Wide spread election fraud 2020

[tinselwolverine]

It's just a hypothetical. You can delay a certification or a census worker. You can destroy a courthouse or a census worker's pen. It's all falls under the definition, so there's obviously some matter of degree (or some other element) that plays a role in the interpretation. I don't know where it is and we don't have tons of examples. So what are other examples of federal building occupation or destruction? The Clive Bundy thing comes to mind. Timothy McVeigh? Was that sedition?

Murder and conspiracy.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Murder and conspiracy.

Thank you.

 

[sggatecl]

I'll give you a "B" for the effort but when you buy into the bit that the "OK" sign is racist because it is used by a "white supremacist" group that was founded and is run by a black guy, you get an "F" for execution.

I don't think it's inherintly racist. When I see someone do it, my mind doesn't immediately scream "racist". I think people use it for that purpose now, but it's all about context. For instance, I would never tell my kids to stop using it like some parents have. For the vast majority of people, it means 'ok'.

I actually didn't even read his link. I was just itching to use the meme and pulled the trigger asap, whether it was actually a false equivalency was irrelevant to me.

I'm sure I'll get to use the meme with proper context eventually. In a forum where most retorts are whataboutisms, it only makes sense that 'false equivalency' would become a buzzword to counter argue.

 

[tigermud]

In the future giving the thumbs up sign will be considered racist since trump used it a lot.

There is no limit to the amount of hate from the cancel culture brown shirts

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't think it's inherintly racist. When I see someone do it, my mind doesn't immediately scream "racist". I think people use it for that purpose now, but it's all about context. For instance, I would never tell my kids to stop using it like some parents have. For the vast majority of people, it means 'ok'.

I actually didn't even read his link. I was just itching to use the meme and pulled the trigger asap, whether it was actually a false equivalency was irrelevant to me.

I'm sure I'll get to use the meme with proper context eventually. In a forum where most retorts are whataboutisms, it only makes sense that 'false equivalency' would become a buzzword to counter argue.

from what little I know of it - read one article recently - it's not used for that purpose, it's still run by the afto-cuban founder. However, it's still labeled a hate group based on surprisingly (#sarcasm) incomplete reporting - some white supremacist tried to hijack the group adn apparently has been kicked out - so the media runs with that to impugn any and all actions they take.

 

[Spartanmack]

In the future giving the thumbs up sign will be considered racist since trump used it a lot.

There is no limit to the amount of stupidity from the cancel culture brown shirts

fixed it for you.

Edit: you weren't wrong, it definitely is hate but the level of stupidity required to say and believe things like the "OK" sign is racist is remarkable.

 

[Spartanmack]

So which is it, was it planned or did Trump instigate a violent, armed insurrection? Or is it both?. Personally, I think it's both - the planners knew trump would know Trump would instigate the protestors and rile them into a blood thirsty mob with his white supremacist dog whistles like "continue protesting peacefully and respectfully." Those white supremacist insurrectionists are playing 4d chess. He didn't use the "OK" sign though - that probably would have been too obvious.

I'm sure everyone claiming this was an angry armed seditious mob hell bent on murdering elected officials and their families (demonstrated by the fact that not a single shot was fired by all those heavily armed protestors), is as shocked as I am that Congress wouldn't want to investigate this before beginning impeachment proceedings.

 

[Michchamp]

So which is it, was it planned or did Trump instigate a violent, armed insurrection? Or is it both?. Personally, I think it's both - the planners knew trump would know Trump would instigate the protestors and rile them into a blood thirsty mob with his white supremacist dog whistles like "continue protesting peacefully and respectfully." Those white supremacist insurrectionists are playing 4d chess. He didn't use the "OK" sign though - that probably would have been too obvious.

I'm sure everyone claiming this was an angry armed seditious mob hell bent on murdering elected officials and their families (demonstrated by the fact that not a single shot was fired by all those heavily armed protestors), is as shocked as I am that Congress wouldn't want to investigate this before beginning impeachment proceedings.

I'm not sure what you're saying exactly here, but...

"Colorado man threatened to shoot Pelosi and Bowser in the head, according to court documents" had brought an assault rifle and pistol, and headbutted the first person he saw when he got out of his car in DC, before being arrested.

great guy! seems like the type you admire.

In some other cases, seems like no shots were fired only because the police stopped them at the doors and gates (more than a few cops got the crap beat out of them by the mobs).

Reporting on other Cases like this one are all over the place. Like if you just click on a non-parler type news site, you might not come off like such a dumbass here.

