All Things Trump: the story continues...

[L'Emmerdeur]

Trump is known for his use of plausible deniability. Cohen, his former bagman and fixer explained it clearly and unequivocally in testimony before the House Oversight Committee.

The people who answered Trump's repeated calls to assemble in Washington on January 6 knew what he wanted, because he'd telegraphed it. The absurd fig-leaf of suggesting a 'peaceful and patriotic' demonstration was given the lie by multiple references to fighting, invoking the idiotic 'losing our country' meme, and the overall tone of the speech. Trump obviously intended to arouse the mob and provide it a target, and he got what he wanted.

[Joe]

This doesn't surprise me. His administration lied a lot, and he looked like hammered shit at the time.

Trump Was Sicker Than Acknowledged With Covid-19

WASHINGTON — President Donald J. Trump was sicker with Covid-19 in October than publicly acknowledged at the time, with extremely depressed blood oxygen levels at one point and a lung problem associated with pneumonia caused by the coronavirus, according to four people familiar with his condition.

His prognosis became so worrisome before he was taken to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center that officials believed he would need to be put on a ventilator, two of the people familiar with his condition said.

The people familiar with Mr. Trump’s health said he was found to have lung infiltrates, which occur when the lungs are inflamed and contain substances such as fluid or bacteria. Their presence, especially when a patient is exhibiting other symptoms, can be a sign of an acute case of the disease. They can be easily spotted on an X-ray or scan, when parts of the lungs appear opaque, or white.

Mr. Trump’s blood oxygen level alone was cause for extreme concern, dipping into the 80s, according to the people familiar with his evaluation. The disease is considered severe when the blood oxygen level falls to the low 90s.

It has been previously reported that Mr. Trump had trouble breathing and a fever on Oct. 2, the day he was taken to the hospital, and the types of treatment he received indicated that his condition was serious. But the new details about his condition and about the effort inside the White House to get him special access to an unapproved drug to fight the virus help to flesh out one of the most dire episodes of Mr. Trump’s presidency.

I wonder how many people learning this now wished he had died.

[Cunt]

Your specific example, when I looked, was edited to remove some of what Trump said.

I have seen similar collages from the right, showing Dem politicians cheering on the rioting throughout 2020. One hinted that Harris retweeted a fundraiser meant to raise bail for rioters.

I'm not saying what Trump said was good, I'm just saying that it wasn't all that remarkable. It sure isn't unexpected that the vid is edited to push an idea, that's how both sides operate.

Tough. The video makes a compelling argument

By 'compelling argument' your video leads off with edited video, conspicuously excluding relevant information.

If that is their 'evidence', you are quite credulous. I'm not trusting at all, and this glaring exclusion screams 'edited for dramatic effect at the expense of honesty'.

that Trump incited violence with what he said, and showed specifically what he said that they thought incited the violence. You say you can show Democratic politicians doing the same thing, and say you saw similar collages, but you haven't shown anything.

If you ain't linking, you're lying.

I'm not lying, I just don't see this propaganda video as some kind of fair evidence. Was there some clarity after they opened their little movie by dishonestly editing what he said?

I remember how far the 'Charlottesville' lie propagated, despite how easy it is to find the unedited speech, so the tactic isn't going to work on me.

Maybe it is, and you'll say what it is he went 'over the line' with. I mean, remember that if you complain that he said the election was stolen, that Time article said the same thing.

You still haven't addressed the video directly. Saying it was edited is an excuse, and calling it propaganda is name calling. Calling it dishonestly edited is bullshit if you don't show how it was done. The rest is bluster.

You asked for this, remember?

My claim is, whatever things Trump said, other politicians have said similar inflammatory things. When asked for examples, I asked for something to counter.

I gave you the Dem's best example. Where's that "steelman argument" you keep talking about?

I couldn't stomach it, so you win. Your team is the winners, and it WAS a insurrecting.

If only they had not been stopped by...getting bored and leaving?

We'll see if he gets convicted of anything. My guess is it will be like the second impeachment - no removal.

I'm still holding out hope for Trump though. It may sound hopeless, and ridiculous, but I think he can make the hat trick.

[Sean Hayden]

Be honest, how many insurrections have you read about?

[Cunt]

Funny you should ask. I'm considering reading Andy Ngo's new book. He's been promoting it on a tour.

[JimC]

Put any words in my mouth you want. I won't chew for you.

As to if I think it would be better if the violent rioters on the 6th stopped Biden from being anointed, NO.

The stop should be made in court, not in a riot.

I also don't think the riots that day were any real danger of 'insurrection', since they were too stupid to accomplish anything. Other than murder, what does anyone honestly think they could have accomplished?

A coup?

The implication here is that they're not guilty of insurrection (and Trump for inciting them) because they were too incompetent to make a coup actually work.

When the police charge someone with robbing a bank, they don't go easy on them because they forgot to organise a proper getaway car...

[Cunt]

Right, but when a drunken idiot tries it with a gun carved out of soap, they don't close the bank down for months, and spend hundreds of millions on increased security.

[Sean Hayden]

Funny you should ask. I'm considering reading Andy Ngo's new book. He's been promoting it on a tour.

So none then, right? There's nothing wrong with that. I've only read a few accounts.

I bring it up because you've made several comments now that this can't be classified as an insurrection/coup because it failed or was bound to fail. But neither of those really matches anything I've read.

In at least one example I can think of many of the people attempting to remove the prime minister were just men who had been paid to show up. I wonder if they were the first to get bored and go home...

