Jan 6 committee

174,484 Views | 3026 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Harrison Bergeron
Wangchung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 10:38p, 6/28/22
4th and Inches said:


It's impossible to overstate the damage that Hutchinson's testimony is doing to the legitimacy of the Jan 6th Committee

How can there be any less credibility than there was from the beginning? Everyone but the media and the smoothest of brains sees this as merely a political stunt.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

"Jesus is Lord!"- random in the crowd
"You are at the wrong rally!" Kamala Harris' response
Reply Quote
3
Cobretti
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:38p, 6/28/22
Reply Quote
3
Cobretti
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:40p, 6/28/22
Reply Quote
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:41p, 6/28/22
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?
Reply Quote
5
Wangchung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cobretti • 10:43p, 6/28/22
Cobretti said:
Suddenly this one seems so relevant...
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

"Jesus is Lord!"- random in the crowd
"You are at the wrong rally!" Kamala Harris' response
Reply Quote
1
Harrison Bergeron
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 10:43p, 6/28/22
4th and Inches said:
The national news media has taken and run with a thus-far uncorroborated testimony from an unknown aide with a thin resume who offered mostly secondhand accounts of conversations and incidents and reported it as fact without any attempt to verify what she said. It would have been easy to at least confirm claims about rifles or dispute her description of what happened in the president's vehicle.

These serious national media reporters have access to all sorts of records and sources that could (and are) contradict(ing) her testimonythey did none of this which is the basic JOB of a journalist. Also, the investigators on the Jan 6th committee suck since the testimony has all kinds of holes in it less than 12 hours after broadcast.
It's amazing ... yesterday the media and Democrats were calling for anyone who worked for Trump to be barred from any corporate or public job ... today she's magically a credible national hero. The hypocrisy is strong.
Reply Quote
2
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ATL Bear • 10:46p, 6/28/22
ATL Bear said:
Osodecentx said:
ATL Bear said:
No one who testified in this hearing is at risk of a perjury charge, so you can be as fast and loose with the truth as you'd like to be.
You think all of these conservative Republicans are lying?
I have no idea. Without cross examination it's hard to assess breadth, intent, and severity.
Which is why McCarthy didn't put anyone on the committee. He doesn't want you assessing breadth, intent, or severity.
Reply Quote
5
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wangchung • 10:50p, 6/28/22
Wangchung said:
Cobretti said:
Suddenly this one seems so relevant...
Very little that Cobretti posts is relevant. I highly recommend the ignore option.
Reply Quote
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 11:08p, 6/28/22
Sam Lowry said:
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?
you skipped parts.. she lied about writing a note. She lied about the assaulting a SS agent. She lied about a conversation. She lied about the plate throwing. She is an unreliable witness. Her story is falling apart, not just one thing.. we are only a few hours post testimony. Lets see what happens. Her testimony is opposing video evidence of Trump himself telling the crowd to peacefully demonstrate.



They dont have corroboration of her story.
Adopt-a-Bear 2024

#90 COOPER LANZ ( DL )
CLASS Junior
HT/WT 6' 3", 288 lbs


#50 KAIAN ROBERTS-DAY ( DL )
CLASS Sophomore
HT/WT 6' 3", 273 lbs
Reply Quote
2
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 11:09p, 6/28/22
Sam Lowry said:
Wangchung said:
Cobretti said:
Suddenly this one seems so relevant...
Very little that Cobretti posts is relevant. I highly recommend the ignore option.
highly informative post
Adopt-a-Bear 2024

