But they didn't hold out for a few more hours. Was part of the plan to leave when they did? If not, why did they leave?
What kinda plan includes having your weapons at a place where you can't get to them?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Fascism - Why...
- Thread starter Secret Chief
- Start date
Again, you have been told before, you don't listen. The went home when their God-King finally got around to telling them to go home.
What do you think would have happened if Trump instead told them to stay?
And you don't answer my questions. What would have happened if they got a hostage?
And again, do you seriously believe all they intended to do was delay the process a few hours? Do you expect anyone else to believe that?
Orbit
I'm a planet
I think it's hilarious that you can't see that that is very *definition* of rejecting democracy.
anna.
colors your eyes with what's not there
The answer is in the photo.
They would have either stayed and gotten arrested, or left anyway.
I don’t know, and neither do you. There are a million different things that could have happened, but nobody knows because it didn’t happen.
Now answer my question; do you believe US democracy was ever in jeopardy? Do you believe if Trump was crazy enough to tell them to continue, these unarmed rioters would have stood a chance against the law of the land?
I think their plan was to go down there and disrupt things. But you disagree, you believe there was some elaborate plan to take over the country get rid of the other 2 branches of government and install Trump as dictator; right? What evidence do you have that they had such a plan to accomplish this?
Just because you say that, doesn't make it true. And as I mentioned before, when racist lawmakers in the Jim Crow south had democratic elections that was designed to exclude black people via unfair literacy tests, those black people rejected those elections because they were unfair, but they were not rejecting democracy.
So you are under the impression those 3 people spoke for the thousands of other people who were there; right? You think several thousands of people showed up at the capital that day unarmed in an effort to start a Civil War; is that correct?
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Firstly, I haven't claimed that.
Secondly, the reason they wanted to hang Pence was because they wanted to prevent him from ratifying the vote against Trump. They wanted to prevent the official process that would see Trump removed from power.
Or gotten killed, and perhaps killed others.
1000% yes!
1000000000000000% YES!!!!!!!!!!
No, but they could have killed a lot of people, and gotten themselves killed as well.
I cannot believe you are that stupid. I believe you are being disingenuous.
Orbit
I'm a planet
That situation is not at all equivalent. Rejecting the results of a free and fair election IS rejecting the democratic process.
That’s not your claim? Fair enough; my disagreement was based on the idea that they wanted to install Trump as their Fascist leader (dictator) which would require getting rid of the other 2 branches of Government. Because it appeared you were siding with the people who have this view, I assumed it was your view as well. If that is not your view, then I have no argument against your position concerning this issue.
How do you believe US Democracy was ever in jeopardy? Give me your worse case scenario of how a couple thousand of unarmed civilians could have taken down the US government, and installed a dictator against the will of millions of people backed up by the US military and law enforcement.
They did not believe the election was free and fair, thus they were not rejecting the democratic process.
I have explained this to you multiple times, you refuse to listen. I could explain it to you again, and you would just ignore it. Just go back and read post 580, or probably multiple posts by me and others where this has been explained to you.
Not only was the U.S. democracy in jeopardy then, the U.S. democracy is in jeopardy now.
I'm not talking about that, slippery slope argument of "first this happens, then years later that happen, then years later something else happens and we no longer have democracy" I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about how was us Democracy in Danger of ending as a result of that the rioters that day!
I have explained that to you already.
You talking about the electoral count act of 1887? As far as the electoral count act of 1887 that you mentioned, it has been revised many times; the latest by the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022
Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022 - Wikipedia
Orbit
I'm a planet
"believe"? That's their problem. There is NO evidence that the election was other than free and fair.
Are you familiar with the concept of linear time? Do I need to explain to you how time works?
The events of January 6th 2021 precede the events Act of 2022. Cause and effect, The events of January 6th 2021 caused the Act of 2022.
Seriously man, you are embarrassing yourself.
So how do you make the leap that the electoral court act of 1887 could have resulted in the US becoming a dictatorship had the rioters held out for a few more hours?