#46 President Joe Biden

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

That's an old survey.  It's also a terrible question that can lead to weird results based on your perspective.  

if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.

What if I'm not politically oriented and I get that question.  What does it mean that the gov't won't "protect" me?  Does that mean there are no police?  Does that mean there are looters running around adn I need to protect my family?  Well damn straight I would get violent to protect them.  

That survey is too broad compared to the topic. 

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

That's an old survey.  It's also a terrible question that can lead to weird results based on your perspective.  

if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.

What if I'm not politically oriented and I get that question.  What does it mean that the gov't won't "protect" me?  Does that mean there are no police?  Does that mean there are looters running around adn I need to protect my family?  Well damn straight I would get violent to protect them.  

That survey is too broad compared to the topic. 

Okay, how many is 12%?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/us/politics/political-violence-survey-united-states.html

From the link:

“These findings suggest a continuing alienation from and mistrust of American democratic society and its institutions,” the researchers from UC-Davis said in a manuscript. “Substantial minorities of the population endorse violence, including lethal violence, to obtain political objectives.”

ignore “big problems” at your peril. Keep thinking it can’t happen here. These people aren’t going away. And they’re not going to stop.

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

That's an old survey.  It's also a terrible question that can lead to weird results based on your perspective.  

if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.

What if I'm not politically oriented and I get that question.  What does it mean that the gov't won't "protect" me?  Does that mean there are no police?  Does that mean there are looters running around adn I need to protect my family?  Well damn straight I would get violent to protect them.  

That survey is too broad compared to the topic. 

Okay, how many is 12%?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/us/politics/political-violence-survey-united-states.html

From the link:

“These findings suggest a continuing alienation from and mistrust of American democratic society and its institutions,” the researchers from UC-Davis said in a manuscript. “Substantial minorities of the population endorse violence, including lethal violence, to obtain political objectives.”

ignore “big problems” at your peril. Keep thinking it can’t happen here. These people aren’t going away. And they’re not going to stop.

I can't even read the lede on the story due to the firewall. 

mickeyrat

theres a Capitol riot thread for this discussion,  just  sayin

mickeyrat

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

That's an old survey.  It's also a terrible question that can lead to weird results based on your perspective.  

if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.

What if I'm not politically oriented and I get that question.  What does it mean that the gov't won't "protect" me?  Does that mean there are no police?  Does that mean there are looters running around adn I need to protect my family?  Well damn straight I would get violent to protect them.  

That survey is too broad compared to the topic. 

Okay, how many is 12%?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/us/politics/political-violence-survey-united-states.html

From the link:

“These findings suggest a continuing alienation from and mistrust of American democratic society and its institutions,” the researchers from UC-Davis said in a manuscript. “Substantial minorities of the population endorse violence, including lethal violence, to obtain political objectives.”

ignore “big problems” at your peril. Keep thinking it can’t happen here. These people aren’t going away. And they’re not going to stop.

I can't even read the lede on the story due to the firewall. 

posted gift article  in riot thread

DewieCox

mace1229 said:

Merkin Baller said:

If you’re in a crowd that built a gallows and starts chanting “hang mike pence” and then storms the Capitol looking for Mike Pence…. Yeah, you didn’t “get caught up” in something. You failed to remove yourself from the scene. 

These were adults, no? Let’s stop making excuses for them. 

I don’t disagree with that. I’ve never said these people shouldn’t have been arrested or should be let out of jail.
I just don’t believe the majority actually believed they would or could prevent Biden from being president from storming the Capitol that day. But we’re arguing other people’s intent who none of us ever met and could never know. It’s just hypothetical, and just my opinion.

And circling back to my original post, certainly not evidence that millions are willing to take up arms and “happy to pull the trigger,” which no one batted an eye over. But then get all upset when I say I personally don’t believe their intent was to overthrow the government because I don’t believe they thought they had a chance. They just wanted to create chaos.
That doesn’t mean they are innocent or shouldn’t be arrested and prosecuted.

What was the point of creating chaos?

DewieCox

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

And mace if your still around, my “trigger” comment was in reference to the FBI mar a lago raid and not Jan six. Yes I mention Jan six as proof they are willing to resort to violence, but my comment was 100% influenced by the scores of reports that maga world was pissed at the mar a lago raid and ready for civil war. So the discussion that followed is a bit off topic.

So, it’s a bit funny, I was not ”interpreting” the Jan six riot in order to call maga world violent, I was literally following reports that they were ready for civil war after the FBI raided his home. No interpreting there, they specifically told us so.

Below is my full comment. IMO it’s apparent I am referring to the FBI mar a lago raid, and the subsequent civil war  - specifically from maga world - immediately after the FBI raid.




