Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America

[Lacius]

Catch 22. I would do the exact same thing - I'm not going to "call off" anyone, that would be equivalent to taking ownership of the mob. Trump explicitly invited the crowd to peacefully protest, he repeatedly mentioned that he wants to see no violence and that everyone present should show respect of the law and law enforcement officers. The moment he "calls off" a violent crowd that he didn't even incite in the first place, people like you are going to call that crowd his "troopers" and say that he's commanding them. The same thing happened with the "stand down" nonsense. Let's not pretend that this isn't a "damned if he does, damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" sort of situation, his opposition will always find something to complain about.

A business should absolutely have the right to refuse anyone for any reason, I did argue that. I also argued that doing so is stupid and exposes the owner's bigotry. I specifically said that it's bad business practice that, in the long run, opens to doors to competition picking up the slack or even outperforming the bigoted estsblishment. Of course you'll neglect to mention that because lying by omission is easier and sometimes slips through the cracks. Sadly for you, I'm eagle-eyed. Discrimating against another person on the basis of their innate characteristics or personal beliefs is reprehensible in this context, however the ability to do so is an integral element of freedom of association. Red Hen owners are more than welcome to ask anyone to leave their establishment and I, as an observer, can criticise them for doing so, and make subsequent decisions on that basis as a potential customer.

The rioters were inarguably Trump's supporters. If Trump isn't going to attempt to call them off because of some Catch 22 in his head about how that might make him, Donald Trump, look, then that's even worse. Also, Trump did indeed incide the mob at the Captiol. It wouldn't have happened if he hadn't.

I acknowledge and appreciate that you don't think gays and people of color should be discriminated against, but history shows that letting the free market sort it out hasn't worked in the past. We don't need to rehash that argument though. My point was that you vehemently defensed a racist's right to deny business to Black people, for example, while also pearl-clutching in response to someone denying business to SHS.

This also isn't a matter of someone being discriminated against because of her conservative beliefs. She was actively lying to the American people and enabling abuse on the part of Trump and the Trump administration. Deplorable behavior comes with its consequences.

 

[WeedZ]

Catch 22. I would do the exact same thing - I'm not going to "call off" anyone, that would be equivalent to taking ownership of the mob. Trump explicitly invited the crowd to peacefully protest, he repeatedly mentioned that he wants to see no violence and that everyone present should show respect of the law and law enforcement officers. The moment he "calls off" a violent crowd that he didn't even incite in the first place, people like you are going to call that crowd his "troopers" and say that he's commanding them. The same thing happened with the "stand down" nonsense. Let's not pretend that this isn't a "damned if he does, damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" sort of situation, his opposition will always find something to complain about.

You can tell them to stop and condemn their behavior from a position of authority as the leader of the United States, of which they are all members and claim to give their allegiance to; without claiming responsibility for their behavior as a leader of a fringe group of terrorists.

The reason he didnt tell them to stop, or call for national guard is because he is taking ownership of the latter. He wanted to see if it would work. What president would stand by as a group, supporters or not, rampaged the capital?

But let's be real, he did incite this. "We're going to march down to the capital", "fight like hell", "your freedom is at risk",

(as its happening) "you are all patriots", "we love you", "this is what happens"

(When its over) "remember this day forever", "now go home in peace"

And trump supporters are like "see! He said peace!". Trump and his supporters' tactics of causing harm are similar to a kid putting his finger in his siblings face chanting "im not touching you, I'm not touching you." Then whining "I never touched him" when they get reprimanded.

 

[Foxi4]

You can tell them to stop and condemn their behavior from a position of authority as the leader of the United States, of which they are all members and claim to give their allegiance to; without claiming responsibility for their behavior as a leader of a fringe group of terrorists.

The reason he didnt tell them to stop, or call for national guard is because he is taking ownership of the latter. He wanted to see if it would work. What president would stand by as a group, supporters or not, rampaged the capital?

But let's be real, he did incite this. "We're going to march down to the capital", "fight like hell", "your freedom is at risk",

(as its happening) "you are all patriots", "we love you", "this is what happens"

(When its over) "remember this day forever", "now go home in peace"

And trump supporters are like "see! He said peace!". Trump and his supporters' tactics of causing harm are similar to a kid putting his finger in his siblings face chanting "im not touching you, I'm not touching you." Then whining "I never touched him" when they get reprimanded.