#90 COOPER LANZ ( DL )
CLASS Junior
HT/WT 6' 3", 288 lbs


#50 KAIAN ROBERTS-DAY ( DL )
CLASS Sophomore
HT/WT 6' 3", 273 lbs
Reply Quote
2
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 11:22p, 6/28/22
I'm talking about the assault on the SS agent. Don't know about the other stuff. It would be nice if Trump could be vindicated just because he used the word "peacefully" in one sentence, but that's not how it works.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Cobretti
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 11:24p, 6/28/22
Sam Lowry said:
Wangchung said:
Cobretti said:
Suddenly this one seems so relevant...
Very little that Cobretti posts is relevant. I highly recommend the ignore option.
Reply Quote
5
ATL Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 11:27p, 6/28/22
Sam Lowry said:
ATL Bear said:
Osodecentx said:
ATL Bear said:
No one who testified in this hearing is at risk of a perjury charge, so you can be as fast and loose with the truth as you'd like to be.
You think all of these conservative Republicans are lying?
I have no idea. Without cross examination it's hard to assess breadth, intent, and severity.
Which is why McCarthy didn't put anyone on the committee. He doesn't want you assessing breadth, intent, or severity.
It certainly wouldn't be any worse than the one sided affair we have today, We've gone so far down the subjective inference rabbit hole, I'm shocked we haven't pinned the death of Ginsburg on Trump.
Reply Quote
3
FLBear5630
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 5:19a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?


There you go again. Undisputed?? So far, no proof but a lot of hearsay,, temper tantrums and not believing the election results, all within his roghts to do. Not one chargeable item.

He even told them on TV to demonstrate peacefully and he told them to go home when things were out of control. Then the pesky little fact that Pence certified, Trump left the White House and Biden was inaugurated all on schedule, did not lose 1 day for all the bluster.

You are a lawyer, what charges could be brought and stick? So far, nothing. So far, he is guilty of not being classy enough. If you prosecute for that you will need to prosecute the whole Northeast US..
Reply Quote
1
FLBear5630
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 5:26a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
I'm talking about the assault on the SS agent. Don't know about the other stuff. It would be nice if Trump could be vindicated just because he used the word "peacefully" in one sentence, but that's now how it works.


The "assault," love how grabbing a steering wheel is assault, is easy. What does the SS agent say?

As for 1 sentence yeah. But it is there on tape. He did say it on the stage, before anyone went down there. Come on lawdog, you would be waving that to a jury all trial long. It does create that nagging reasonable doubt... (like the Tombstone reference?)
Reply Quote
1
Golem
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 6:20a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?


Why do you keep repeating your big lie? He explicitly called for peaceful protest. He objected to an election outcome….something democrats have done in virtually every national election they've lost since 2000. You don't appear terribly rational when you lie with such alacrity and ubiquity because you don't like a politician's mean tweets.
Reply Quote
7
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 6:41a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
I'm talking about the assault on the SS agent. Don't know about the other stuff. It would be nice if Trump could be vindicated just because he used the word "peacefully" in one sentence, but that's now how it works.


It happened more than once.. the committee has a history of doctoring testinony. You keep falling for their lies..


Is this a problem for you?




Hearsay comes in many forms. It may be a written or oral statement; it also includes gestures. Essentially anything intended to assert a fact is considered a statement for the purposes of the Hearsay Rule.

Side note- ornato is trending on twitter but only pointing to hutchinson testimony, not his rebuttal. Twitter still manipulating the narrative
Adopt-a-Bear 2024

#90 COOPER LANZ ( DL )
CLASS Junior
HT/WT 6' 3", 288 lbs


#50 KAIAN ROBERTS-DAY ( DL )
CLASS Sophomore
HT/WT 6' 3", 273 lbs
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
ShooterTX
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 7:36a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?


The dems and the media tried to make this "the most damning testimony so far"... so quit trying to shift the blame onto those that are simply exposing the lies.
The whole thing is a lie, and this is just the latest example.
ShooterTX
Reply Quote
7
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:17a, 6/29/22
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
Reply Quote
4
Golem
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 8:22a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning.
Sad, sad.


Are you sweating more than normal? I'd expect you would be accustomed to your own scent by now.
Reply Quote
8
Osodecentx
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 8:28a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
Reply Quote
1
ScottS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:28a, 6/29/22
Does anyone see the similarities between the Russian Dossier and the Jan 6 investigations?
Reply Quote
6
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Osodecentx • 8:39a, 6/29/22
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
Reply Quote
1
FLBear5630
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 8:51a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
You really are going to make that argument? That using the word "fight" incites violence? I think I could show that "fight" has many meanings.

So, how do you prove which meaning?


Definition of fight
(Entry 1 of 2)
intransitive verb
1a: to contend in battle or physical combat especially : to strive to overcome a person by blows or weaponsThe soldiers fought bravely.
b: to engage in boxing He will fight for the heavyweight title next month.

