-
Please checkout the new poll we will be pushing hard, and want some good stories to come out of this
result are public - you can change your vote over time, which might genuinely be the case from time to time.
Search the forum,
He's said many a dumb thing but more common is that he is misrepresented to make him look more foolish. He has been treated incredibly unfairly by the press, news and social media.
It is the disparity of treatment.
Look up the incoherent ramblings and senile fumbling of Joe Biden on the Internet and then look for the coverage on the news.
..and thats not even going near the corruption.
Watch the above ànd ask yourself, honestly, what would have happened if Trump had said the same.
I wish you would read my posts and stop trying to put words in my mouth, at no point have I said there were no Trump supporters in the riots on Capitol Hill.
I was clear in stating the Pelosi is pushing for an impeachment on Trump based on the speech of the Trump rally 2miles down from Capitol Hill, she was clear about it been that speech that she claims incited the disturbances on Capitol Hill, at no point did I mention nore did she about tweets prior to or following the breach of Capitol Hill.
I never said the National Guard were in Cahoots, the national Guard is a large body, I cited a piece that gave specific names of the local police Chief Commander and who he reported to, it was the failure of who he reported to that the national guard was not brought in.
There were several prominent arrests over the breach of Capitol Hill and through FB messenger and Twitter the FBI have found a pre organised intent to cause maximum disturbances with some information asking for members of the government and opposition to be kidnapped and or killed, on such person was a deluded Trump fan who was found with a hit list and arsenal of weapons, I never said there were no trump supporters involved, I clearly stated the the mainstream media were telling a very different story to that of what happened that day, leaving out the fact that many arrested were there who participated in the initial push and breach of Capitol Hill were indeed Antifa and BLM, some well known and already facing previous charges for rioting.
When the building was breached and people got in at some point security were filmed letting in people through 2 side doors, people simply followed the crowd at this stage and starting walking in and walking around, there was plenty of uploaded footing that show people walking about filming the building and surrounding while in other areas their were been violent.
The link to the guy I cited - his lengthy video even shows him talking to a journalist at the end admitting to pre arranging it and he says he was sorry he couldn't tell her too much (her been a journalist) but he also goes on to say, "I told you it was going to be epic or words to that effect, isn't this the best, I just couldn't tell you too much," his internet history directly links him to Antifa, BLM and it shows him organising with groups for this event and attack, he is not a Trump fan and he came equipped but like I keep saying, the media ignore any of these hardened violent protesters who had pre-planned it and continue to say the riots were a reaction to Trump's speech that day.
PS - I am not claiming conspiracy, the FBI were aware of intentions of known groups, it was even publicly announced they had intelligence on such matters yet did nothing, requested no back up and then denied it after, the FBI will have reported this to Pelosi given she was in the chair that day, so 2 scenarios
They did report their concern and Pelosi told them to do nothing or they didn't tell Pelosi which raises bigger questions.
If they didn't tell Pelosi then the Chief Commander reported to Pelosi's rep' for the national guard and he should have also reported it been a security issue of the building she was in.
Somebody somewhere made a conscious decision to ignore the preemptive threat alert or ignored the active threat alert and from the citation of the interview given by the Chief Commander it looks on Pelosi in both scenarios unless by massive coincidence she was never told by 2 departments that were there to warn of her of such security matters.
Take from this what you will but when the sequence of event do not add up and then we see an unconstitutional attempt to impeach Trump it does point consistently to political motivation was in play and when I say unconstitutional I mean they are trying to impeach a private citizen now which impeachment does not cover and they are trying to do it by subverting the law and Trump's rights to a fair hearing.. now that is corruption right there if I ever saw it, all to ensure he cannot run again in 4yrs time.
But there was no challenge to the result as far as I’m aware, just the usual local count challenges and recounts.
Obama too congratulated Trump, he allowed full access to Trump and his team through the transition and was totally magnanimous and friendly through the inauguration. As was Michelle Obama.
Not the same really, is it?
She didn't even have a concession speech and didn't give one.
The same fix that Biden benefitted from was in for Hillary only the plug was pulled at the last minute, it appears that even the Dems didn't really want her.
If Trump only achieved one thing it was saving the world from that psychopath.
Thanks Donny.
But I refuse to believe she could be worse than Trump, inconceivable.
Who know, but we did get this.
Again, thanks Donny.
The problem with your posts, well my problem is you go on forever in your replies. If you can be more concise, perhaps we might get to the crux of the matter.