He immediately condemned all violence and urged all the protestors to follow the rule of law. "Fight for your rights" is standard political rhetoric on both sides of the aisle and isn't a reference to actual physical violence - protesting is a form of a fight. He said that everyone should remember the event because a hundred thousand people marched to the Capital to protest an election that they think was compromised and inadequately audited. Yes, a handful of those protestors have engaged in violence and did breach lines they weren't supposed to breach, but those events were pre-planned well in advance and Donald Trump's words during the event couldn't have incited them unless the rioters had a time machine. The timeline simply doesn't line up and Trump will be, rightfully, acquitted yet again.

The rioters were inarguably Trump's supporters. If Trump isn't going to attempt to call them off because of some Catch 22 in his head about how that might make him, Donald Trump, look, then that's even worse. Also, Trump did indeed incide the mob at the Captiol. It wouldn't have happened if he hadn't.

I acknowledge and appreciate that you don't think gays and people of color should be discriminated against, but history shows that letting the free market sort it out hasn't worked in the past. We don't need to rehash that argument though. My point was that you vehemently defensed a racist's right to deny business to Black people, for example, while also pearl-clutching in response to someone denying business to SHS.

This also isn't a matter of someone being discriminated against because of her conservative beliefs. She was actively lying to the American people and enabling abuse on the part of Trump and the Trump administration. Deplorable behavior comes with its consequences.

They absolutely had the right to deny SHS service. They're also stupid for doing so and I am entitled to criticise that. Political alignment shouldn't have anything to do with how you do business - money has no ideological preference. Refusing service based of whether someone is on the right or the left side of the aisle is, by definition, divisive - it's a form of discriminating against your customer base. I sincerely hope Red Hen saw a financial impact of their poor business decisions.

 

[WeedZ]

He immediately condemned all violence and urged all the protestors to follow the rule of law.

Thats not true. He didnt say anything until the next day where he called the attack heinous and those involved didn't represent America. He also falsely claimed to have deployed nation guard.

But that begs the question.. going back to what you said earlier.. why couldn't he have said that while it was happening? Or even actually deploy the national guard?

It wasn't just what he said at the rally that incited the violence. He had been firing these people up for months, feeding them conspiracy, telling them their families were at risk, their freedom was at risk.

And then he coincidentally decides to hold a rally (after election ends mind you) for all these angry and scared people the same day, in the same city, that they are about to certify the votes they were told are fraud?

And then on a whim he thinks its a good idea to tell them to march down to the capital, where they have no permit or legal right to be at, to "protest"?

"I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you"

He didnt outright say (as far as we know) "you guys go down there and hang the vp and take congress hostage". But his intent was there. We have overwhelming evidence to that fact.

And if people think we need a videotaped confession to convict for intent, then why have investigators, courts, jury, etc. We dont live in a world where murderers walk because they didnt videotape themselves saying "ma'am, I going to murder you now".

 

[Doran754]

Thats not true. He didnt say anything until the next day where he called the attack heinous and those involved didn't represent America. He also falsely claimed to have deployed nation guard.

But that begs the question.. going back to what you said earlier.. why couldn't he have said that while it was happening? Or even actually deploy the national guard?

It wasn't just what he said at the rally that incited the violence. He had been firing these people up for months, feeding them conspiracy, telling them their families were at risk, their freedom was at risk.

And then he coincidentally decides to hold a rally (after election ends mind you) for all these angry and scared people the same day, in the same city, that they are about to certify the votes they were told are fraud?

And then on a whim he thinks its a good idea to tell them to march down to the capital, where they have no permit or legal right to be at, to "protest"?

"I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you"

He didnt outright say (as far as we know) "you guys go down there and hang the vp and take congress hostage". But his intent was there. We have overwhelming evidence to that fact.

And if people think we need a videotaped confession to convict for intent, then why have investigators, courts, jury, etc. We dont live in a world where murderers walk because they didnt videotape themselves saying "ma'am, I going to murder you now".

There's a thing called reasonable doubt. If you want to convict people on intent with no evidence I suggest you move to China. People walk because there is insufficient evidence. If you're trying to take somebodys liberty away you better be damn sure you're correct. If you are itll be proved in court. If it's not proved in court, you're wrong. You don't get to decide somebodys intent thankfully.

 

[WeedZ]

There's a thing called reasonable doubt. If you want to convict people on intent with no evidence I suggest you move to China. People walk because there is insufficient evidence. If you're trying to take somebodys liberty away you better be damn sure you're correct. If you are itll be proved in court. If it's not proved in court, you're wrong. You don't get to decide somebodys intent thankfully.

