a while
hows island life?
i was in diego a few years ago and thoughta you
Doing well. We don't have any corona cases here,thanks to our small airport that do not receive international flights, so life is going as usual. The mauritian government is trying to get Diego back. I don't think they'll succeed though. The story of the chagossian people is such a sad story though. I saw the videos when they were allowed to visit the islands some years back and it was truly heartbreaking.