Anyone popping in to the forum for the first time would think he had inadvertently stumbled onto "Parler-lite"
Not quite.
From Wikipedia:
Pennsylvania:
On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters, a process known as gerrymandering. Less than one month later, a new congressional map was drawn and approved. The new map would take place in the May primaries.[3] With the new congressional map in place, Democrats had a net gain of three congressional seats, giving the Democratic Party half of Pennsylvania's congressional seats.
Michigan:
In 2018, the state electorate passed proposals to create an independent redistricting commission,
*Edit: I'm not sure if any redistricting took place in Michigan since that time
What you perhaps I advertently highlighted in your post is the republican practice of "gerrymandering. Add to that all the other means of trying to disenfranchised voters. If none of that works, just send down the local armed militia to stand outside the voting stations. Not very democratic, is it
Not inadvertant at all and there's no denying the history of gerrymandering by US republicans. I'm not sure how historic events tie in to a thread entitled "USA politics, recent events"?
The information I posted is of little relevance, but was a response to your post that seemed to assume control of state legisature as overriding factor in the overall electoral processes of that state.
"the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters"
Like quoting sentences in their full context?
Not sure why you appear to be so angry, but think it's best if I step away now.
It's righting a wrong.
I will ask again about an earlier comment you made, you said Trump has brought a white supremacist group from the fringes into the mainstream or words to that effect, you still haven't told me who this group is as I cannot find any.
This is not about 'in Trump's world', there has been individual private claims of voter fraud and also Powell brought independent claims herself which are not a part of Trump's claims.
I assume then if you say that no voter fraud occurred you can explain why we now have numerous people on trial for voter fraud and are on film admitting to it, I find it amazing how these cases simply never make it to the mainstream media, it's almost like they had an agenda but hey, that would be me been a conspiracist again even though we have hours of CNN secretly taped conversations of hows to protect Biden from negative stories and how to attack Trump.
PS was not on Parlour or any forum of that kind, I don't even have a twitter and don't bother using FB although I have FB just to catch up on local bands playing.
I actually follow a group who have channels that breakdown the legal process and analyse the actions and merits of the cases and explain without bias what is occurring if you must know, I also follow people like Viva Frei who is a Canadian law expert and when he comments on US law he brings in guest speakers to confirm US laws and legal process when he need verification, I only know of parlour through their videos and if you watch YT recent one on parlour suing Amazon you will realise not all is as it seems or is told to you by the media.
Lets face it none of us know what really took place, we were not there. As typical in large scale violent demonstrations, it’s difficult to comprehend how this unfolded. We gain our information, from various sources, mostly the internet, which I have.
Indeed there was intelligence on what’s was to happen, you only have to look at all the stuff on the internet beforehand, about ‘stopthesteal’. I’ve read that the Capitol Police, said there was no such intelligence.
For your first point, the various persons were present in and around the Capitol because of the happenings in there, but also by various tweets Trump had been made leading up to this event, not least his speech, for many days before. He IMO incited them before and during.
Again from the internet, the Capitol Police are responsible for the security of the building. Washington, D.C., is not a state: Because D.C. does not have a governor, D.C. Guard deployments must be approved by the city’s National Guard army secretary, Ryan McCarthy. This is a slower process than a governor hastily declaring a state of emergency and calling in National Guard forces in large numbers.
Pelosi is not in charge of the security of the Capitol building (various internet searches).
Quite simply the Capitol Police were overwhelmed by the size of the mob. We will have to wait and see, why they did not have additional resources. They only have 2000 officers. Even if they were all deployed, that would be insufficient to protect the grounds and building IMO, in such an incident. Perhaps they were too vain to ask.
For your last point, there is precedent for impeachment of a person, after they have left office. Leave you all to google that.
Apologies for the long post folks ?
On this forum, responsible sparks (and I don't doubt you are one by the way) are constantly reminding DIY posters of potential danger once we discern they don't understand what they are dealing with. Trump's politics are no different. They have danger written all over them. The responsible thing to do is call it out.
At no point have I denied dishonest acts of Trump you may have put but you take my position not to raise them as a position that I do not admit to them which is presumption on your part, a point I made earlier btw, all sides of politics has its bad points and I do not deny that but I pursue lesser of the 2 evils and what I have witnessed over the last 4yrs and the cases I have watched live, the content I have seen regarding Hunter Biden and his father has sealed my side of the debate to prefer Trump to the corruption that has entered the Whitehouse at the moment.