We have overwhelming evidence to that fact.

 

[Valwinz]

Did joe give me the 2k yet ? or they still waisting money on another fail impeachment

 

[Foxi4]

He didnt outright say (as far as we know) "you guys go down there and hang the vp and take congress hostage". But his intent was there. We have overwhelming evidence to that fact.

I am yet to see one person show just one convincing piece of evidence that Donald Trump specifically asked his supporters to commit acts of violence in order to overturn the election, or even one that there was a plan for a coup at all. I don't want to hear anything about "dog whistles" anymore, Donald Trump is either an idiot or a brilliant mastermind, his detractors should make up their mind which one it is and stick to it.

Here's a mental exercise, the same one that came up during yesterday's hearings - we're the follow through? Let's say the violent crowd pulled out every single representative out of Congress and hung them - grissly, but let's just say that happened. Where's step two? Where's the new shadow government that organised the event and planned to take over? I'm gonna need some names because I'm not seeing any. What I do see is a group of idiots who got enraged by the state of the country, for a variety of reasons, and aimed to unleash their frustration on the party that they considered responsible - Congress.

It was riot, and we've seen those for months. We should all be so lucky to only ever deal with "insurrectionists" that smear poop on walls, use office phones while giggling like children and steal podiums for a laugh, and then disperse once they get bored because there's a curfew. What happened on the 6th of January was inexcusable and the people involved should all be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, especially since people died in the clash with law enforcement. They shouldn't have been there at all, they should've exercised their 1A right and protest peacefully, but the pretendonitis is strong when this issue is discussed.

Donald Trump is expected to denounce someone every hour of his life until the end of time - that's not how it works. The protestors were *already* breaching the no-go lines *as he was speaking* at the White House Ellipse over a mile away, but somehow there's a weird expectation that he should've pulled out his phone in the middle of his speech and send out a Tweet right quick to tell people to stop being naughty, and that they would've all pulled out their phones as well, read their feed and stopped there and then. That's fantasy.

Trump will be acquitted either way, the Republican senators overwhelmingly agreed that they're unconvinced by the evidence presented, and neither am I. Nobody's opinion of Trump has changed throughout this whole ordeal and the entire process has been a huge waste of time from Day 1.

 

[deinonychus71]

I watched a good part of the hearings and it was quite frankly underwhelming. They focus way too much on the Pathos and intent but without hard cold facts.
Emotions can move people but they have no place in a trial.

 

[Plasmaster09]

I am yet to see one person show just one convincing piece of evidence that Donald Trump specifically asked his supporters to commit acts of violence in order to overturn the election, or even one that there was a plan for a coup at all. I don't want to hear anything about "dog whistles" anymore, Donald Trump is either an idiot or a brilliant mastermind, his detractors should make up their mind which one it is and stick to it.

Here's a mental exercise, the same one that came up during yesterday's hearings - we're the follow through? Let's say the violent crowd pulled out every single representative out of Congress and hung them - grissly, but let's just say that happened. Where's step two? Where's the new shadow government that organised the event and planned to take over? I'm gonna need some names because I'm not seeing any. What I do see is a group of idiots who got enraged by the state of the country, for a variety of reasons, and aimed to unleash their frustration on the party that they considered responsible - Congress.

It was riot, and we've seen those for months. We should all be so lucky to only ever deal with "insurrectionists" that smear poop on walls, use office phones while giggling like children and steal podiums for a laugh, and then disperse once they get bored because there's a curfew. What happened on the 6th of January was inexcusable and the people involved should all be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, especially since people died in the clash with law enforcement. They shouldn't have been there at all, they should've exercised their 1A right and protest peacefully, but the pretendonitis is strong when this issue is discussed.

Donald Trump is expected to denounce someone every hour of his life until the end of time - that's not how it works. The protestors were *already* breaching the no-go lines *as he was speaking* at the White House Ellipse over a mile away, but somehow he's expected to pull out his phone in the middle of his speech and send out a Tweet right quick to tell people to stop being naughty, and that they would've all pulled out their phones, read their feed and stopped there and then if he did. That's fantasy.

Trump will be acquitted either way, the Republican senators overwhelmingly agreed that they're unconvinced by the evidence presented, and neither am I. Nobody's opinion of Trump has changed throughout this whole ordeal and the entire process has been a huge waste of time from Day 1.

