Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

Too stupid to understand the distinction between Flynn and a losing candidate for president?

How the mighty have fallen.

---

Careful. We may tolerate a lot in this party, but one thing you don't do is call Trump a loser. Just ask Liz Cheney.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

I think you know the IC tried to frame up Flynn and the Trump admin.

They will do it again to ANYONE not in their club. You know this.

It's much more dangerous than fringe presidents.

---

Tried and failed. We were happy with the rule of law when it vindicated us, so let's not pretend this is about the IC.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

I think you know the IC tried to frame up Flynn and the Trump admin.

They will do it again to ANYONE not in their club. You know this.

It's much more dangerous than fringe presidents.

---

Tried and failed. We were happy with the rule of law when it vindicated us, so let's not pretend this is about the IC.

---

Failed? The goal was to smear and it worked. They influenced 2018 midterms to democrats.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

I think you know the IC tried to frame up Flynn and the Trump admin.

They will do it again to ANYONE not in their club. You know this.

It's much more dangerous than fringe presidents.

---

Tried and failed. We were happy with the rule of law when it vindicated us, so let's not pretend this is about the IC.

---

Failed? The goal was to smear and it worked. They influenced 2018 midterms to democrats.

---

The goal was to remove Trump from office. We all knew that.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

I think you know the IC tried to frame up Flynn and the Trump admin.

They will do it again to ANYONE not in their club. You know this.

It's much more dangerous than fringe presidents.

---

Tried and failed. We were happy with the rule of law when it vindicated us, so let's not pretend this is about the IC.

---

Failed? The goal was to smear and it worked. They influenced 2018 midterms to democrats.

---

The goal was to remove Trump from office. We all knew that.

---

That doesn't negate their abuses.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

This is from Allen West, State Republican chairman:
West said in a Newsmax interview on Tuesday he rejected Flynn's suggestion.
"I do not support any type of military coup in the United States of America because we have a representative democracy, we have a constitutional republic, and we just need to abide by the Constitution in all that we say and do," West said to Newsmax.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/01/texas-allen-west-sid-miller-louie-gohmert-qanon/

---

It seems like the nutty fringe 5% are being given credit for being the average Republican.

That in itself is stupid.

So a bunch of fringe looney's got together and called themselves God and Country.

I know maybe 100 or so people that I have a really good idea of what they believe.

Not a single one would agree with what Flynn said, nor do I. He is a nut obviously, and
congregated with a group of nuts. We saw it all summer in much larger volume with actual
action, burning cities, taking over neighborhoods, actual working anarchism, there are actually nuts on all sides of politics.

---

If the GOP caucus on the Hill and Republican leaders of some states werent marching lock step with the Big Lie etc. you might have a point that t this is fringe and not the establishment of whatever this party is that has taken the GOP's name.

---

I'm guessing the Big Lie, was the lie that the election was stolen.

That Big Lie seems to resurrect itself once every 4 years for someone. Democrats were so insistent that Trumps election was a big lie they were still trying to overthrow his election 3 years into his term, with the Russia stuff. Hillary wrote a book still not able to admit she just lost. Gore never got over losing. The Big Lie seems to recycle on a regular basis.

That is pretty common politics. This overthrow through military coup stuff is not. I don't know a single person who believes that. It isn't anything but fringe sentiment, of seriously disturbed people that think they posses more power than they do.

---

Actually there is no whataboutism here at all. There was an insurrection attempt. Now a member (a former NSC advisor no less) of the administration that lost election is talking military coup. Trump is claiming he will be reinstated by August. Nothing in our history has ever been like this. You are right though about one thing these are seriously disturbed and mislead people we are talking about.

---

Yeah, but the vast majority of former US presidents are not Trump. He's a fringe character.

---

I think you know the IC tried to frame up Flynn and the Trump admin.

They will do it again to ANYONE not in their club. You know this.

It's much more dangerous than fringe presidents.

---

Tried and failed. We were happy with the rule of law when it vindicated us, so let's not pretend this is about the IC.

---

Failed? The goal was to smear and it worked. They influenced 2018 midterms to democrats.

---

The goal was to remove Trump from office. We all knew that.

---

That doesn't negate their abuses.