2: to put forth a determined effort They were fighting to stay awake.

transitive verb
1a(1): to contend against in or as if in battle or physical combat fought the invaders of his homelandwas fighting a forest fire
(2): to box against in the ring fought several strong contenders
b(1): to attempt to prevent the success or effectiveness of the company fought the takeover attempt
(2): to oppose the passage or development offight a bill in Congress

2a: WAGE, CARRY ON fight a battle
b: to take part in (a boxing match or similar contest)

3: to struggle to endure or surmount fight a cold is fighting cancer

4a: to gain by struggle fights his way through
b: to resolve by struggle fought out their differences in court

If that is what you are hanging your hat on, settle Counselor...


Reply Quote
4
1 edit
303Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 8:53a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
Confused how you view pointing out the contradictions (people saying publicly what was testified never happened) and impossibility (literally cannot get from the passenger cabin of the presidential limo to the driver seat) of certain testimony is desperation.

If this ever does go to trial (and I think more and more that part of the committee's goal is to throw so much muck into public that no trial would ever be able to proceed or get a conviction, while still getting the dem base and never-trumpers riled up), how on earth would her testimony today get in on a hearsay exception?
Reply Quote
2
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:54a, 6/29/22
Cassidy Hutchinson's Testimony against Trump Is Devastating

By Andrew C. McCarthy
June 28, 2022 10:33 PM

Things will not be the same after this.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to Trump's White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, provided compelling testimony Tuesday that former president Donald Trump is singularly culpable for the Capitol riot.

Legal analysts, myself included, while not defending the speech -- which is indefensible -- have pointed out that it does not meet the demanding legal test for incitement. Trump makes grudging references to protesting "peacefully" -- and Cheney continues to damage her credibility by eliding mention of that (and it's gratuitous self-damage because, the more the evidence mounts, the more apparent it is that it's just a couple of throwaway lines -- which doesn't justify omitting it as if it didn't happen). Well, Trump's words may not have been incitement as a matter of law, but that doesn't mean they are not evidence of other potential crimes -- especially once you are informed about how fully aware the president was about the mob being lethally armed. It is a crime, to take just one example, to aid and abet the forcible intimidation of government officials, including the vice president and members of Congress.

We should understand, in any event, that what Cheney did with Hutchinson Tuesday is what prosecutors do with witnesses in grand juries every day: drawing out the witness's testimony with no obligation to provide the defense perspective. To be sure, no one gets convicted at the grand-jury stage, but an awful lot of people get indicted this way, and on far less evidence than the country heard today.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony-against-trump-is-devastating
Reply Quote
1
303Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FLBear5630 • 8:55a, 6/29/22
RMF5630 said:
Sam Lowry said:
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
You really are going to make that argument? That using the word "fight" incites violence? I think I could show that "fight" has many meanings. If that is what you are hanging your hat on, settle Counselor...
The very definition of "fight" means this is not at all a "case closed" situation. Not to mention the colloquial use of "fight" in many contexts not connected to physical violence. Such conclusory language is unbecoming someone who used to be a reasonable poster (and still is generally when it does not come to trump).
Reply Quote
1
FLBear5630
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:00a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Cassidy Hutchinson's Testimony against Trump Is Devastating

By Andrew C. McCarthy
June 28, 2022 10:33 PM

Things will not be the same after this.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to Trump's White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, provided compelling testimony Tuesday that former president Donald Trump is singularly culpable for the Capitol riot.

Legal analysts, myself included, while not defending the speech -- which is indefensible -- have pointed out that it does not meet the demanding legal test for incitement. Trump makes grudging references to protesting "peacefully" -- and Cheney continues to damage her credibility by eliding mention of that (and it's gratuitous self-damage because, the more the evidence mounts, the more apparent it is that it's just a couple of throwaway lines -- which doesn't justify omitting it as if it didn't happen). Well, Trump's words may not have been incitement as a matter of law, but that doesn't mean they are not evidence of other potential crimes -- especially once you are informed about how fully aware the president was about the mob being lethally armed. It is a crime, to take just one example, to aid and abet the forcible intimidation of government officials, including the vice president and members of Congress.