Regarding DIY - that has no relevance to this subject and your attempt to suggest they are comparable are just your opinion which I disagree, what I do agree with is your position to challenge ideas that you do not agree with as that is what debate is about however your claim 'dangerous' relative to this debate is your opinion and you need to back that up with more than attacks on me and what I say, I remind you you started of posting several posts by quoting part isolated paragraphs and sentences then deliberately taking them out of the context they were written in for nothing more than a 'jovial' jab at members.
As it stands at the moment you are spending more time actually complaining about the thread than you are challenging any specific points raised, you fail to bring anything to the table yourself except your opinion and claims you do not back up, so lets try move forward here (both of us) and bring more citation and evidence to back our positions.
PS - I actually think I know who these 'White Supremacists' are you refer to but need you to say their name because there is one glaring elephant in the room attaching that tag to them, even so I do not condone this group or the fact Trump may have boosted their presence in the public eye, funny how you brought that up and fail to mention the MSM and Democrats approach with BLM and Antifa both guilty of worse crimes then this suggested group you call out if it is the same group I am thinking.
We are all just sharing views and debating in a largely civilised manner and that is how it should be .The real danger is trying to shut down debate because that helps us better understand each others motivations and grievances .
Some good can come of that
We can argue all day long about what meaning should be ascribed to spoken words and we may all perceive such words differently but, for purposes of clarity and accuracy, here are Trump's exact words:
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
The full speech is available to watch online and transcripts are also available to review.
I'd copied and pasted those words from the first transcript provided by google, but agree that it would be very easy to omit or add words and why should anyone believe me? I'm just some random person on an internet forum, who might have fabricated that quote.
To be clear about what words were actually spoken, it is fortunate that video evidence also exists.
Many media outlets played the same clip, but chose to only play the section that fitted their agenda and then cut to talking heads who were ready to condemn. I don't agree with some of what @darkwood has posted, but fully agree with his words about the media and the explicit bias often displayed by news outlets that many people trust. I would state that anyone who receives their information, on domestic or international affairs, from news media is very unlikely to be in possession of even half the facts of any story. To find the video posted above I had to scroll past many videos that had editied out the contentious words - many of which claiming those words were never spoken.
I do take the point about using terms like 'fight like hell' and its use in general, but whether that was his mens rea or not, that's exactly what happened. Being a man who holds such power or did have, he should of choose his words more carefully.
When I listen to this man, I find his words both arrogant, belittling and offensive. I recall someone posting about how many conflicts previous Presidents had took their country into conflicts, whereas Trump had none. But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?
I am glad he's out.
As always who benefits?
That most people do not know that many Republican senators were going to use, rightfully, the counting ceremony as an opportunity to air their objections and get them on record is very telling.
The fact that this "insurrection" allowed the process to be halted and subsequently waived through without contest tell us all we need to know.
Discuss USA politics, recent events. in the Electricians Chat - Off Topic Chat area at ElectriciansForums.net
- Reaction score
- 17,145
How can a left winger seriously say trump has never said anything Stupid? come on admit it, he has said hundreds of Stupid things, how about can we drink bleach to kill the virus lol, surely that is stupid
- Reaction score
- 3,010
I've not, to my knowledge or intent, defended Trump. In fact I think he's a bit of a prat, sure I've posted that somewhere.
He's said many a dumb thing but more common is that he is misrepresented to make him look more foolish. He has been treated incredibly unfairly by the press, news and social media.
- Reaction score
- 17,145
Seriously, just google "Trumps silly comments" some of the things are so stupid a 5 year old child has more sense, he is a complete clown, a buffoon, a simpleton, and the farce regarding the election being stolen highlights his intelligence, how anyone in their right mind can even suggest for one minute he was made to look more foolish must be kidding around surely.
- Reaction score
- 5,664
Trump say silly things, No never.
"We're going to build a wall on the Mexican border and we will make the Mexicans pay for it"
Not a hope was there of that ever happening.
It's already 5 times over budget and if ever fully built at todays cost would be $40bn for the whole 2000 miles.
Guess who'll be paying for what they've spent on the wall now,, the American tax payers which includes my Son.
"We're gonna walk down to the Capitol (building) AND I'LL BE WITH YOU"
Not a hope was there of the Secret Service ever letting a serving President walk down the road with anyone.