---

If we're just talking about smear campaigns, take your pick. Happens on both sides, but it hardly justifies Trump being reinstated. It's incredibly damaging to the republic for him to even pursue that.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that?

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? Is that some sort of newsflash? Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. Flynn is a Republican
2. He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? Flynn has never been elected to any position. He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements?

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. It wasn't a difficult question. Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that?

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? Is that some sort of newsflash? Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. Flynn is a Republican
2. He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? Flynn has never been elected to any position. He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements?

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. It wasn't a difficult question. Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that?

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? Is that some sort of newsflash? Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. Flynn is a Republican
2. He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? Flynn has never been elected to any position. He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements?

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. It wasn't a difficult question. Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Then why pander to it? At what point do you draw the line?

---

Who is pandering to it? The only person I have heard that suggested insurrection is Flynn, and even he has now backed off those statements, claiming he was taken out of context. Whether true or not, that's a grand total of one fringe person in any authoritative capacity (if you want to call it that) suggesting a coup.

Look, as we discussed the other day, I agree with you that it's the nutjobs suggesting the election was stolen. It's the even bigger nut jobs that are suggesting some sort of coup. Both are bad for the party. No question. But this idea that the Republicans have to "own" the fringe beliefs of the nutjobs is simply ridiculous.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that?

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? Is that some sort of newsflash? Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. Flynn is a Republican
2. He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? Flynn has never been elected to any position. He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements?

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. It wasn't a difficult question. Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Then why pander to it? At what point do you draw the line?

---

Who is pandering to it?

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that? %A0

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? %A0Is that some sort of newsflash? %A0Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. %A0Flynn is a Republican
2. %A0He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. %A0He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. %A0Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. %A0Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? %A0Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? %A0Flynn has never been elected to any position. %A0He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. %A0Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? %A0When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. %A0Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements? %A0

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. %A0Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. %A0Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. %A0Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. %A0It wasn't a difficult question. %A0Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? %A0The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of %A0the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Then why pander to it? At what point do you draw the line?

---

Who is pandering to it?

---

Kevin McCarthy & the DC Republican conference

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that? %A0

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? %A0Is that some sort of newsflash? %A0Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. %A0Flynn is a Republican
2. %A0He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. %A0He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. %A0Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. %A0Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? %A0Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? %A0Flynn has never been elected to any position. %A0He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. %A0Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? %A0When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. %A0Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements? %A0

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. %A0Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. %A0Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. %A0Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. %A0It wasn't a difficult question. %A0Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? %A0The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of %A0the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Then why pander to it? At what point do you draw the line?

---

Who is pandering to it?

---

Kevin McCarthy & the DC Republican conference

---

I don't agree with you and Sam that being civil to Trump or not publicly rebuking him is pandering to seditionists.%A0 Like it or not, he is still a very popular person in the Republican Party.%A0 Constantly publicly rebuking him - ala Liz Cheney - is not the way to go about this, IMO (even though I agree with pretty much all of her statements about the jackass).%A0 And it's certainly not supporting insurrection, as Sam has suggested.%A0 That's ridiculous hyperbole.%A0 Sam knows it.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I don't know that we disagree all that much on Trump. I think he's a complete jackass, and that another term would be a disaster. I also agree with you that he is leading others down a primrose path. He has a cult of personality that his followers have swallowed hook, line and sinker. The less we hear from him, the better. If he has significant involvement in the next election - either as a candidate or otherwise - I think the Republicans will lose big.

Do I think he's better than the current president, and that the inflation, woke policies and decline in quality of life are confirmation on that? Yes. Do I think that open confrontation with him is a recipe for disaster? Yes. Perhaps that is where we disagree.

---

So you think he's a disaster for the present and future of your party, but don't want to back an alternative because of the stranglehold he has on your party's voter base?

A) How is this not acquiescing to/enabling the insanity? B) How can you claim after posting what you just did that the crazies are just a fringe minority at this point?

It sounds to me like they've overtaken your party and you have no idea how to get it back.

---

Allen West just resigned as Chair of the RPT. Effective at 5p today. #txlege

— Cat Parks (@CatParksTX) June 4, 2021

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

What an idiot, and who are these idiots cheering that?

---

The same idiots he encouraged to precipitate a coup on 1/6. Are you starting to see now?

---

That there is a minority of fringe nuts in the Republican Party? Is that some sort of newsflash? Each side has their crazies.