Think of the practicality of arresting a former president. We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that. And the instant a Republican becomes president, Biden, Obama and Hilary will be sharing a cell.

Its not worth the risk for simply trump  taking documents. Now if they have evidence trump was up to something nefarious with a foreign enemy, that could be different 


edit, for reference, this original comment is in the “indictment” thread 9/5, not this one,

I’m still around. After Nashville, had to pick up my guitar for the first time in a long time. Then I get sad knowing I’ll never be Mike.

But this is what you said that I replied to:
“We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that." 

I don’t know how to take that any way other than what happened Jan 6 is proof that millions will take up arms and be happy to pull the trigger if they don’t get their way.
You may be talking about the Trump raid, but your proof millions will be happy to pull the trigger over it was Jan 6.
I don’t see Jan 6 as proof millions will take up arms, kill millions more and create the biggest civil war the world has ever seen. I’m just not seeing that from Jan 6, over Mar a largo or anything else.

His followers threatened civil war, and my best guess is that requires millions, not thousands. Jan six was certainly violent, whether or not there were a dozen, a hundred, or a thousand guns nearby.

Trump is pandering to the violent extreme of his party, when he says “a storm is coming.”

…

“On Tuesday, using his Truth Social platform, the Republican former president reposted an image of himself wearing a Q lapel pin overlaid with the words “The Storm is Coming.” In QAnon lore, the “storm” refers to Trump’s final victory, when supposedly he will regain power and his opponents will be tried, and potentially executed, on live television.”

…

he sent an angry armed mob to the capitol; his followers threatened civil war when the FBI raided his club, and now he is embracing a violent conspiracy group cultist belief that judgement day is coming in order to kill democrats.

the evidence is there, it’s daunting republicans are closing their eyes and ears to it.

I see stuff like “Red Sea moment coming” and “the big reveal will be so shocking, but so cleansing”….these people aren’t sane and there are millions of them. 10’s of millions if you count those not actively praying for it and simply hopeful that it happens. The fact that they ever believed this stuff, let alone still cling to it defies logic and sanity.

Merkin Baller

DewieCox said:

mace1229 said:

Merkin Baller said:

If you’re in a crowd that built a gallows and starts chanting “hang mike pence” and then storms the Capitol looking for Mike Pence…. Yeah, you didn’t “get caught up” in something. You failed to remove yourself from the scene. 

These were adults, no? Let’s stop making excuses for them. 

I don’t disagree with that. I’ve never said these people shouldn’t have been arrested or should be let out of jail.
I just don’t believe the majority actually believed they would or could prevent Biden from being president from storming the Capitol that day. But we’re arguing other people’s intent who none of us ever met and could never know. It’s just hypothetical, and just my opinion.

And circling back to my original post, certainly not evidence that millions are willing to take up arms and “happy to pull the trigger,” which no one batted an eye over. But then get all upset when I say I personally don’t believe their intent was to overthrow the government because I don’t believe they thought they had a chance. They just wanted to create chaos.
That doesn’t mean they are innocent or shouldn’t be arrested and prosecuted.

What was the point of creating chaos?

Had enough chaos been created, tfg could have invoked martial law and then the country would have been f'ed. That would have "stopped the steal" (which was, as we all know, their declared intent of being there). This was the plan, and it came closer to succeeding than a lot of people want to admit. 

We're lucky no counter protestors showed up on 1/6. 

static111

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

Not enough apparently 

static111

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Never mind the following:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa

How many is 39% of Repubs?

That's an old survey.  It's also a terrible question that can lead to weird results based on your perspective.  

if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions.

What if I'm not politically oriented and I get that question.  What does it mean that the gov't won't "protect" me?  Does that mean there are no police?  Does that mean there are looters running around adn I need to protect my family?  Well damn straight I would get violent to protect them.  

That survey is too broad compared to the topic. 

Okay, how many is 12%?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/us/politics/political-violence-survey-united-states.html

From the link:

“These findings suggest a continuing alienation from and mistrust of American democratic society and its institutions,” the researchers from UC-Davis said in a manuscript. “Substantial minorities of the population endorse violence, including lethal violence, to obtain political objectives.”

ignore “big problems” at your peril. Keep thinking it can’t happen here. These people aren’t going away. And they’re not going to stop.

I can't even read the lede on the story due to the firewall. 

posted gift article  in riot thread

That article is disconcerting.

HughFreakingDillon

Merkin Baller said:

If you’re in a crowd that built a gallows and starts chanting “hang mike pence” and then storms the Capitol looking for Mike Pence…. Yeah, you didn’t “get caught up” in something. You failed to remove yourself from the scene. 

These were adults, no? Let’s stop making excuses for them. 

I'm not excusing those people. I'm talking about the other several thousand who left as soon as they saw violence happening. 

