American Politics IV: 1400 Reasons Why(A Stimulus Serial)

[Spirit of Hope]

-Snip-

I think the defense "I dropped 100 guns on the street, but only 1 was used for murder," is not a great defense. Sure not everyone who voted for Trump stormed the capital, but the people who did storm the capitol were waving Trump flags, came from a Trump rally, and were responding to Trump's call to pressure Pense and representatives to do something they had no legal power to do.

But sure, Trump said once to peacefully protest. That totally overdoses him saying people had to fight or their country would be stolen. He told violent extremists, who showed up at the riot, to stand by.

Trump took hours to respond, and he didn't deploy the national guard to respond to the emergency. But sure, he told them to leave eventually so all is forgiven.

You can complain about Democratic being nasty to Trump, but they didn't storm the capital while calling to kill the vice president.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

It would be entirely Donald Trump's fault for egging them on if even a single rioter interrupted the counting of electoral votes on the 6th.

1 - How do you explain my Cuban and American Friends at the rally who heard the same speech and did not storm the Capitol Building, cause damage, kill persons or commit any acts of violence?

2 - How do you explain most Republican Trump supporters who heard the same speech did not storm the Capitol Building, cause damage, kill persons or commit any acts of violence?

I say the persons who stormed the Capitol Building, caused damage, kill persons and committed any acts of violence, made a personal decision to do so, they are responsible for their own actions. If I did the same I would be responsible for my own actions. If you did the same you would be responsible for your own actions. If any of us did the same we would be responsible for our own actions.

Not al leftist protestors in Democrat run cities with Democrat mayors protested violently. They made a personal decision to not do so, many protested peacefully.

But many others protestors tore down statues and monuments, burned buildings and businesses at times owned by ethnic minorities, looted stores, throwed projectiles at cops, and killed innocent cops and persons.

3 - I have condemned right wing violence and left wing violence, have you?

I usually aske this question and they don't answer the question.

GMS.

Easy explanation.

1-either they were the few trumpsters with common sense who knew how it would end or they knew they had something to lose.

2-They wanted someone else to do it for them. Thats why they voted for Trump, cause now someone else would harm the black people, Mexicans, Arabs, socialists, democrats and news for them and they don't have to risk it all joining an extremist group.

3-The right wing commits a disproportionate amount of domestic terror and their terrorist attacks are directed at PEOPLE. McDonalds being burned down in a riot isn't equivalent to the loss of human life, especially when you consider that McDonalds kills more people a year than right or left wing terrorism. Corporate America suffering from property damage isn't as bad as a sikh temple being shot up or Mexicans being executed at a Walmart. Like seriously how fucked up is America that we feel more bad about "the economy" than we do about loss of life, whether it be with covid or with the riots of this summer? So to answer your third question, I condemn any left wing violence directed at random civilians. I do not condemn leftwing violence committed against corporate businesses who exploit this country and its people.

[Gravlen]

04 - Did Democrat Nancy Pelosi tore up a copy of Republican President Trump's State of The Union Speech as I showed with a video link on my previous post? Yes she did,

Ignore for a moment that it's not even close to being an impeachable offence:

Tearing up a piece of paper is not the same as attempting a coup. For starters, about five less people died as a consequence of Pelosi tearing up that speech.

[Istoreya]

-Snip-

I think the defense "I dropped 100 guns on the street, but only 1 was used for murder," is not a great defense. Sure not everyone who voted for Trump stormed the capital, but the people who did storm the capitol were waving Trump flags, came from a Trump rally, and were responding to Trump's call to pressure Pense and representatives to do something they had no legal power to do.

But sure, Trump said once to peacefully protest. That totally overdoses him saying people had to fight or their country would be stolen. He told violent extremists, who showed up at the riot, to stand by.

Trump took hours to respond, and he didn't deploy the national guard to respond to the emergency. But sure, he told them to leave eventually so all is forgiven.

You can complain about Democratic being nasty to Trump, but they didn't storm the capital while calling to kill the vice president.

It also completely ignores the fact that this isn't the only violence that Trump spurred on. Granted nobody actually died - but that was because the men were caught before they could actually kidnap and execute Governor Whitmer.

[Gravlen]

I think the defense "I dropped 100 guns on the street, but only 1 was used for murder," is not a great defense. Sure not everyone who voted for Trump stormed the capital, but the people who did storm the capitol were waving Trump flags, came from a Trump rally, and were responding to Trump's call to pressure Pense and representatives to do something they had no legal power to do.

But sure, Trump said once to peacefully protest. That totally overdoses him saying people had to fight or their country would be stolen. He told violent extremists, who showed up at the riot, to stand by.