Even Fox... Even Fox News is reporting on the arrests and planned violent attacks!!! You're really having to retreat farther and farther into your safe space to keep up the charade here, snowflake.

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm not sure what you're saying exactly here, but...

"Colorado man threatened to shoot Pelosi and Bowser in the head, according to court documents" had brought an assault rifle and pistol, and headbutted the first person he saw when he got out of his car in DC, before being arrested.

great guy! seems like the type you admire.

Yeah, it's painfully obvious you don't get it. And as a result you don't know what the hell you're talking about here. No one is defending the actions of the rioters, nor would they defend someone who threatened to kill anyone, even Nancy Pelosi. By the way, your piece seems to indicate that guy never made it to the mostly peaceful insurrection. You're gonna need more than a single anecdote to project his intentions onto the mob at the Capitol - at least for most reasonable people. Your buddy will probably be convinced - he may even find a nit to pick like what percent of the crowd was there to protest vs overthrow the government vs the ratio of mostly peaceful:rioters at this summers BLM riots and determine that the mob was out to murder politicians - and their families.

In some other cases, seems like no shots were fired only because the police stopped them at the doors and gates (more than a few cops got the crap beat out of them by the mobs).

Reporting on other Cases like this one are all over the place. Like if you just click on a non-parler type news site, you might not come off like such a dumbass here.

I love this bit...They didn't shoot and kill any congressmen or congresswomen because the cops stopped them - why didn't they shoot at the cops? Why were the cops able to stop these blood thirsty armed murderers without firing a shot or being shot at. You make me laugh.

Also, I've never been on Parler - if you read the article, you'd see my source is the left-leaning Washington Post.

Even Fox... Even Fox News is reporting on the arrests and planned violent attacks!!! You're really having to retreat farther and farther into your safe space to keep up the charade here, snowflake.

I may love this part even more...I didn't say they weren't planned violent attacks. I posted an article stating that there's evidence that the violence was planned. I'm not retreating anywhere - I'm on here challenging the bullshit narrative that Trump incited the riot and you're completely missing the point, accusing me of being a snowflake - thanks for that doughboy. Since you're struggling so mightily with the obvious, I'll spell it out for you - I'll even type it slowly so you don't miss anything...the point is, if the violence was planned ahead of time, then it wasn't Trump's speech that spurred the riot - it's obvious to anyone who read his speech that he didn't incite the riot, but the press and Dems want to have it both ways - thankfully, they have their useful idiots who won't question any of it.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Incredible sign of how divided we are. Trump gets the 2nd most votes ever and at the same time has the lowest average Gallup pole rating ever. 1st President to never hit 50% Biggest partisan split too.



https://news.gallup.com/poll/328637/last-trump-job-approval-average-record-low.aspx

 

[Spartanmack]

Incredible sign of how divided we are. Trump gets the 2nd most votes ever and at the same time has the lowest average Gallup pole rating ever. 1st President to never hit 50% Biggest partisan split too.



https://news.gallup.com/poll/328637/last-trump-job-approval-average-record-low.aspx

and how misled people are - I've said a few times that 55% of Americans said they were better off than they were under Obama's tenure. This piece shows Trump's approval rating dropped 12 points from the last pre-election poll to the most recent. I wonder if that has anything to do with the clearly false accusations that he instigated the riots at the capitol... Both points pretty clearly indicate the effect of virtually 100% negative coverage of him.

as for having the biggest partisan split, those numbers aren't that out of line with Obama's - and his same-Republican approval rating is inline with the same-party approval rating of every President since Reagan. The divide has been happening for years.

 

[Gulo Blue]

and how misled people are - I've said a few times that 55% of Americans said they were better off than they were under Obama's tenure. This piece shows Trump's approval rating dropped 12 points from the last pre-election poll to the most recent. I wonder if that has anything to do with the clearly false accusations that he instigated the riots at the capitol... Both points pretty clearly indicate the effect of virtually 100% negative coverage of him.

as for having the biggest partisan split, those numbers aren't that out of line with Obama's - and his same-Republican approval rating is inline with the same-party approval rating of every President since Reagan. The divide has been happening for years.

The population is the population. It's not like other Presidents didn't face imperfectly informed populations. And what's changed is largely social media, which Trump is credited at being better than most at using to his advantage.

 

[tinselwolverine]

and how misled people are - I've said a few times that 55% of Americans said they were better off than they were under Obama's tenure. This piece shows Trump's approval rating dropped 12 points from the last pre-election poll to the most recent. I wonder if that has anything to do with the clearly false accusations that he instigated the riots at the capitol... Both points pretty clearly indicate the effect of virtually 100% negative coverage of him.

as for having the biggest partisan split, those numbers aren't that out of line with Obama's - and his same-Republican approval rating is inline with the same-party approval rating of every President since Reagan. The divide has been happening for years.