HughFreakingDillon

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

The Juggler

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

HughFreakingDillon

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

this whole back and forth started with you asserting that "every person who went to that rally was there to disrupt the election certification". that's what I was disagreeing with. 

The Juggler

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

this whole back and forth started with you asserting that "every person who went to that rally was there to disrupt the election certification". that's what I was disagreeing with. 

I don't believe I said that. I was talking about the people who went to the capitol building. This is what I said and I stand by it:


"They're all on videotape literally yelling, ranting and raving, about how they wanted to hang the vice president and to take back their country back with force. A lot of the magamorons who pled guilty said they were there trying to help Trump stay in office. Most of them probably thought Trump was going to be there with them since he said he was going to and they believe everything that chronological liar says."

Merkin Baller

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

this whole back and forth started with you asserting that "every person who went to that rally was there to disrupt the election certification". that's what I was disagreeing with. 

Not for nothing Hugh, but why else would someone attend the “stop the steal” rally on 1/6 at the ellipse if they didn’t support the disruption of the certification of the election? Mind you I’m not advocating the prosecution of anyone who gathered peacefully, but the intent of the rally was made quite clear from the start. 

Cropduster-80

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

this whole back and forth started with you asserting that "every person who went to that rally was there to disrupt the election certification". that's what I was disagreeing with. 

Not for nothing Hugh, but why else would someone attend the “stop the steal” rally on 1/6 at the ellipse if they didn’t support the disruption of the certification of the election? Mind you I’m not advocating the prosecution of anyone who gathered peacefully, but the intent of the rally was made quite clear from the start. 

That’s no different than white nationalists rallies. It’s disgusting but I’d defend their right to be disgusting 

they terrorise and intimidate as that’s the entire point of any of these far right gatherings when they parade around cities, often carrying guns. Until they act they are doing it legally 

stepping one foot inside the capital then it changes

Lerxst1992

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

And mace if your still around, my “trigger” comment was in reference to the FBI mar a lago raid and not Jan six. Yes I mention Jan six as proof they are willing to resort to violence, but my comment was 100% influenced by the scores of reports that maga world was pissed at the mar a lago raid and ready for civil war. So the discussion that followed is a bit off topic.

So, it’s a bit funny, I was not ”interpreting” the Jan six riot in order to call maga world violent, I was literally following reports that they were ready for civil war after the FBI raided his home. No interpreting there, they specifically told us so.

Below is my full comment. IMO it’s apparent I am referring to the FBI mar a lago raid, and the subsequent civil war  - specifically from maga world - immediately after the FBI raid.




Think of the practicality of arresting a former president. We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that. And the instant a Republican becomes president, Biden, Obama and Hilary will be sharing a cell.

Its not worth the risk for simply trump  taking documents. Now if they have evidence trump was up to something nefarious with a foreign enemy, that could be different 


edit, for reference, this original comment is in the “indictment” thread 9/5, not this one,

I’m still around. After Nashville, had to pick up my guitar for the first time in a long time. Then I get sad knowing I’ll never be Mike.

But this is what you said that I replied to:
“We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that." 

I don’t know how to take that any way other than what happened Jan 6 is proof that millions will take up arms and be happy to pull the trigger if they don’t get their way.
You may be talking about the Trump raid, but your proof millions will be happy to pull the trigger over it was Jan 6.
I don’t see Jan 6 as proof millions will take up arms, kill millions more and create the biggest civil war the world has ever seen. I’m just not seeing that from Jan 6, over Mar a largo or anything else.

His followers threatened civil war, and my best guess is that requires millions, not thousands. Jan six was certainly violent, whether or not there were a dozen, a hundred, or a thousand guns nearby.

Trump is pandering to the violent extreme of his party, when he says “a storm is coming.”

…

“On Tuesday, using his Truth Social platform, the Republican former president reposted an image of himself wearing a Q lapel pin overlaid with the words “The Storm is Coming.” In QAnon lore, the “storm” refers to Trump’s final victory, when supposedly he will regain power and his opponents will be tried, and potentially executed, on live television.”

…

he sent an angry armed mob to the capitol; his followers threatened civil war when the FBI raided his club, and now he is embracing a violent conspiracy group cultist belief that judgement day is coming in order to kill democrats.

the evidence is there, it’s daunting republicans are closing their eyes and ears to it.

So because a few threatened civil war, that means they have the millions required to maybe pull it off?
Those threatening civil war are a very small minority of the far right. Not the majority of the party.

The leader promotes violence, and his voters don’t seem concerned at all, that’s the threat. Maybe if he threatened to kill you you’d be more concerned?

Lerxst1992

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

And mace if your still around, my “trigger” comment was in reference to the FBI mar a lago raid and not Jan six. Yes I mention Jan six as proof they are willing to resort to violence, but my comment was 100% influenced by the scores of reports that maga world was pissed at the mar a lago raid and ready for civil war. So the discussion that followed is a bit off topic.