We should understand, in any event, that what Cheney did with Hutchinson Tuesday is what prosecutors do with witnesses in grand juries every day: drawing out the witness's testimony with no obligation to provide the defense perspective. To be sure, no one gets convicted at the grand-jury stage, but an awful lot of people get indicted this way, and on far less evidence than the country heard today.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony-against-trump-is-devastating
Geez, Sam. Have you ever seen an article McCarthy wrote that didn't say Trump was committing a crime? Wanting something to happen and having evidence is two different things. You keep throwing out this biased, circumstantial information as if it is proof. If there was evidence, it would have been found by now 16 months later.
Reply Quote
5
Oldbear83
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:04a, 6/29/22
Much more like mind closed if that is your idea of "proof".
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Reply Quote
1
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FLBear5630 • 9:10a, 6/29/22
RMF5630 said:
Sam Lowry said:
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
You really are going to make that argument?
No, I'm not. Are you really going to argue that he's innocent just because he used the word "peacefully?"
Reply Quote
1
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FLBear5630 • 9:11a, 6/29/22
RMF5630 said:
Sam Lowry said:
Cassidy Hutchinson's Testimony against Trump Is Devastating

By Andrew C. McCarthy
June 28, 2022 10:33 PM

Things will not be the same after this.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to Trump's White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, provided compelling testimony Tuesday that former president Donald Trump is singularly culpable for the Capitol riot.

Legal analysts, myself included, while not defending the speech -- which is indefensible -- have pointed out that it does not meet the demanding legal test for incitement. Trump makes grudging references to protesting "peacefully" -- and Cheney continues to damage her credibility by eliding mention of that (and it's gratuitous self-damage because, the more the evidence mounts, the more apparent it is that it's just a couple of throwaway lines -- which doesn't justify omitting it as if it didn't happen). Well, Trump's words may not have been incitement as a matter of law, but that doesn't mean they are not evidence of other potential crimes -- especially once you are informed about how fully aware the president was about the mob being lethally armed. It is a crime, to take just one example, to aid and abet the forcible intimidation of government officials, including the vice president and members of Congress.

We should understand, in any event, that what Cheney did with Hutchinson Tuesday is what prosecutors do with witnesses in grand juries every day: drawing out the witness's testimony with no obligation to provide the defense perspective. To be sure, no one gets convicted at the grand-jury stage, but an awful lot of people get indicted this way, and on far less evidence than the country heard today.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony-against-trump-is-devastating
Geez, Sam. Have you ever seen an article McCarthy wrote that didn't say Trump was committing a crime?
Yeah, pretty much on a weekly basis throughout the Russia investigation.
Reply Quote
Oldbear83
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:12a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
RMF5630 said:
Sam Lowry said:
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
You really are going to make that argument?
No, I'm not. Are you really going to argue that he's innocent just because he used the word "peacefully?"
A real lawyer would know that's not how this works, Sam.

Innocence is presumed.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Reply Quote
3
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 303Bear • 9:12a, 6/29/22
303Bear said:
RMF5630 said:
Sam Lowry said:
Osodecentx said:
Sam Lowry said:
The reek of desperation is overpowering this morning. No matter how much evidence piles up, all anyone can say is "but but peacefully march!"

Sad, sad.
The rioter needed their guns in order to march peacefully
If it's trial by proof-text, Trump loses. He even told people to be violent:

"We're going to have to fight much harder."

"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country any more."

Case closed.
You really are going to make that argument? That using the word "fight" incites violence? I think I could show that "fight" has many meanings. If that is what you are hanging your hat on, settle Counselor...
The very definition of "fight" means this is not at all a "case closed" situation. Not to mention the colloquial use of "fight" in many contexts not connected to physical violence. Such conclusory language is unbecoming someone who used to be a reasonable poster (and still is generally when it does not come to trump).
I'm just making the point that all his words and actions need to be taken in context.
Reply Quote
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Oldbear83 • 9:12a, 6/29/22
Oldbear83 said:
Much more like mind closed if that is your idea of "proof".
It's not my idea of proof. It's yours.
Reply Quote
Whiskey Pete
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:13a, 6/29/22
Sam Lowry said:
Anyone else noticed how the entire conversation on this thread is now about the one contested allegation that Trump tried to grab a steering wheel, which may be the least interesting part of the testimony, instead of the more damning and so far undisputed evidence that he incited violence and tried to obstruct justice?
Insurrection, I say!

Still pretty effin' easy
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.