"We're going to build a wall on the Mexican border and we will make the Mexicans pay for it"
Not a hope was there of that ever happening.
It's already 5 times over budget and if ever fully built at todays cost would be $40bn for the whole 2000 miles.
Guess who'll be paying for what they've spent on the wall now,, the American tax payers which includes my Son.
"We're gonna walk down to the Capitol (building) AND I'LL BE WITH YOU"
Not a hope was there of the Secret Service ever letting a serving President walk down the road with anyone.
- Reaction score
- 3,010
Which bit of the not defending Trump are you struggling with.
It is the disparity of treatment.
Look up the incoherent ramblings and senile fumbling of Joe Biden on the Internet and then look for the coverage on the news.
..and thats not even going near the corruption.
Watch the above ànd ask yourself, honestly, what would have happened if Trump had said the same.
- Reaction score
- 345
To be fair he didn't set out to build a garden wall , more of a ---- off wall ?
- Reaction score
- 10,616
I can understand any nation wanting to control their borders, we have some very good border controls, except Harridans Wall (only joking), but our 'wall' hasn't stopped migrants crossing the Channel. I seem to recall reading in the news, that they are already digging tunnels or something under the new bits of wall. Seems a bit of waste of money.
OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
I wish you would read my posts and stop trying to put words in my mouth, at no point have I said there were no Trump supporters in the riots on Capitol Hill.
I was clear in stating the Pelosi is pushing for an impeachment on Trump based on the speech of the Trump rally 2miles down from Capitol Hill, she was clear about it been that speech that she claims incited the disturbances on Capitol Hill, at no point did I mention nore did she about tweets prior to or following the breach of Capitol Hill.
I never said the National Guard were in Cahoots, the national Guard is a large body, I cited a piece that gave specific names of the local police Chief Commander and who he reported to, it was the failure of who he reported to that the national guard was not brought in.
There were several prominent arrests over the breach of Capitol Hill and through FB messenger and Twitter the FBI have found a pre organised intent to cause maximum disturbances with some information asking for members of the government and opposition to be kidnapped and or killed, on such person was a deluded Trump fan who was found with a hit list and arsenal of weapons, I never said there were no trump supporters involved, I clearly stated the the mainstream media were telling a very different story to that of what happened that day, leaving out the fact that many arrested were there who participated in the initial push and breach of Capitol Hill were indeed Antifa and BLM, some well known and already facing previous charges for rioting.
When the building was breached and people got in at some point security were filmed letting in people through 2 side doors, people simply followed the crowd at this stage and starting walking in and walking around, there was plenty of uploaded footing that show people walking about filming the building and surrounding while in other areas their were been violent.
The link to the guy I cited - his lengthy video even shows him talking to a journalist at the end admitting to pre arranging it and he says he was sorry he couldn't tell her too much (her been a journalist) but he also goes on to say, "I told you it was going to be epic or words to that effect, isn't this the best, I just couldn't tell you too much," his internet history directly links him to Antifa, BLM and it shows him organising with groups for this event and attack, he is not a Trump fan and he came equipped but like I keep saying, the media ignore any of these hardened violent protesters who had pre-planned it and continue to say the riots were a reaction to Trump's speech that day.
PS - I am not claiming conspiracy, the FBI were aware of intentions of known groups, it was even publicly announced they had intelligence on such matters yet did nothing, requested no back up and then denied it after, the FBI will have reported this to Pelosi given she was in the chair that day, so 2 scenarios
They did report their concern and Pelosi told them to do nothing or they didn't tell Pelosi which raises bigger questions.
If they didn't tell Pelosi then the Chief Commander reported to Pelosi's rep' for the national guard and he should have also reported it been a security issue of the building she was in.
Somebody somewhere made a conscious decision to ignore the preemptive threat alert or ignored the active threat alert and from the citation of the interview given by the Chief Commander it looks on Pelosi in both scenarios unless by massive coincidence she was never told by 2 departments that were there to warn of her of such security matters.
Take from this what you will but when the sequence of event do not add up and then we see an unconstitutional attempt to impeach Trump it does point consistently to political motivation was in play and when I say unconstitutional I mean they are trying to impeach a private citizen now which impeachment does not cover and they are trying to do it by subverting the law and Trump's rights to a fair hearing.. now that is corruption right there if I ever saw it, all to ensure he cannot run again in 4yrs time.