If nothing we've shown you counts as convincing for you, then you're so far down the rabbit hole it would warrant a puerile joke.
Please. Seek. Exit. Counseling.

 

[Foxi4]

I watched a good part of the hearings and it was quite frankly underwhelming. They focus way too much on the Pathos and intent but without hard cold facts.
Emotions can move people but they have no place in a trial.

This whole impeachment, as well as the previous one, is based primarily on emotional appeals from both sides. It's a bizarre referendum on Trump as a person.

If nothing we've shown you counts as convincing for you, then you're so far down the rabbit hole it would warrant a puerile joke.
Please. Seek. Exit. Counseling.

I'm fine with Trump not being President anymore and I'm totally fine with the Biden administration - I don't need "counselling". I'm simply unmoved by the left's weird desire for revenge porn, which is what this trial is in my estimation. There is no benefit to it whatsoever, Trump is no longer in office. You just hate him *so much* that you don't want him to be involved in politics ever again - you fantasize about him wearing an orange suit and being locked up 50 miles underground in ultra-sec confinement forever. This whole process has nothing to do with national security or the removal of an unfit President from office, which is the actual purpose of impeachment.

 

[Lacius]

They absolutely had the right to deny SHS service. They're also stupid for doing so and I am entitled to criticise that. Political alignment shouldn't have anything to do with how you do business - money has no ideological preference. Refusing service based of whether someone is on the right or the left side of the aisle is, by definition, divisive - it's a form of discriminating against your customer base. I sincerely hope Red Hen saw a financial impact of their poor business decisions.

Please stop acting like she was refused service because of political alignment. That's not what happened. She was refused service because of her actions, and rightfully so. There's nothing about refusing service to SHS that is comparable to inciting an armed insurrection against the Capitol.

He immediately condemned all violence and urged all the protestors to follow the rule of law.

This isn't even close to true. Recent reporting shows he refused to call off his supporters, and it wasn't until a long bout of silence from the White House ,after the violence was said and done, that Trump have a disheartened speech about not being violent after all and also called them patriots who should remember these events for the rest of their lives.

I am yet to see one person show just one convincing piece of evidence that Donald Trump specifically asked his supporters to commit acts of violence in order to overturn the election, or even one that there was a plan for a coup at all. I don't want to hear anything about "dog whistles" anymore, Donald Trump is either an idiot or a brilliant mastermind, his detractors should make up their mind which one it is and stick to it.

Here's a mental exercise, the same one that came up during yesterday's hearings - we're the follow through? Let's say the violent crowd pulled out every single representative out of Congress and hung them - grissly, but let's just say that happened. Where's step two? Where's the new shadow government that organised the event and planned to take over? I'm gonna need some names because I'm not seeing any. What I do see is a group of idiots who got enraged by the state of the country, for a variety of reasons, and aimed to unleash their frustration on the party that they considered responsible - Congress.

It was riot, and we've seen those for months. We should all be so lucky to only ever deal with "insurrectionists" that smear poop on walls, use office phones while giggling like children and steal podiums for a laugh, and then disperse once they get bored because there's a curfew. What happened on the 6th of January was inexcusable and the people involved should all be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, especially since people died in the clash with law enforcement. They shouldn't have been there at all, they should've exercised their 1A right and protest peacefully, but the pretendonitis is strong when this issue is discussed.

Donald Trump is expected to denounce someone every hour of his life until the end of time - that's not how it works. The protestors were *already* breaching the no-go lines *as he was speaking* at the White House Ellipse over a mile away, but somehow he's expected to pull out his phone in the middle of his speech and send out a Tweet right quick to tell people to stop being naughty, and that they would've all pulled out their phones, read their feed and stopped there and then if he did. That's fantasy.

Trump will be acquitted either way, the Republican senators overwhelmingly agreed that they're unconvinced by the evidence presented, and neither am I. Nobody's opinion of Trump has changed throughout this whole ordeal and the entire process has been a huge waste of time from Day 1.

Trump's repeated and blatant attempts to try to overthrow the results of the election with false claims of voter fraud are reason enough to hold Trump responsible for the riots, but it doesn't end there. His people go the the permits for the Capitol. He incited them to go to the Capitol. He told them to take back their country with strength, not weakness. He refused pleas from members of Congress to do anything about the actions of his supporters in the midst of the violence, snarkily saying that they must just care more about America than the pleading congress people do.