Still doesn't justify a vote that supported Biden.

---

!. Flynn is a Republican
2. He served as NS advisor to a Republican president
3. He advocated the violent overthrow of the US government

I'm looking for stories about Republicans denouncing Flynn's recommendation
I'm sure there are some stories out there

---

Actually he is a lifelong Dem, and when asked, doesn't claim to belong to a party. Look up some of his quotes on the subject.

As for no. 2, he was fired after 3 weeks on the job.

As for no. 3, that is what has been reported, but he said he never advocated for that position. Let me ask you a question: Do you think it's possible that the media might have twisted Flynn's words to mean something he did not?

As for your last point, tell me, what good does it serve to denounce the painfully obvious? Should Republicans give credence to a fringe, discredited figure based on comments at a tiny rally in Dallas? Flynn has never been elected to any position. He has no power.

It serves no good purpose whatsoever to denounce Flynn other than to give the Dems another talking point.

---

Oh no, not another Dem talking point! Never mind a little sedition then...sorry for interrupting.

---

You still haven't answered my question, chicken little. Do the vast majority of Repubs agree with sedition or not?

---

I don't know. Why does it matter? I doubt the vast majority of Dems agree with burning down cities, but that doesn't mean they won't turn a blind eye. Don't want to give the GOP a talking point, after all.

---

Playing dumb again? When you proffer that Republicans must "own" statements of the crazy fringe elements of the party, it suggests that you believe a good percentage of them hold those positions. Otherwise, why suggest that a party "own" the views of its fringe elements?

Thus, I was curious if that's what you truly believed. Apparently, you are afraid to give an honest answer or simply or can't answer the question. Thus, your position that Republicans must "own" Flynn's views remains absurd.

As for your comparison to Dems and the BLM riots, when a large number of Republicans come out in support of Flynn's comments and even fund sedition efforts, then your comparison might be an apt one. Until then, it likewise is absurd.

---

I assumed you were talking about voters. The party leaders are obviously okay with it, as evidenced by the fact that West shared a stage with Flynn in the first place. No sane party would have anything to do with Flynn after his tweets helped incite the Capitol riot.

---

We are talking about Republicans. It wasn't a difficult question. Why should Republicans own the statements of the fringe?

And are we talking about the same West who denounced Flynn's comments? The same West who did not appear with Flynn at the event in question?

You have very strange logic.

---

West did appear at the event.

What you should own is not the seditionists, but the fact of their influence in the party.

---

I sure hope they have little influence outside of the nutty type that shows for these rallys and the nuts that marched into the Capitol.

If you took a poll of the 50 Republican Senators I would bet you would get a zero count for those wanting a takeover by the Military.

If you polled the 211 Republican Representatives I would hope you would poll zero, but there are probably a couple of total nuts in the group that might say yes.

I don't think that far fringe group has a whole lot of influence when you get down to it. It certainly isn't mainstream thought.

---

Then why pander to it? At what point do you draw the line?

---

Who is pandering to it? The only person I have heard that suggested insurrection is Flynn, and even he has now backed off those statements, claiming he was taken out of context. Whether true or not, that's a grand total of one fringe person in any authoritative capacity (if you want to call it that) suggesting a coup.

Look, as we discussed the other day, I agree with you that it's the nutjobs suggesting the election was stolen. It's the even bigger nut jobs that are suggesting some sort of coup. Both are bad for the party. No question. But this idea that the Republicans have to "own" the fringe beliefs of the nutjobs is simply ridiculous.

---

The universal ass-kissing of a man who cost the party the House, Senate, and Presidency is still sometimes hard to believe.

Trump almost certainly cost Loeffler her OWN seat. https://t.co/top8qcLXNl

— Ben Yelin (@byelin) June 4, 2021

HuMcK said:

---

I would like to think this isn't related to the Flynn stuff.

Allen West just resigned as Chair of the RPT. Effective at 5p today. #txlege

— Cat Parks (@CatParksTX) June 4, 2021

---

HuMcK said:

---

But Trump is gone, right?

The universal ass-kissing of a man who cost the party the House, Senate, and Presidency is still sometimes hard to believe.

Trump almost certainly cost Loeffler her OWN seat. https://t.co/top8qcLXNl

— Ben Yelin (@byelin) June 4, 2021

---