SectionC3

What a friggin disgrace. I have no words.

Are you invoking Rule #2?

I get where you’re going with this, and in isolation it might be a fair point. The isolation, of course, would speak to the protestors. If they didn’t have a means of communicating with Trump after the breach (that is, if they were isolated from Trump), then I might agree with you. But in the iPhone world, I don’t see how we have such isolation, and the inflammatory words still “count” after the breach occurred. Diction matters. You/HRC said “the Republicans” are co-conspirators. I do not agree with that, because there may be some who rely on what I believe to be the stupid and politically convenient position that the rejected jurisdictional bar prevents a determination on the merits. If you said “Republicans” who so vote are co-conspirators, then I would agree, because the reference wouldn’t be to ALL such Republicans (it would apply to SOME Republicans) who vote to acquit. Hawley and Cruz are going vote to acquit, and those two scumbags are complicit. Ding ding we have a winner. Refusal to quell despite the obvious power to do so is circumstantial evidence of intent. Also, I’ll add, there is a big difference between “innocent” and “not guilty.”

Maybe you could be like that Lynrd Skynyrd guy and complain that this isn’t smoking gun evidence. I agree with you. I’m sensitive to free speech considerations, but the circumstantial evidence is just too much here. Everyone with a brain knows that the election theft hoax is a (the) Big Lie. Literally everyone. Even Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley (both of whom are very smart, unlike, for example, Mo Brooks). Yet Trump raised money on the issue, repeatedly repeated the lie, egged on his supporters, brought thousands of them to within sight of the Capitol at the time the EC vote was to be certified, let Rudy talk about trial by combat, told his supporters not to be weak and to fight, and then turned them loose on the Capitol. Today we’ll learn that he didn’t give an eff that the Capitol had been breached and refused to immediately ask his supporters to stop the violence. This isn’t a Trump issue for me. It’s an American issue and a common sense question. I can’t imagine better circumstantial evidence that this fool catalyzed the violence.

Degree of victimization has nothing to with incitement. I wasn’t directly victimized, but that doesn’t mean that Trump didn’t incite the insurrectionists and traitors.

You aren’t open minded about this evidence. You’re obstinate. That’s where we part ways. “Smoking guns” don’t exist with respect to intent. They just don’t. It’s not how crime works. You’re applying an utterly unreasonable standard and ignoring the point that circumstantial evidence of intent is perfectly acceptable. It’s a MyPillow-ish position. Just like literally everyone with a functioning brain—including the jurors in this case—knows the election wasn’t stolen, a similar critical mass recognizes that requiring “smoking gun” evidence on this intent issue is absurd.

That might be the downfall. The one place where everyone despises that loser. The democrats detest him, and the republicans owe him a little payback for blowing the senate and messing with party regulars. And

So are you going on MyPillow TV to defend the insurrectionists and their leader or not?

I'll summarize. You demand a smoking gun with respect to an issue for which there is almost NEVER a smoking gun. That's the bottom line. Next time someone who commits a murder alerts the world to the intent to kill via writing, verbal expression, or social media post, let me know. Until then, since there are NO Republicans getting on TV to defend Trump, maybe you can book a couple of hits on Newsmax or Fox or the MyPillowNetwork to tell the world that Trump has clean hands here.

The sane, moderate Republicans are leaving. We're seeing a battle for the future of the Republican Party, and the Trumpers (not the freetrader/conservative/capitalists) are winning. Impeachment II probably won't result in a conviction, but the managers are using it to pound away at the fissure in the Republican Party. The best thing they (Senate Republicans) can do is convict this fool, take their lumps in midterms in 2022, and try to win it back in 2024. But they won't. And that's fine with me.

If it was pre-planned, and Trump said stand down (or stand by), do you really think we'd be here? Objectively speaking, I don't. There was a plan -- probably multiple plans, actually -- he encouraged it, and we all saw the result. The Big Lie and the failure to prove the Big Lie left us in a spot where violence was the only solution for those who wanted Trump to stay in power despite the election results.

