Trump Impeachment 2.0

[Buffarukus]

19 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

This is just false equivalency.

 

We have had riots throughout our country's history. They are unfortunate, and civil laws are broken and those caught are punished.

 

What we have not had in 200 years of our history (before Trump and his non-stop lies took office) is citizens storming into our Congress and attempting to subvert/overthrow our government in the performance of its duties. To put the seriousness of the crime in perspective for those so-called "patriots". The last time our capital was overrun and ransacked was in the war of 1812 with the British.

 

What they did is not comparable to an LA riot, or the Newark riots, or the Atlanta riots. What they did broke several federal statutes that I have already posted previously in this thread. And either you believe Trump is a complete moron and was unaware of what could happen when he whipped up his crowd of MAGA drones and said they needed to march on Congress and only through strength can they force a change, or he was complicit in trying to subvert and overthrow our government in its Constitutional duties to certify the electoral votes.

 

And those that try to say that he jumped all over the riot to try to defuse it, you probably should take a better look at the timeline of events that better aligns with everything his aids have said since about him watching the riots on TV with rapt attention and only calling for calm after being told that he may be found liable for what they were doing.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/riots-and-the-us-capitol-overrun-the-day-that-shook-america-1.4452731

 

He was complicit, and how incredibly irresponsible and insanely selfish. One of the things that separates the United States from 3rd world countries and their dictators is our history of peaceful transition of our Presidency. Sure you can have legal arguments, procedural arguments, but no President before Trump has done something so terrible and embarrassing to this country. He has not made America great again, he has divided and weakened us and made us vulnerable in the eyes of our allies and enemies around the world.

 

He is simply the worst president in our nation's history.

 

 

 

How you cede power with grace in our great nation - brought to you by Vice President Biden when Trump won his election:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4642251/user-clip-it-over-joe-biden-dismisses-electoral-college-challenge&fbclid=IwAR1wrQlIY9FSXbnVKRChlo5mK0Gw9S6jUPRVad5s6d4FC149CNXzUwfxaHk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

somehow me saying violence is violence and any leader that was complicit should be held accountable is a false equivalence? 

 

your trying very hard to disassociate from it through a few different methods. first you want to talk about its use in history. well civil rights violence has happened alot in history so its different. then you want to talk about outcome.

 

history

so how long has it been since a federal court has been burned to the ground with people in it? people were in that building during numerous attempts this summer. doors blockaded while trying. police station also were barricaded and attempted arson, buisnesses looted and destroyed, people attacked, murders ive stated. its all happened before..recently, so its false equivalence when it also happens in the capital because of outcome, i guess.

 

outcome

the outcome of the violence was the same. the people involved were just as scared as any congressional leader who are given full uninterrupted recounts for all stations to tell. the truth is thier families were just as nervous they would not see thier loved ones, they were just as terrified as anyone put in that position but that terror is different according to WideNine.

 

so the storming the capital would [subverted democracy,  that makes it different!] (im paraphrasing)

 

burning people alive in a federal courthouse subverts justice! yes? no? lots of evidence and case files in that building..the outcome? who knows. convicts going free? pedophiles, murders ect ect. destroying small buisness, attacking people, looting helps the goal of police brutality how? martin luther king and many other great leaders had alot to say on the topic, please dont think any of that was neccessary.  so when it comes to democracy you have a standard we all should have. but yours changes for other violence, mine doesn't. both are wrong.

 

lots of anger for trump any left for ted wheeler?..a mayor who stood at the front of the gates WITH the rioters to destroy that fed building? any punishment neccessary for the democrats that not only ignored antifa but called them a myth that contributed to a man being stalked and shot in portland? any justice for BLM leaders that advocated looting after violence was done while in its act? any anger towards leaders that villianized police? that led to them being ambushed and killed? no? no jailtime for mayor durkin who allowed armed "protestors" to take over blocks of her city and police station in "a summer of love" that directly lead to a murder of a young teenager?  

 

a set standards only for a president? only for his words. only cause you dont agree with it. you do know every person in that building is being charged correct so your held accountable statement goes both ways. which it should...if that goes both ways so should your advocation for our president to all complicit leaders. accountability for being complicit in violence should not be based on political affiliation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[Backintheday544]

First odds I’ve seen on will Trump be convicted:

 

United Kingdom-based Betfair sportsbook.

No is a -303 favorite. Yes is a +200 underdog.

 

 

[WideNine]

31 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

 

somehow me saying violence is violence and any leader that was complicit should be held accountable is a false equivalence? 

 

your trying very hard to disassociate from it through a few different methods. first you want to talk about its use in history. well civil rights violence has happened alot in history so its different. then you want to talk about outcome.

 

history

so how long has it been since a federal court has been burned to the ground with people in it? people were in that building during numerous attempts this summer. doors blockaded while trying. police station also were barricaded and attempted arson, buisnesses looted and destroyed, people attacked, murders ive stated. its all happened before..recently, so its false equivalence when it also happens in the capital because of outcome, i guess.

 

outcome

the outcome of the violence was the same. the people involved were just as scared as any congressional leader who are given full uninterrupted recounts for all stations to tell. the truth is thier families were just as nervous they would not see thier loved ones, they were just as terrified as anyone put in that position but that terror is different according to WideNine.

 

so the storming the capital would [subverted democracy,  that makes it different!] (im paraphrasing)

 

burning people alive in a federal courthouse subverts justice! yes? no? lots of evidence and case files in that building..the outcome? who knows. convicts going free? pedophiles, murders ect ect. destroying small buisness, attacking people, looting helps the goal of police brutality how? martin luther king and many other great leaders had alot to say on the topic, please dont think any of that was neccessary.  so when it comes to democracy you have a standard we all should have. but yours changes for other violence, mine doesn't. both are wrong.