Trump took hours to respond, and he didn't deploy the national guard to respond to the emergency. But sure, he told them to leave eventually so all is forgiven.

You can complain about Democratic being nasty to Trump, but they didn't storm the capital while calling to kill the vice president.

It also completely ignores the fact that this isn't the only violence that Trump spurred on. Granted nobody actually died - but that was because the men were caught before they could actually kidnap and execute Governor Whitmer.

And don't forget the attempts at overturning the election, by non-legal means, after he had riled people up about non-existent fraud.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

-Snip-

I think the defense "I dropped 100 guns on the street, but only 1 was used for murder," is not a great defense. Sure not everyone who voted for Trump stormed the capital, but the people who did storm the capitol were waving Trump flags, came from a Trump rally, and were responding to Trump's call to pressure Pense and representatives to do something they had no legal power to do.

But sure, Trump said once to peacefully protest. That totally overdoses him saying people had to fight or their country would be stolen. He told violent extremists, who showed up at the riot, to stand by.

Trump took hours to respond, and he didn't deploy the national guard to respond to the emergency. But sure, he told them to leave eventually so all is forgiven.

You can complain about Democratic being nasty to Trump, but they didn't storm the capital while calling to kill the vice president.

Also 45% of Republicans did support the siege.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

2 - Did most Pro Trump Republican supporters who heard the speech storm the Capitol Building, cause damage and kill persons? No.

It would be entirely Donald Trump's fault for egging them on if even a single rioter interrupted the counting of electoral votes on the 6th.

The penalty for interrupting is basically zero. It's a ritual in basically every democratic Parliament that proceedings halt when a citizen starts shouting from the gallery (where they're legally allowed to be ... until they start shouting). It's rather nice actually, like "petition for redress of grievances" though usually the protestor is incomprehensible and the members are chatting to each other or on their phones, it's part of the ceremony and tradition of the place. Rules vary, but when the presiding officer (Speaker etc) detects a pattern of protesters delaying proceedings by a few minutes each, the Speaker generally closes the gallery to the public and they all have to leave.

I'm saying that interrupting proceedings is not itself a crime. Trying to gain entry to the 'floor' where elected representatives are within sword's reach: definitely a crime. It's kind of dumb to still have the gallery really, with C-SPAN to verify proceedings and many services available to "petition", but the principle of allowing random voters close enough to listen and interject, but not to actually kill the critters, I think is worth preserving.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

I think the defense "I dropped 100 guns on the street, but only 1 was used for murder," is not a great defense. Sure not everyone who voted for Trump stormed the capital, but the people who did storm the capitol were waving Trump flags, came from a Trump rally, and were responding to Trump's call to pressure Pense and representatives to do something they had no legal power to do.

But sure, Trump said once to peacefully protest. That totally overdoses him saying people had to fight or their country would be stolen. He told violent extremists, who showed up at the riot, to stand by.

Trump took hours to respond, and he didn't deploy the national guard to respond to the emergency. But sure, he told them to leave eventually so all is forgiven.

You can complain about Democratic being nasty to Trump, but they didn't storm the capital while calling to kill the vice president.

Also 45% of Republicans did support the siege.

The statistics vary.

I heard the statistic was 18%

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

The wording of the question, and the context of other questions before, makes a huge difference.

"Siege" probably gets more approval than "storming". The former sounds almost legal.

[Dresderstan]

It would be entirely Donald Trump's fault for egging them on if even a single rioter interrupted the counting of electoral votes on the 6th.

The penalty for interrupting is basically zero. It's a ritual in basically every democratic Parliament that proceedings halt when a citizen starts shouting from the gallery (where they're legally allowed to be ... until they start shouting). It's rather nice actually, like "petition for redress of grievances" though usually the protestor is incomprehensible and the members are chatting to each other or on their phones, it's part of the ceremony and tradition of the place. Rules vary, but when the presiding officer (Speaker etc) detects a pattern of protesters delaying proceedings by a few minutes each, the Speaker generally closes the gallery to the public and they all have to leave.

I'm saying that interrupting proceedings is not itself a crime. Trying to gain entry to the 'floor' where elected representatives are within sword's reach: definitely a crime. It's kind of dumb to still have the gallery really, with C-SPAN to verify proceedings and many services available to "petition", but the principle of allowing random voters close enough to listen and interject, but not to actually kill the critters, I think is worth preserving.

Some people want to see old men arguing live and in person, others though the safety of their house on TV, it's quite dull most of the time but sometimes could be fascinating.