- Reaction score
- 1,207
But Clinton conceded and congratulated Trump the day after the election SC. Although to be fair, she then moaned about it for the next 4 years.
But there was no challenge to the result as far as I’m aware, just the usual local count challenges and recounts.
Obama too congratulated Trump, he allowed full access to Trump and his team through the transition and was totally magnanimous and friendly through the inauguration. As was Michelle Obama.
Not the same really, is it?
- Reaction score
- 3,010
Hillary lost her composure so enormously when she lost because, not only did she think she would win, she knew she'd win.
She didn't even have a concession speech and didn't give one.
The same fix that Biden benefitted from was in for Hillary only the plug was pulled at the last minute, it appears that even the Dems didn't really want her.
If Trump only achieved one thing it was saving the world from that psychopath.
Thanks Donny.
- Reaction score
- 1,207
You maybe right with the first part of this.
But I refuse to believe she could be worse than Trump, inconceivable.
- Reaction score
- 3,010
Almost impossible to prove, granted, but I'd posit there are more people alive in the middle East today than if Hillary was POTUS.
Who know, but we did get this.
Again, thanks Donny.
- Reaction score
- 345
A lot of these Democrats see themselves as a political elite.
It serves their interests to whip up division and oppression whilst simultaneously presenting themselves as the guardians of the dispossessed and the disenfranchised .
Truth is they dont really want anything much to change because they want to continue harvesting that vote.
Throughout Trumps reign they have consistently shown a particularly nasty and cynical disregard for democracy
It serves their interests to whip up division and oppression whilst simultaneously presenting themselves as the guardians of the dispossessed and the disenfranchised .
Truth is they dont really want anything much to change because they want to continue harvesting that vote.
Throughout Trumps reign they have consistently shown a particularly nasty and cynical disregard for democracy
- Reaction score
- 10,616
The problem with your posts, well my problem is you go on forever in your replies. If you can be more concise, perhaps we might get to the crux of the matter.
- Reaction score
- 10,616
Are the same ole thing , like with Cameron in the Brexit thread, they thought they would win. Bull pop, none of them go into it thinking they would win. 'A week is a long time in politics'.
- Reaction score
- 1,230
Correct. Darkwood has written the vast majority of the content and reading back through it I find little of substance . What's clear is he is a big fan of ex president Trump and believes he has been cheated out of an election by voter fraud. The fact that Trump's vice President, his own attorney General, (William Barr) said otherwise matters, little. The states where disputed votes supposedly took place were all republican controlled. They all stated there was no fraud. The judges agreed including the trump appointed ones. But in Trump's World facts could be overturned by "alternative facts" and conspiracy theories.
Anyone popping in to the forum for the first time would think he had inadvertently stumbled onto "Parler-lite"
- Reaction score
- 6,904
Not quite.
From Wikipedia:
Pennsylvania:
On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters, a process known as gerrymandering. Less than one month later, a new congressional map was drawn and approved. The new map would take place in the May primaries.[3] With the new congressional map in place, Democrats had a net gain of three congressional seats, giving the Democratic Party half of Pennsylvania's congressional seats.
Michigan:
In 2018, the state electorate passed proposals to create an independent redistricting commission,
*Edit: I'm not sure if any redistricting took place in Michigan since that time
- Reaction score
- 1,230
Helpful post. A bit like informing us that that the murder victim had 4 instead of 5 bullet wounds. Don't miss the elephant in the room.
What you perhaps I advertently highlighted in your post is the republican practice of "gerrymandering. Add to that all the other means of trying to disenfranchised voters. If none of that works, just send down the local armed militia to stand outside the voting stations. Not very democratic, is it
- Reaction score
- 1,207
I think you've undermined your own case there, it says the Republicans were gerrymandering. Unless I've misunderstood your point.
- Reaction score
- 6,904
Not inadvertant at all and there's no denying the history of gerrymandering by US republicans. I'm not sure how historic events tie in to a thread entitled "USA politics, recent events"?
The information I posted is of little relevance, but was a response to your post that seemed to assume control of state legisature as overriding factor in the overall electoral processes of that state.
- Reaction score
- 6,904
"the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania mandated that the state's congressional map be redrawn, alleging that the current map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans and disenfranchise Democratic voters"
- Reaction score
- 1,230
Would be really helpful if you could focus on the relevant stuff
- Reaction score
- 6,904
Like quoting sentences in their full context?