Trump is 100% responsible for what happened at the Capitol, and in more ways than one.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

This whole impeachment, as well as the previous one, is based primarily on emotional appeals from both sides. It's a bizarre referendum on Trump as a person.
I'm fine with Trump not being President anymore and I'm totally fine with the Biden administration - I don't need "counselling". I'm simply unmoved by the left's weird desire for revenge porn, which is what this trial is in my estimation. There is no benefit to it whatsoever, Trump is no longer in office. You just hate him *so much* that you don't want him to be involved in politics ever again - you fantasise about him wearing an orange suit and being locked up 50 miles underground in ultra-sec confinement forever. This whole process has nothing to do with national security or the removal of an unfit President from office, which is the actual purpose of impeachment.

This isn't about revenge porn. This is about making sure one is held accountable for his deplorable actions and making sure an armed insurrection against the Capitol doesn't happen again. If nothing is done, then precedent exists for any sore loser to use the same playbook again. Please don't be so fucking disingenuous.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Did joe give me the 2k yet ? or they still waisting money on another fail impeachment

Asked and answered. See my previous post on the subject. You're welcome.

Oh, and considering you likely voted against people who wanted to give you $2,000, I assume your concern stems from your urgent desire to mail me your $2,000 as soon as possible. I will take the $600 you've already gotten.

 

[Foxi4]

Please stop acting like she was refused service because of political alignment. That's not what happened. She was refused service because of her actions, and rightfully so. There's nothing about refusing service to SHS that is comparable to inciting an armed insurrection against the Capitol.

She was denied service because she was a part of Trump's admin, and the owners weren't fans of the administration. There's nothing more to it. She was denied based on political affiliation/her employment, which is discriminatory and a terrible business decision. Businesses should be politically agnostic and serve the public - they're entitled to pick and choose in my mind, but there are consequences to being picky.

This isn't even close to true. Recent reporting shows he refused to call off his supporters, and it wasn't until a long bout of silence from the White House ,after the violence was said and done, that Trump have a disheartened speech about not being violent after all and also called them patriots who should remember these events for the rest of their lives.

Already addressed this, Trump is not their dad. He condemned the violence after the fact, but he's not in a position to tell private citizens what to do - the moment he does, he turns into the mastermind commanding his henchmen. These proceedings prove that this is precisely how his opposition sees him, I see zero reasons why he'd want to reinforce this imaginary version of reality in people's minds.

Trump's repeated and blatant attempts to try to overthrow the results of the election with false claims of voter fraud are reason enough to hold Trump responsible for the riots, but it doesn't end there. His people go the the permits for the Capitol. He incited them to go to the Capitol. He told them to take back their country with strength, not weakness. He refused pleas from members of Congress to do anything about the actions of his supporters in the midst of the violence, snarkily saying that they must just care more about America than the pleading congress people do.

Trump is 100% responsible for what happened at the Capitol, and in more ways than one.

Trump is entitled to be displeased by election results and criticise the auditing methodology if he finds it inadequate. He also has the right to hold a rally any time he pleases. What his supporters, grown adults, do is beyond his control and he's not liable for any of it unless he specifically requested that they break the law, which in my opinion he did not.

This isn't about revenge porn. This is about making sure one is held accountable for his deplorable actions and making sure an armed insurrection against the Capitol doesn't happen again. Please don't be so fucking disingenuous.

It's 100% about revenge and venting frustration, it's perverse and it's sick. I'm entitled to that opinion and you can disagree with it if you so please, it doesn't bother me.

 

[WeedZ]

Donald Trump is either an idiot or a brilliant mastermind

That was going to be my next point to you. Either hes so stupid that he didnt see anything wrong with having them march on the capital when they've been calling for civil war for months or seen any sign that every choice or statement he made was leading to a violent breaking point, or he knew exactly what he was doing and purposefully orchestrated an attack on the us capital. Either way you slice it, ineptitude or insurrection, he wasn't fit for presidency and deserves an impeachment conviction. Should have been removed sooner.

 

[Darth Meteos]

meteos too scary 2021

i don't know who needs to read this, but trump obviously incited the riot
who are you kidding
what are you gaining by defending the guy apart from just not facing that you got used
what happened to you to make your existence so inexorably bound to making excuses for a guy who got your vote for "drain the swamp" and then put half the deep state in his administration

It's 100% about revenge and venting frustration, it's unhealthy and it's sick. I'm entitled to that opinion and you can disagree with it if you so please, it doesn't bother me.