[Glorious Hong Kong]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

The penalty for interrupting is basically zero. It's a ritual in basically every democratic Parliament that proceedings halt when a citizen starts shouting from the gallery (where they're legally allowed to be ... until they start shouting). It's rather nice actually, like "petition for redress of grievances" though usually the protestor is incomprehensible and the members are chatting to each other or on their phones, it's part of the ceremony and tradition of the place. Rules vary, but when the presiding officer (Speaker etc) detects a pattern of protesters delaying proceedings by a few minutes each, the Speaker generally closes the gallery to the public and they all have to leave.

I'm saying that interrupting proceedings is not itself a crime. Trying to gain entry to the 'floor' where elected representatives are within sword's reach: definitely a crime. It's kind of dumb to still have the gallery really, with C-SPAN to verify proceedings and many services available to "petition", but the principle of allowing random voters close enough to listen and interject, but not to actually kill the critters, I think is worth preserving.

Some people want to see old men arguing live and in person, others though the safety of their house on TV, it's quite dull most of the time but sometimes could be fascinating.

Our Parliament is better viewing than yours! Though they could use better audio from the back-benches. And the Speaker/President leading the House/Senate in prayer at the beginning of a session is a bit cringe.

[Neutraligon]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

Too late.

[San Lumen]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

[Shrillland]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

Because, as we've so often said, nobody relishes the prospect of being murdered by extremists, and that's where we're at now.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

Maybe not cowards. Remember that most of them agreed with the "we all do that, right?" defense in the first Impeachment. Now they might be thinking "well Trump did a dick move in guess, but give me the White House and I'd probably do the same".

I might get trouble for this, but I still think Trump's misconduct involving him alone speaking for the US, and the leader of a dependant ally (Zelensky), and a big check Congress had authorized him to give to that ally ... fits the charge of a treasonous act which deserves Senate conviction. Than this vaguer charge of inciting random people to commit a treasonous act.

So I don't care. The Senate can do whatever. The invasion of the Capitol at a critical time, would not have happened if the Senate had convicted Trump the first time.

[Greater Miami Shores]

1 - How do you explain my Cuban and American Friends at the rally who heard the same speech and did not storm the Capitol Building, cause damage, kill persons or commit any acts of violence?

2 - How do you explain most Republican Trump supporters who heard the same speech did not storm the Capitol Building, cause damage, kill persons or commit any acts of violence?

I say the persons who stormed the Capitol Building, caused damage, kill persons and committed any acts of violence, made a personal decision to do so, they are responsible for their own actions. If I did the same I would be responsible for my own actions. If you did the same you would be responsible for your own actions. If any of us did the same we would be responsible for our own actions.

Not al leftist protestors in Democrat run cities with Democrat mayors protested violently. They made a personal decision to not do so, many protested peacefully.

But many others protestors tore down statues and monuments, burned buildings and businesses at times owned by ethnic minorities, looted stores, throwed projectiles at cops, and killed innocent cops and persons.

3 - I have condemned right wing violence and left wing violence, have you?

I usually aske this question and they don't answer the question.

GMS.

Your nonsense is irrelevant. If even a single rioter breached the Capitol on the 6th that is on Trump.

Just the answer I expected, excuses. My Cuban and Republican Trump Supporter Friends at the Pro Trump Stop The Election Steal Rally, heard the same speech and they were not influenced by the speech or by President Trump to storm the Capitol Building, cause damage to public or private property, or commit any acts of violence.

I pointed out in details most leftists protestors protested peacefully not violently. The few certain leftists and right wingers who protested violently are responsible for their own actions.

God made me do it, the devil made me do it, President Trump made me do it, the Republicans made me do it, Biden made me do it, the Democrats made me do it, are just excuses. They made themselves do it. No one told them to do so, no one forced them to do so. These are Facts.

Most Republican Trump supporters at the Trump Stop The Election Steal Rally, heard the same speech and they were not influenced by the speech or President Trump to storm the Capitol Building, cause damage to public or private property, or commit any acts of violence.

President Trump did not say storm the Capitol Building, commit violence, protest violently, he said Protest Peacefully and Patriotically. These are Facts. This is why the biased, partisan, anti Republicans, anti Trump Democrat Impeachment Managers cant prove their anti Trump case of hate.

This is why they did not prove their anti Trump case during the second Democrat impeachment attempt of hate. Just like they did not prove their anti Trump case against President Trump on the first Democrat Impeachment attempt of hate.

Democrat Senators charging Republican Trump supporters as terrorists, accomplices, not having moral ethical values, while claiming they have moral and ethical values, as if they have never said or committed unethical acts, like the ones I posted about with video links to prove my case.

I hope and we hope they expose them all for their hypocrisy claims of ethical and moral values, I am not the only one who has suggested this.

Just the answer I expected, excuses.

GMS.