Not sure why you appear to be so angry, but think it's best if I step away now.
- Reaction score
- 1,207
That's right, it's in response to the 2012 changes which gave the Republicans extra seats, that was the gerrymandering.
It's righting a wrong.
OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
I sat through several hours of open hearing in the contested states, little to none of these have had the chance to be presented before judge and jury to be ruled on so any claims of no fraud have no meaning as no cases have allowed evidence to be heard or evidence to be gathered even though in some counties to this day we have court orders to allow for access to ballots and machines, they have effectively all be stonewalled repeatedly, your comment about William Barr - please do me the honours and recite what he actually said word for word and in full context.
I will ask again about an earlier comment you made, you said Trump has brought a white supremacist group from the fringes into the mainstream or words to that effect, you still haven't told me who this group is as I cannot find any.
This is not about 'in Trump's world', there has been individual private claims of voter fraud and also Powell brought independent claims herself which are not a part of Trump's claims.
I assume then if you say that no voter fraud occurred you can explain why we now have numerous people on trial for voter fraud and are on film admitting to it, I find it amazing how these cases simply never make it to the mainstream media, it's almost like they had an agenda but hey, that would be me been a conspiracist again even though we have hours of CNN secretly taped conversations of hows to protect Biden from negative stories and how to attack Trump.
PS was not on Parlour or any forum of that kind, I don't even have a twitter and don't bother using FB although I have FB just to catch up on local bands playing.
I actually follow a group who have channels that breakdown the legal process and analyse the actions and merits of the cases and explain without bias what is occurring if you must know, I also follow people like Viva Frei who is a Canadian law expert and when he comments on US law he brings in guest speakers to confirm US laws and legal process when he need verification, I only know of parlour through their videos and if you watch YT recent one on parlour suing Amazon you will realise not all is as it seems or is told to you by the media.
- Reaction score
- 10,616
I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’ve summarised the suspicions you’ve made.
Lets face it none of us know what really took place, we were not there. As typical in large scale violent demonstrations, it’s difficult to comprehend how this unfolded. We gain our information, from various sources, mostly the internet, which I have.
Indeed there was intelligence on what’s was to happen, you only have to look at all the stuff on the internet beforehand, about ‘stopthesteal’. I’ve read that the Capitol Police, said there was no such intelligence.
For your first point, the various persons were present in and around the Capitol because of the happenings in there, but also by various tweets Trump had been made leading up to this event, not least his speech, for many days before. He IMO incited them before and during.
Again from the internet, the Capitol Police are responsible for the security of the building. Washington, D.C., is not a state: Because D.C. does not have a governor, D.C. Guard deployments must be approved by the city’s National Guard army secretary, Ryan McCarthy. This is a slower process than a governor hastily declaring a state of emergency and calling in National Guard forces in large numbers.
Pelosi is not in charge of the security of the Capitol building (various internet searches).
Quite simply the Capitol Police were overwhelmed by the size of the mob. We will have to wait and see, why they did not have additional resources. They only have 2000 officers. Even if they were all deployed, that would be insufficient to protect the grounds and building IMO, in such an incident. Perhaps they were too vain to ask.
For your last point, there is precedent for impeachment of a person, after they have left office. Leave you all to google that.
Apologies for the long post folks ?
- Reaction score
- 17,145
Yeah we were mate, I watched the whole thing on TV and the Trump speech before hand, he asked the mob to go to the Capitol and said he would go in with them, he knew the Secret service wouldn't allow him to go but wound the crowd up and hundreds of out of control yobbo's then attacked the building and entered, Trump incited it and 5 people ended up dead, he was to blame, and thank God he has now gone, I want him to get found guilty, because if he doesn't he will be back next time in 2024, and it wouldn't surprise me if he won again, they are that daft over there.
- Reaction score
- 1,230
You started a thread which consists largely of your opinions and speculations. It consists primarily of "ifs, buts and mayby, s" Unfortunately hard facts are extremely hard to come by in your posts. When presented with the hard facts of Trump's blatant dishonesty and lying, you chose to ignore them and instead inform us of "declassified this and that" that you have read. You profess ignorance of the fact that Trump made white supremacy fashionable again.The proverbial dogs in the street know it. How did you manage to miss it??despite the hours of research you apparently put in to American politics. Trump took the traditional republican "dog whistle" (an appeal to right wingers) and replaced it with a trumpet.