So, it’s a bit funny, I was not ”interpreting” the Jan six riot in order to call maga world violent, I was literally following reports that they were ready for civil war after the FBI raided his home. No interpreting there, they specifically told us so.

Below is my full comment. IMO it’s apparent I am referring to the FBI mar a lago raid, and the subsequent civil war  - specifically from maga world - immediately after the FBI raid.




Think of the practicality of arresting a former president. We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that. And the instant a Republican becomes president, Biden, Obama and Hilary will be sharing a cell.

Its not worth the risk for simply trump  taking documents. Now if they have evidence trump was up to something nefarious with a foreign enemy, that could be different 


edit, for reference, this original comment is in the “indictment” thread 9/5, not this one,

I’m still around. After Nashville, had to pick up my guitar for the first time in a long time. Then I get sad knowing I’ll never be Mike.

But this is what you said that I replied to:
“We like to say no one is above the law but there is no real way to pull it off without pissing off millions of crazies with guns, who would happily pull the trigger over this, and Jan six is proof of that." 

I don’t know how to take that any way other than what happened Jan 6 is proof that millions will take up arms and be happy to pull the trigger if they don’t get their way.
You may be talking about the Trump raid, but your proof millions will be happy to pull the trigger over it was Jan 6.
I don’t see Jan 6 as proof millions will take up arms, kill millions more and create the biggest civil war the world has ever seen. I’m just not seeing that from Jan 6, over Mar a largo or anything else.

His followers threatened civil war, and my best guess is that requires millions, not thousands. Jan six was certainly violent, whether or not there were a dozen, a hundred, or a thousand guns nearby.

Trump is pandering to the violent extreme of his party, when he says “a storm is coming.”

…

“On Tuesday, using his Truth Social platform, the Republican former president reposted an image of himself wearing a Q lapel pin overlaid with the words “The Storm is Coming.” In QAnon lore, the “storm” refers to Trump’s final victory, when supposedly he will regain power and his opponents will be tried, and potentially executed, on live television.”

…

he sent an angry armed mob to the capitol; his followers threatened civil war when the FBI raided his club, and now he is embracing a violent conspiracy group cultist belief that judgement day is coming in order to kill democrats.

the evidence is there, it’s daunting republicans are closing their eyes and ears to it.

So because a few threatened civil war, that means they have the millions required to maybe pull it off?
Those threatening civil war are a very small minority of the far right. Not the majority of the party.

I'm generally with Mace.  I think it's a small minority that feels this way and significantly smaller that would ever do anything about it.  They are generally a bunch of Cos players.  

I think many did go to the Capital thinking they could stop the certification but they had no clue how.  By contrast, Team Trump used them to try and pressure Pence.  

That’s obvious based on your jokes about the cos players, which are insignificant to the point I was striving to make. The problem is, to change this country, it does not take a lot of violence, the threat of violence with a handful of guns is enough.

combine the violence with the threat of more violence by brandishing guns, with changing voting and certification laws, topped off with a friendly court, and that’s more than enough to get the job done.

Looking at how GOP voters flocked to support trump candidates in the primaries after his decision to go violent is more than enough proof.

the fact that Cheney agrees more with me than you is a bit daunting.

HughFreakingDillon

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The Juggler said:

Yeah, sorry guys. You don't just get "caught up in a riot" at the US Capitol building, behind police barricades,  at the exact date and time of the certifying of the election. They all knew why they were marching there and they all knew what they were trying to do. Their leader told them to fight like hell for him. They were following orders. They're all on videotape admitting to it. They're not "average joes." They're all a bunch of lunatics. 

2,000 or entered the capitol. out of an estimated rally attendance of 80,000. 

all of whom were doing what again?

Whoa....80,000?!?! There were like 10,000 people at that speech. lol

I have no qualms with the disillusioned wackjobs that chose to spend their time at a Trump rally and did NOT attempt to block the certification of the election. 

sorry yes, bad source. 10,000. the fact remains: the majority left. 

Why do you think any of us are talking about the people who only went to the speech though?

this whole back and forth started with you asserting that "every person who went to that rally was there to disrupt the election certification". that's what I was disagreeing with. 

Not for nothing Hugh, but why else would someone attend the “stop the steal” rally on 1/6 at the ellipse if they didn’t support the disruption of the certification of the election? Mind you I’m not advocating the prosecution of anyone who gathered peacefully, but the intent of the rally was made quite clear from the start. 

I can't claim to know the intentions of what anyone was there to do that day. But if I had to guess, for most it was to be part of "something" that their cult leader was attending. 

some had legit intentions to "take back the country" by any means necessary.