Trumps second Impeachment Trial Dead on Arrival

[Cooky]

Oh, it's all good then! Only 5 people died, and they were mostly heart attacks! Whew!

One was bludgeoned to death with an American flag.
One was shot while trying to breach the barricaded door to the House Chamber.
One person had a stroke during the attack.
Another lady was trampled by the crowd.
Another may have died from a heart attack, but it hasn't been confirmed.

I just read that another officer that was working at the Capitol that day has committed suicide.

And another officer was tasered multiple times in the back of the neck, while the crowd laughed about how they should shoot him with his own gun, as he pled for his life. He later had a heart attack. He's lucky to be alive.

Dozens more police and security officers were injured.



Way to try to minimize the deaths though.
I sure hope you weren't one of the people up in arms over the Benghazi incident.

I demand honesty in discussion. Not really, but I really would appreciate it.

...Surely you can admit that 5 weren't actually "killed".

 

[SkepticThinker]

I demand honesty in discussion. Not really, but I really would appreciate it.

...Surely you can admit that 5 weren't actually "killed".

You might want to try some of that then.

Instead of splitting hairs and grasping at straws.

 

[sun rise]

Trump never said to break doors and windows, and enter illegally. To falsely associate him that way is KGBish and total corruption.

So all the traitors and criminals who said that his speech told them to do what they did are left-wing, antifa liars, eh?

The craven cowards, enablers and traitors in the Senate lied about not convicting someone after that person has left office. It's been done before but they're lying and lying and sucking Trump's toes still.

They're no different than the Chinese legislature who does exactly what Xi wants and the Duma in Russia who does what Putin says to do.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No. He just told them the election was stolen (it wasn't), that the democrats cheated (they didn't), that democracy was under threat (it wasn't), and that Biden's presidency is invalid (it isn't).

I agree with everything except the true fact that democracy is under threat. By both parties.

 

[Sunstone]

Trumps guiltless. I'd never vote for him again... The only difference between me and you guys is you want blood, and you're willing to break your own principles by *assuming* a special kind of guiltiness, which is the beginning phases of corruption, IMO.

The scope, range, and depth of your self-awareness overwhelms my capacity for awe in response to it.

We couldn't even meet up in a coffee shop for a single cup these days, could we?

 

[Sunstone]

I agree with everything except the true fact that democracy is under threat. By both parties.

Does that mean you too have noticed Schumer is sabotaging Biden's agenda? Or did you have in mind an even more bizarre and disturbing reason for believing both parties threaten Democracy these days?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Honest question. Do you see any people on the right, high or low, who you can point me to as evidence to warrant thinking reason is still useful in communicating with the right these days? Anyone. Even the best of them?

I myself would call dibs on Mitt Romney if he could demonstrably keep it up.

I'm sure there are. Even now we have states which are turning purple from red, and schisms within the GOP and their feelings towards Trump. It's just so difficult to retain your career in a political environment so toxic that it fosters simple binaries. That's why I really think both sides need to split into different parties on different parts of the left right spectrum and auth lib spectrum. We can't have productive dialogues when everything is so oversimplified to two choices.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Trump's a loser.. I'd never vote for him again... The only difference between me and you guys is you want blood, and you're willing to break your own principles by *assuming* a special kind of guiltiness, which is the beginning phases of corruption, IMO.

What I want is accountability for one's actions.

 

[Wrangler]

Hasn't this thread already been done? It was incitement to riot and sedition.

Speaking truth to power of Leftist lies sure is
incitement to riot and sedition to these power deranged crazies.

 

[Altfish]

Trump never said to break doors and windows, and enter illegally. To falsely associate him that way is KGBish and total corruption.

If Trump's behaviour is not impeachable, nothing is impeachable. The US might as well scrap the procedure.

 

[Cooky]

If Trump's behaviour is not impeachable, nothing is impeachable. The US might as well scrap the procedure.

That's what was stated by a member on the house floor... It sounds good, and convincing until you look a little deeper.

Honestly, why would you want an ex-president to be impeached? Answer me that?

 

[Altfish]

That's what was stated by a member on the house floor... It sounds good, and convincing until you look a little deeper.

Honestly, why would you want an ex-president to be impeached? Answer me that?

As I understand it, it stops him holding a political position ever again.
It also means that it is not likely to happen again if it is punished. ie No one else will try it.
If the GOP try to sweep it under the carpet, it is likely to be attempted again.

 

[Cooky]

As I understand it, it stops him holding a political position ever again
.

Exactly! Just like Putin's trumped-up charges on Alexei Navalny. This is so KGB.

Total corruption.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Trump's a loser.. I'd never vote for him again... The only difference between me and you guys is you want blood, and you're willing to break your own principles by *assuming* a special kind of guiltiness, which is the beginning phases of corruption, IMO.

All I see is a hypocrite, since you undoubtedly would want punishment if the situation was reversed - as unlikely as it would be. Protecting democracy and all that.

 

[Altfish]

Exactly! Just like Putin's trumped-up charges on Alexei Navalny. This is so KGB.

Total corruption.

I notice you ignored the rest of my post.

Anyway, should he be allowed to stand again for anything? He behaved attrociously and ingraciously in his last 2-months. Bad loser is not strong enough a phrase to describe him.

 

[Heyo]

And people are free to accept or deny his claims. Free speech is tricky, but I'll favor liberty and freedom as far as I possibly can until I can't... Our limits vary... My limit extends farther than most.

...The reason it extends farther than others is because I'm unwilling to "assume"...

People don't have to panic when some screams "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. They are free to accept or deny the claim. Free speech is tricky.

 

[Cooky]

We couldn't even meet up in a coffee shop for a single cup these days, could we?

Of course we could... In fact, it would be an honor!

 

[Heyo]

Trump's a loser.. I'd never vote for him again... The only difference between me and you guys is you want blood, and you're willing to break your own principles by *assuming* a special kind of guiltiness, which is the beginning phases of corruption, IMO.

I can't speak for all but all I want is a fair trial and fair and impartial judges (Senators).
And I'm convinced that, from what I know now, Trump would be convicted.

It seems you don't even want that trial?

 

[Cooky]

I can't speak for all but all I want is a fair trial and fair and impartial judges (Senators).
And I'm convinced that, from what I know now, Trump would be convicted.

It seems you don't even want that trial?

If it could actually be *proven*, that Trump wanted rioters to break into the Capitol building by force, even if it meant bashing police officers over the head with fire extinguishers and breaking down doors in order to enter the very chamber floor in order to stop the proceedings from happening... Then yes, Trump should be tried and placed in jail.

...But there is no way I believe that's what Trump intended, or told anyone to do...

...Does anyone here think that's really what Trump wanted? Did he use the exact words, describing what exactly happened..? If not, then to say he did is a lie-filled assumption.

 

[Aštra’el]

Cognitive dissonance

cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance
/ˈkäɡnədiv ˈdisənəns/

noun
PSYCHOLOGY

1. the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.