"it doesn't bother me"

 

[Foxi4]

That was going to be my next point to you. Either hes so stupid that he didnt see anything wrong with having them march on the capital when they've been calling for civil war for months or seen any sign that every choice or statement he made was leading to a violent breaking point, or he knew exactly what he was doing and purposefully orchestrated an attack on the us capital. Either way you slice it, ineptitude or insurrection, he wasn't fit for presidency and deserves an impeachment conviction. Should have been removed sooner.

I can think of no better place to protest that the Capitol.

meteos too scary 2021

i don't know who needs to read this, but trump obviously incited the riot
who are you kidding
what are you gaining by defending the guy apart from just not facing that you got used
what happened to you to make your existence so inexorably bound to making excuses for a guy who got your vote for "drain the swamp" and then put half the deep state in his administration


"it doesn't bother me"

Nice projection. I'll let it slide, I like a little memey picture every now and then as long as you stay on-topic.

 

[Plasmaster09]

I can think of no better place to protest that the Capitol.

Nice projection. I'll let it slide, I like a little memey picture every now and then as long as you stay on-topic.

"Nice projection", says the man that blamed the Democrats for everything the Republicans did and still refuses to admit it.

 

[Darth Meteos]

This isn't about revenge porn.

donald trump was in office for four years, openly being corrupt and going "what are you gonna do"
for four years, nobody did anything except get mad on twitter
the dude finally does something that upset the nest of the elites by threatening their lives, but it's too late
it's the old mass shooting trick

stage 1: there hasn't been a shooting in ages, you're brining up something that doesn't matter
stage 2: how dare you politicize the deaths of innocent people?!
stage 3: have various actors cast doubt onto the situation, do a media campaign spreading misinformation and appeals to majority
stage 4: obstruct anything that gets through the cracks, ignore bad press
stage 5: go back to stage 1

 

[Lacius]

She was denied service because she was a part of Trump's admin, and the owners weren't fans of the administration. There's nothing more to it.

Right. That's not the same thing as refusing service because of someone's beliefs. Her actions were the problems, and rightfully so.

Already addressed this, Trump is not their dad. He condemned the violence after the fact, but he's not in a position to tell private citizens what to do - the moment he does, he turns into the mastermind commanding his henchmen. These proceedings prove that this is precisely how his opposition sees him, I see zero reasons why he's want to reinforce this imaginary version of reality in people's minds.
Trump is entitled to be displeased by election results and criticise the auditing methodology if he finds it inadequate. He also has the right to hold a rally any time he pleases. What his supporters, grown adults, do is beyond his control and he's not liable for any of it unless he specifically requested that they break the law, which in my opinion he did not.

He didn't condemn the violence during or immediately after the riot. He did nothing to call in the National Guard. He did nothing to respond to the attack on the Capitol. When the attack was in full swing, he didn't Tweet about the violence stopping; he Tweeted attacks against Mike Pence. We have videos of Trump relishing in the violence. He rebuffed calls for help in the middle of the violence. We know that after Trump knew Mike was being rushed to safety and was in danger from the mob, Trump sent the anti-Pence Tweet afterward. Considering how hard it is to argue against the facts, I don't blame you for having to resort to "nah, unconvincing" as your response instead.

If you are going to argue that Trump is the mastermind of the riots if he attempts to call his supporters off, despite the fact that other people condemned and attempted to call of the rioters without being labeled the masterminds behind it, then you've already admitted that Trump is the instigator. If you are going to argue that Trump is more concerned with how the optics affect him personally over stopping the actual insurrection at the Capitol, then you've already admitted that Trump is complicit.

It's 100% about revenge and venting frustration, it's unhealthy and it's sick. I'm entitled to that opinion and you can disagree with it if you so please, it doesn't bother me.

Not only are you claiming it's about revenge without evidence, but it's also ONE HUNDRED PERCENT about revenge? The hyperbole highlights how disingenuous you're actually being.

 

[WeedZ]

I can think of no better place to protest that the Capitol.

if I were majority leader, I would offer trump this choice. If he could come before the senate and state for the record that he's not responsible for what happened on the 6th because he's too stupid to understand the consequences of his own actions, I would drop the impeachment. You think his ego would let him, or would he be compelled to take responsibility?