That's nice to dredge up Russia. But that's not the issue here. And let's not play games on intent, either. Rarely, RARELY, is there direct evidence of intent. It's measured by, and inferred from, actions, because criminals generally don't announce intent before committing a crime. E.g., putting a gun to someone's head and pulling the trigger (and firing) is evidence of intent to kill and sufficient to convict of intentional murder (assuming death) even if the assailant doesn't speak his or her goal of killing the victim.

The weight of the enormous quantum of powerful circumstantial evidence that points to Trump as the catalyst for the MAGA raid on the Capitol. The timeline, in particular, supports the contention that the President's words on January 6 deliberately directed the mob to violently converge upon the Capitol. Next, I'm sure, we're going to hear about how Trump didn't immediately to stop the mob and to protect our seat of government. Maybe a couple of tidbits about how he enjoyed it, too. The slaughter is on. Madeleine Dean was friggin outstanding. Can't fake that emotion.

I'm pretty impressed with this presentation. The first impeachment trial . . . not as much. That was a different animal, though. This one is dynamite. I assume they're going to wrap it up with the point that intent is typically a circumstantial thing in the criminal realm--rarely does a criminal announce his or her intent, and it has to be inferred from the actions of the accused. They are just hammering that point today.

You hit it on the head. In a perverse way, leaving the political parties actually strengthens the two-party system. Those people who want to be "independent" (or blank, in political parlance) are just going to get more of the same.

I'm listening to today's proceedings, and this thing is a slaughter. A straight slaughter. I'll be surprised if there's a conviction, but the managers are creaming the Trump and his senatorial followers in the court of public opinion.

Tell that to the family of the officer who was killed. I suspect their view is a bit different from yours. Then again, HCQ can increase the risk of dementia, so maybe that explains your forgetfulness as to the violence of the mob that overran the Capitol.

The guy who's arguing now is another link in the clown chain. Whining about inability to investigate. But no specifics as to how the investigation was hampered. Blah blah blah. I don't miss the Trump clown show at all.

Unfortunately the MyPillow guy gets more run than me. I'm not sure if that says something about Newsmax, the MyPillow guy, or me. Maybe all of us.

OMG these guys are awful. I'm listening to it. Droning on and on. No point to the arguments. Then we flip to this clown who plays the victim card. And no defense on the merits - jurisdiction, victimization, politics, cancellation, etc. What a joke. Trump could stand up and say this is wrong. He could apologize. But he won't. Because he's a wimp. And guilty.

Smaller TV markets, general fatigue, Brady fatigue, and a very, very unlikable Chiefs team. Mahomes is OK, but Kelce is annoying, Jones plays like a d-bag, Reid apparently lets d-bags run amok there, and Hill is beyond a d-bag.

Whatever it is that you tried to say was presented through gibberish. I don't pretend to understand gibberish. If you can articulate your thoughts clearly, then we can have a conversation.

Are you talking about the guy who killed the Capitol Police officer? Probably not. I wonder if Trump has called the family of that hero. Probably not there, too. Too busy brushing his teeth with HCQ, trying to harness the magic necessary to make COVID-19 disappear, and lamenting the power of the "fake news media." I gotta be honest. I kinda miss hearing from the guy every day. Each time I think I'm too inferior or stupid to do anything with my life, I could point to him and say if his tiny baby hands, limited intellect, and bloviation can get somewhere, then I can too. Kind of ironic that Antifa is a hoax and Trump Terror is a real thing. Sad and disgraceful, too.

Cool story bro. I checked. No democrat run cities in flames right recently. Unless we count DC. And we all know who started that one. Enjoy your fantasy land. How come he's not on Newsmax these days? The MyPillow guy got his tongue? I don't really like cancel culture - everyone makes mistakes. But some are unforgivable. I will joyfully cancel each and every d-bag who participated in the Capitol uprising.

I'd like to substantively respond, but this post is gibberish. I don't have the ability to meaningfully respond to such things.