[Cunt]

Tempest in a teacup. If he is removed, or if he is not, nothing will be different.

Makes me wonder why everyone is so excited about it. Is Biden really that boring?

[Sean Hayden]

Yes. Biden is boring.

Americans are mad at Trump and the Republicans, why shouldn't they be?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Nobody seriously thinks that the Trumpist Party senators are going to do anything but grovel for their Dear Leader. However, incitement to overthrow the government is without doubt an impeachable offence. The House of Representatives would be failing its constitutional duty if it did not impeach.

In realpolitik terms, no government that blandly accepts incitement and resultant attack is likely to survive for long. A pantomime attempted coup is nonetheless an attempted coup. If some people lose their lives in the process, that's just a bonus.

[rainbow]

The people who answered Trump's repeated calls to assemble in Washington on January 6 knew what he wanted, because he'd telegraphed it. The absurd fig-leaf of suggesting a 'peaceful and patriotic' demonstration was given the lie by multiple references to fighting, invoking the idiotic 'losing our country' meme, and the overall tone of the speech. Trump obviously intended to arouse the mob and provide it a target, and he got what he wanted.

He didn't get what he wanted. He wanted millions of people to be at his protest, but got maybe 20 000. He wanted a huge crowd to march on the Capitol, but only part of his miserable crowd arrived. He wanted to stop the Congress from affirming Biden, but they simply went into secure parts of the Capitol and waited for the Nation Guard to arrive, then they completed the process. He wanted the National Guard to stand back and let the Occupation remain, so that he could declare an Emergency and bring in Martial Law. He wanted to suspend Congress and remain President.

...so no, he didn't get what he wanted.

[Hermit]

Right, but when a drunken idiot tries it with a gun carved out of soap, they don't close the bank down for months, and spend hundreds of millions on increased security.

The storming of the Capitol is not even metaphorically comparative to a drunken idiot with a gun carved out of soap. More people were killed during the storming of the Capitol than the storming of the Winter Palace that brought down the Tsarist regime in 1917. Given what happened on the 6th of January, the cost of upgrading security is justified. Where was your objection to the 64 million dollar fence upgrade Trump ordered for the White House when there was no security concern and certainly no event that would have justified it?

[L'Emmerdeur]

The people who answered Trump's repeated calls to assemble in Washington on January 6 knew what he wanted, because he'd telegraphed it. The absurd fig-leaf of suggesting a 'peaceful and patriotic' demonstration was given the lie by multiple references to fighting, invoking the idiotic 'losing our country' meme, and the overall tone of the speech. Trump obviously intended to arouse the mob and provide it a target, and he got what he wanted.

He didn't get what he wanted. He wanted millions of people to be at his protest, but got maybe 20 000. He wanted a huge crowd to march on the Capitol, but only part of his miserable crowd arrived. He wanted to stop the Congress from affirming Biden, but they simply went into secure parts of the Capitol and waited for the Nation Guard to arrive, then they completed the process. He wanted the National Guard to stand back and let the Occupation remain, so that he could declare an Emergency and bring in Martial Law. He wanted to suspend Congress and remain President.

...so no, he didn't get what he wanted.

Fair enough. He did all he could with what he had.

[Joe]

Your specific example, when I looked, was edited to remove some of what Trump said.

I have seen similar collages from the right, showing Dem politicians cheering on the rioting throughout 2020. One hinted that Harris retweeted a fundraiser meant to raise bail for rioters.

I'm not saying what Trump said was good, I'm just saying that it wasn't all that remarkable. It sure isn't unexpected that the vid is edited to push an idea, that's how both sides operate.

Tough. The video makes a compelling argument

By 'compelling argument' your video leads off with edited video, conspicuously excluding relevant information.

If that is their 'evidence', you are quite credulous. I'm not trusting at all, and this glaring exclusion screams 'edited for dramatic effect at the expense of honesty'.

that Trump incited violence with what he said, and showed specifically what he said that they thought incited the violence. You say you can show Democratic politicians doing the same thing, and say you saw similar collages, but you haven't shown anything.

If you ain't linking, you're lying.

I'm not lying, I just don't see this propaganda video as some kind of fair evidence. Was there some clarity after they opened their little movie by dishonestly editing what he said?

I remember how far the 'Charlottesville' lie propagated, despite how easy it is to find the unedited speech, so the tactic isn't going to work on me.

Maybe it is, and you'll say what it is he went 'over the line' with. I mean, remember that if you complain that he said the election was stolen, that Time article said the same thing.

You still haven't addressed the video directly. Saying it was edited is an excuse, and calling it propaganda is name calling. Calling it dishonestly edited is bullshit if you don't show how it was done. The rest is bluster.

You asked for this, remember?

My claim is, whatever things Trump said, other politicians have said similar inflammatory things. When asked for examples, I asked for something to counter.

I gave you the Dem's best example. Where's that "steelman argument" you keep talking about?

I couldn't stomach it, so you win. Your team is the winners, and it WAS a insurrecting.

If only they had not been stopped by...getting bored and leaving?

We'll see if he gets convicted of anything. My guess is it will be like the second impeachment - no removal.

I'm still holding out hope for Trump though. It may sound hopeless, and ridiculous, but I think he can make the hat trick.

When you gonna learn Cunt. I'm an independent, not a Democrat. I don't need a team to do my thinking for me.

The Dems know just as well as the rest of us the fix is in and Trump will be acquitted. They're trying to make GOP Senators who vote to acquit pay a political price. You think you couldn't stomach that video now, wait for 2022 and 2024 when it's used in ads.