On this forum, responsible sparks (and I don't doubt you are one by the way) are constantly reminding DIY posters of potential danger once we discern they don't understand what they are dealing with. Trump's politics are no different. They have danger written all over them. The responsible thing to do is call it out.
- Reaction score
- 1,230
P. S. I don, t or won't be getting involved in politics myself. I took that decision some time ago. My purpose in commenting on this thread (this will be my final comment on the matter) is because it has in my view crossed a line. It promotes idea, s which are simply not to anyone's advantage. Idea, s that are divisive. It would be a terribly pity if these type of thread was to become acceptable. This forum I have come to value. Its worth fighting for. Have a good day everyone?
- Reaction score
- 17,145
Agree, I loved seeing the Clowns at the Circus when I was a kid
- Reaction score
- 17,145
LOL, Never seen such an idiotic post
OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
You may want to look in the mirror of your own posts, you have repeatedly done exactly what you accuse me of doing, you fail to even address a question I asked now 3 times so really who is peddling in claims you do not back up... please name these white supremacists that is all I asked and still keep asking, I remind you I do not follow sites that peddle hearsay, propaganda and conspiracy, I watch legal debate and follow real proceedings and the evidence provided.
At no point have I denied dishonest acts of Trump you may have put but you take my position not to raise them as a position that I do not admit to them which is presumption on your part, a point I made earlier btw, all sides of politics has its bad points and I do not deny that but I pursue lesser of the 2 evils and what I have witnessed over the last 4yrs and the cases I have watched live, the content I have seen regarding Hunter Biden and his father has sealed my side of the debate to prefer Trump to the corruption that has entered the Whitehouse at the moment.
Regarding DIY - that has no relevance to this subject and your attempt to suggest they are comparable are just your opinion which I disagree, what I do agree with is your position to challenge ideas that you do not agree with as that is what debate is about however your claim 'dangerous' relative to this debate is your opinion and you need to back that up with more than attacks on me and what I say, I remind you you started of posting several posts by quoting part isolated paragraphs and sentences then deliberately taking them out of the context they were written in for nothing more than a 'jovial' jab at members.
As it stands at the moment you are spending more time actually complaining about the thread than you are challenging any specific points raised, you fail to bring anything to the table yourself except your opinion and claims you do not back up, so lets try move forward here (both of us) and bring more citation and evidence to back our positions.
PS - I actually think I know who these 'White Supremacists' are you refer to but need you to say their name because there is one glaring elephant in the room attaching that tag to them, even so I do not condone this group or the fact Trump may have boosted their presence in the public eye, funny how you brought that up and fail to mention the MSM and Democrats approach with BLM and Antifa both guilty of worse crimes then this suggested group you call out if it is the same group I am thinking.
- Reaction score
- 345
By having an opinion you are involved in politics and have become involved.
We are all just sharing views and debating in a largely civilised manner and that is how it should be .The real danger is trying to shut down debate because that helps us better understand each others motivations and grievances .
Some good can come of that
- Reaction score
- 6,904
We can argue all day long about what meaning should be ascribed to spoken words and we may all perceive such words differently but, for purposes of clarity and accuracy, here are Trump's exact words:
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
The full speech is available to watch online and transcripts are also available to review.
- Reaction score
- 10,616
Transcripts have been made by various, some don’t mention him saying ‘peacefully’ and the best part of his speech, keeps referring to election fraud and that the election was stolen, with the audience cheering him on, and him seemly cheering them on.
This comes after various tweets he made before the 6th, same sort of rhetoric, but worse, which led to his account suspension.
We‘ll just have wait and see what his impeachment case says, if it goes ahead.
This comes after various tweets he made before the 6th, same sort of rhetoric, but worse, which led to his account suspension.
We‘ll just have wait and see what his impeachment case says, if it goes ahead.
- Reaction score
- 6,904
I'd copied and pasted those words from the first transcript provided by google, but agree that it would be very easy to omit or add words and why should anyone believe me? I'm just some random person on an internet forum, who might have fabricated that quote.
To be clear about what words were actually spoken, it is fortunate that video evidence also exists.
Many media outlets played the same clip, but chose to only play the section that fitted their agenda and then cut to talking heads who were ready to condemn. I don't agree with some of what @darkwood has posted, but fully agree with his words about the media and the explicit bias often displayed by news outlets that many people trust. I would state that anyone who receives their information, on domestic or international affairs, from news media is very unlikely to be in possession of even half the facts of any story. To find the video posted above I had to scroll past many videos that had editied out the contentious words - many of which claiming those words were never spoken.
OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
To be noted here when Trump users the terms fight or fighting he is clearly been figurative as the context of the rest of his speech clarifies.
I find it strange that we have seen thousands of politicians use phrases like fight for what you believe and all they mean is in a figurative sense and not a violent one, but because it is trump and we have had a 4yr witch hunt on him they take those words as an incite to violence which within the context of the rest of the speech is ludicrous to suggest that.
'We are going to cheer on our brave senators' .... clearly part of a speech that is inciting violence -not!
I find it strange that we have seen thousands of politicians use phrases like fight for what you believe and all they mean is in a figurative sense and not a violent one, but because it is trump and we have had a 4yr witch hunt on him they take those words as an incite to violence which within the context of the rest of the speech is ludicrous to suggest that.
'We are going to cheer on our brave senators' .... clearly part of a speech that is inciting violence -not!
- Reaction score
- 10,616
Far enough. However, the rest of his speech just keeps on repeating the same rhetoric about election fraud and the steal etc, and as previously mentioned the tweets beforehand. Enough to inspire the crowd to do what happened IMO.
I do take the point about using terms like 'fight like hell' and its use in general, but whether that was his mens rea or not, that's exactly what happened. Being a man who holds such power or did have, he should of choose his words more carefully.
When I listen to this man, I find his words both arrogant, belittling and offensive. I recall someone posting about how many conflicts previous Presidents had took their country into conflicts, whereas Trump had none. But I wonder how many achievements he's had as a President in comparison?
- Reaction score
- 4,247
Totally agree. Couldn't have put it better. The president of the most powerful nation in the world surely should at least try to display a little tact when talking to people. Instead he talks over people, not allowing them to air their view.
I am glad he's out.
- Reaction score
- 17,145
Fair Play Tel, this site wouldn't be the same without you and your comedy, Your a good Guy, I'd love to have a pint with you sometime, it would be fun I know
- Reaction score
- 10,616
I learnt about the Hubris Theory some time ago with some of my bosses. I think Trump excels in this area. In fact he could teach a few leaders, a point or too. Makes Putin look like a -----.
OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
In post 1 I linked to a list of achievements, browse through them and see how many you recognise from the media telling you, very few if any, when Obama was in the MSM fell over itself to promote positive feedback and spin on anything he did yet Trump has half the term of Obama and breaks all the records with jobs, economy, peace deals etc and nothing from the BBC or other outlets.
When you are constantly paraded with everything a person does wrong it is very easy to misjudge them and ignore what they have actually achieved.
I have never said Trump doesn't make gaffs, his 'injecting yourself with bleach' is a massive one of many but I prefer to judge the man for what he has done for the black community and black education, the employment record breaking figures as well as the economic ones, like i said before, on paper this man has achieved way more for the USA as any recent president has ever done and that is totally been ignored by the media to feed there anti Trump narrative.
When you are constantly paraded with everything a person does wrong it is very easy to misjudge them and ignore what they have actually achieved.
I have never said Trump doesn't make gaffs, his 'injecting yourself with bleach' is a massive one of many but I prefer to judge the man for what he has done for the black community and black education, the employment record breaking figures as well as the economic ones, like i said before, on paper this man has achieved way more for the USA as any recent president has ever done and that is totally been ignored by the media to feed there anti Trump narrative.
- Reaction score
- 3,010
Qui bono?
As always who benefits?
That most people do not know that many Republican senators were going to use, rightfully, the counting ceremony as an opportunity to air their objections and get them on record is very telling.
The fact that this "insurrection" allowed the process to be halted and subsequently waived through without contest tell us all we need to know.
- Reaction score
- 3,010
Cherio, don't let the door smack your --- on the way out.
Reply to USA politics, recent events. in the Electricians Chat - Off Topic Chat area at ElectriciansForums.net
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
YOUR Unread Posts
-
Does a SPD need a dedicated MCB?Absolutely. I have a 75 kWh Citroën ë-Dispatch. Great van.- Latest: Risteard
-
Unreasonably high invoice bill from an electricianThis is precisely the issue. I had the HSE out with me a number of years ago to offer advice...
- Latest: Risteard
-
What is it called IR testing?One has probably licensed one from the other. All my fibre splicers are Japanese, either...- Latest: KungFuTurkeyLeg
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.