[Dresderstan]

Some people want to see old men arguing live and in person, others though the safety of their house on TV, it's quite dull most of the time but sometimes could be fascinating.

Our Parliament is better viewing than yours! Though they could use better audio from the back-benches. And the Speaker/President leading the House/Senate in prayer at the beginning of a session is a bit cringe.

And which Parliament is that can I ask?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

Because, as we've so often said, nobody relishes the prospect of being murdered by extremists, and that's where we're at now.

Well let's build secure apartment for them to live in Washington DC for their entire term. With their families if they want. In fact, let's allow designated proxies to vote for them in their chamber. First sons/daughters preferred, but really anyone they trust.

Move Congress and the apartments to Yucca mountain. Don't complain, it's not optional. Get your ass in there, mr. Senator, or you'll be replaced by whoever came second in your last election.

The President will be even safer (from assassins) in the International Space Station. If he/she is too cowardly to ride a tower of flame, it's the same deal, and if they all pass it will be President Oprah Winfrey who takes the oath in space. Screw you Electoral College. Up yours Popular Vote. Who dares wins.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

Trump ally Nikki Haley turns on him during impeachment trial: ‘We shouldn’t have followed him’

Good for you Nikki.

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

They would get censured and subsequently primaried. Their careers would be over

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Our Parliament is better viewing than yours! Though they could use better audio from the back-benches. And the Speaker/President leading the House/Senate in prayer at the beginning of a session is a bit cringe.

And which Parliament is that can I ask?

Obviously you've never seen it. Kangaroos hop through quite regularly.

The Westminster tradition is that any member can shout stuff out, providing it doesn't include rude words or threats. And up to the point that whoever is supposed to be speaking can't be heard over the "interjections". It's up to the Speaker (or President in the Senate) to draw the line of what is too disorderly. It's

I just wish I could hear the interjections. It seems all the members can: they laugh or yell something back, they're obviously getting their jollies. But most of those interjections aren't comprehensible on the telecast, and only some of them get entered into the Parliamentary record.

Of the 1,136 members who have served in the House of Representatives from 1901 to the end of the 44th Parliament in May 2016, 329 (30 per cent) have been penalised for disorderly behaviour in the Chamber.

[Loeje]

A new thread already?

Why can’t senators do the same and stop being such cowards?

They would get censured and subsequently primaried. Their careers would be over

I think that would be a sacrifice they should make.

[Rusozak]

This is the headline you want to see:

Military officials were unaware of potential danger to Pence's 'nuclear football' during Capitol riot

Military officials overseeing the authorization process to launch nuclear weapons were unaware on January 6 that then-Vice President Mike Pence's military aide carrying the "nuclear football" was potentially in danger as rioters got close during the violent Capitol insurrection, according to a defense official.

The vice president is always accompanied by a backup of the "football," which contains the equipment to carry out orders to launch a nuclear strike. It must be ready at all times and is identical to what the president carries, in case he becomes incapacitated.

US Strategic Command became aware of the gravity of the incident after seeing a video played at the Senate impeachment trial Wednesday showing Pence, his Secret Service agents and a military officer carrying the briefcase with classified nuclear launch information running down a flight of stairs inside the Capitol to get to safety, the official said.

"As the rioters reached the top of the stairs, they were within 100 feet of where the vice president was sheltering with his family, and they were just feet away from one of the doors to this chamber," Del. Stacey Plaskett, one of the impeachment managers, explained in the senate trial on Wednesday. In one video, the crowd can be heard chanting "Hang Mike Pence" as they stand in an open doorway of the Capitol.

Given that these people didn't think selling Pelosi's computer to the Russians was morally problematic I shudder to think what country would've ended with VP's nuclear football had the rioters gotten even just a little bit further.

Could they have used it though? I would hope there are safeguards in place so that whoever has complete control of the nuclear weapons isn't just simply whoever is physically holding the football. I doubt it's just a big red button with no keys or codes or anything.

[Vassenor]

Given that these people didn't think selling Pelosi's computer to the Russians was morally problematic I shudder to think what country would've ended with VP's nuclear football had the rioters gotten even just a little bit further.

Could they have used it though? I would hope there are safeguards in place so that whoever has complete control of the nuclear weapons isn't just simply whoever is physically holding the football. I doubt it's just a big red button with no keys or codes or anything.

The Football Order is supposed to be verified as being issued by the legitimate authority by SECDEF, yes. And it's useless without authentication codes kept on the designated user's person.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

A new thread already?

They would get censured and subsequently primaried. Their careers would be over

I think that would be a sacrifice they should make.

some have even been disowned by their own *families* for doing so

i can absolutely see why the congressional GOP have been so strongly against this considering the consequences of supporting it