His language probably won?t be seen as rising to the level of criminal.

Our own Byco described the rally as ?ill advised? - I?ll go with that.

McConnell? ?Provoked?.

Barr: ?Betrayal?.

Assorted Republicans.

Worse to me was Trump?s attempt to coerce, cajole and intimidate Pence into unlawfully, unconstitutionally and probably treasonously change the outcome of the election. To me that rises to the level of a coup attempt. If he was going to be impeached, it should have been for that.

As distasteful as I have always found him to be, going into the election I would have preferred Trump to win - the least bad of two horrible choices.

In hindsight, given the aftermath, fuck him. Good riddance.

Given my low opinion of Trump, I would?ve never thought the feeling I have for him now would be possible - I?m actually disappointed in him.

And that there that is some shit, for sure.

 

[Gulo Blue]

As distasteful as I have always found him to be, going into the election I would have preferred Trump to win - the least bad of two horrible choices.

Even with the child/family separations at the border? That's some low-down dirty behavior.

 

[Spartanmack]

The population is the population. It's not like other Presidents didn't face imperfectly informed populations. And what's changed is largely social media, which Trump is credited at being better than most at using to his advantage.

they didn't face imperfectly informed populations to the same degree. That matters and I think Trump's numbers reflect that. Social media is a recent phenomenon but it's not the only change - traditional media has become more biased, divided and polarized as well. The people crediting Trump for his social media acumen are probably the people who can't figure out why their 100% negative coverage of him hasn't swayed the 74mm people who voted for him to also hate him and everything he does or stands for.

 

[Gulo Blue]

they didn't face imperfectly informed populations to the same degree. That matters and I think Trump's numbers reflect that. Social media is a recent phenomenon but it's not the only change - traditional media has become more biased, divided and polarized as well. The people crediting Trump for his social media acumen are probably the people who can't figure out why their 100% negative coverage of him hasn't swayed the 74mm people who voted for him to also hate him and everything he does or stands for.

I think Trump being exceptionally divisive better satisfies Occam's Razor.

 

[Spartanmack]

His language probably won?t be seen as rising to the level of criminal.

Our own Byco described the rally as ?ill advised? - I?ll go with that.

McConnell? ?Provoked?.

Barr: ?Betrayal?.

Assorted Republicans.

Worse to me was Trump?s attempt to coerce, cajole and intimidate Pence into unlawfully, unconstitutionally and probably treasonously change the outcome of the election. To me that rises to the level of a coup attempt. If he was going to be impeached, it should have been for that.

As distasteful as I have always found him to be, going into the election I would have preferred Trump to win - the least bad of two horrible choices.

In hindsight, given the aftermath, fuck him. Good riddance.

Given my low opinion of Trump, I would?ve never thought the feeling I have for him now would be possible - I?m actually disappointed in him.

And that there that is some shit, for sure.

"Provoked" is utter nonsense. The best thing that can be said about McConnell in any circumstance is that he is an opportunist who will say whatever is politically convenient at the time - and now he's facing Dem control of both houses of Congress and the White House. Were his words a betrayal? Possibly - a betrayal of what? and how does that rise to the level of incitement? Given the opposition to Trump from within the Republican party from day 1, I don't see how criticism coming from the same side of the aisle is in any way a validation of these claims of incitement.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Even with the child/family separations at the border? That's some low-down dirty behavior.

That shit had been going on before Trump.

Instead of going halfway around the world to the Middle East, maybe we should have cleaned up our shit hole neighbor countries to the south so their people might actually not be so desperate to get out of them.

 

[tinselwolverine]

That shit had been going on before Trump.

Instead of going halfway around the world to the Middle East, maybe we should have cleaned up our shit hole neighbor countries to the south so their people might actually not be so desperate to get out of them.

My first sentence that you quoted was ?His language probably won?t be seen as rising to the level of criminal.?

More than one thing can be true.

 

[Gulo Blue]

That shit had been going on before Trump.

Instead of going halfway around the world to the Middle East, maybe we should have cleaned up our shit hole neighbor countries to the south so their people might actually not be so desperate to get out of them.

Before Trump there was a flood of unaccompanied minors. So Obama started putting kids in cages. But they didn't separate families as a matter of policy, only when they thought the claim that they were a family was a lie or when there were crimes other than just crossing the border involved. I don't understand why people think that's the same thing.