 

lots of anger for trump any left for ted wheeler?..a mayor who stood at the front of the gates WITH the rioters to destroy that fed building? any punishment neccessary for the democrats that not only ignored antifa but called them a myth that contributed to a man being stalked and shot in portland? any justice for BLM leaders that advocated looting after violence was done while in its act? any anger towards leaders that villianized police? that led to them being ambushed and killed? no? no jailtime for mayor durkin who allowed armed "protestors" to take over blocks of her city and police station in "a summer of love" that directly lead to a murder of a young teenager?  

 

a set standards only for a president? only for his words. only cause you dont agree with it. you do know every person in that building is being charged correct so your held accountable statement goes both ways. which it should...if that goes both ways so should your advocation for our president to all complicit leaders. accountability for being complicit in violence should not be based on political affiliation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes.

 

What I am saying is that violence random vs violent insurrection are different in both historical context and legal context.

 

And the (assuming) Portland references are weak seeing as I have been there several times this past year and know that they are weak from a 1st hand take rather than a Fox News take.

 

No federal buildings were occupied, just a lot of posturing nonsense around the perimeter. Any that did trespass on the property DHS was obligated to process for trespassing.

 

A state federal building is not Congress.

 

Now they did have an incident where armed right-wing protesters were let into their state capital building by a GOP representative and that is under investigation I believe.

 

Seems to be a GOP trend to undermine democracy.

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/12/oregon-capitol-riot-mike-nearman/

 

 

Edited January 19, 2021 by WideNine

[Buffarukus]

4 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Yes.

 

What I am saying is that violence random vs violent insurrection are different in both historical context and legal context.

 

And the (assuming) Portland references are weak seeing as I have been there several times this past year and know that they are weak from a 1st hand take rather than a Fox News take.

 

No federal buildings were occupied, just a lot of posturing nonsense around the perimeter. Any that did trespass on the property DHS was obligated to process for trespassing.

 

A state federal building is not Congress.

 

Now they did have an incident where armed right-wing protesters were let into their state capital building by a GOP representative and that is under investigation I believe.

 

Seems to be a GOP trend to undermine democracy.

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/12/oregon-capitol-riot-mike-nearman/

 

 

 

im just not getting your point. your still saying one type of violence is different then another only you want to call it "random" 

 

lets look at seattle. protesters overtook a police dept. police were ordered to vacate and leave the building. later a group takes over city blocks, again no issue. cops told to stand down. multiple people shot and protestors block police assistance and medical help. still random? armed men take over and more and more violence erupts until...a young teenager and his friend were shot. this time killed. this isnt random and if you call for protest that lead to violence and use terms like "get in their face" and have media talking about mostly peaceful or "where does it say protest should be peaceful?" i could go on and on...it shown a history and outcome yet under the guise of social justice they complicitly called for it and deserve the exact same justice you want to give to another leader who called for "wild" protests and said the exact same rhetoric.

 

you dont have to prove right wing violence is bad. your stuck arguing that I AGREE! you should as well. hold them ALL accountable!

Edited January 20, 2021 by Buffarukus

[WideNine]

3 hours ago, Buffarukus said:

 

im just not getting your point. your still saying one type of violence is different then another only you want to call it "random" 

 

lets look at seattle. protesters overtook a police dept. police were ordered to vacate and leave the building. later a group takes over city blocks, again no issue. cops told to stand down. multiple people shot and protestors block police assistance and medical help. still random? armed men take over and more and more violence erupts until...a young teenager and his friend were shot. this time killed. this isnt random and if you call for protest that lead to violence and use terms like "get in their face" and have media talking about mostly peaceful or "where does it say protest should be peaceful?" i could go on and on...it shown a history and outcome yet under the guise of social justice they complicitly called for it and deserve the exact same justice you want to give to another leader who called for "wild" protests and said the exact same rhetoric.

 

OK....

 

Let's start with the basics. Yes, anyone can draw equivalencies such as breaking a window and entering is breaking and entering whether it is a window in an old store in a one-light town, or breaking a window in a Congressional building while Congress is in session. The same dumbing-down argument can be used comparing similar acts of violence.

 

This is a poor-man's attempt at sophistry because they are not the same in regards to this nation's laws and how they are prosecuted, which seems to baffle the whining MAGA masses.

 

I would start by reading about the differences between civil criminal code vs. federal codes governing something like riots for instance. Once you get through those differences we can work our way up to the other federal laws that are broken when you riot and storm into our US Congress as compared to something done within the jurisdiction of a state as would be the case in Seattle, WA.

 

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/rioting-and-inciting-riots.html

 

 

Yes, they are different.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by WideNine

[Buffarukus]

3 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

OK....

 

Let's start with the basics. Yes, anyone can draw equivalencies such as breaking a window and entering is breaking and entering whether it is a window in an old store in a one-light town, or breaking a window in a Congressional building while Congress is in session. The same dumbing-down argument can be used comparing similar acts of violence.

 

This is a poor-man's attempt at sophistry because they are not the same in regards to this nation's laws and how they are prosecuted, which seems to baffle the whining MAGA masses.

 

I would start by reading about the differences between civil criminal code vs. federal codes governing something like riots for instance. Once you get through those differences we can work our way up to the other federal laws that are broken when you riot and storm into our US Congress as compared to something done within the jurisdiction of a state as would be the case in Seattle, WA.

 

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/rioting-and-inciting-riots.html

 

 

Yes, they are different.

 

 

 

 

 

all i can do is shake my head and rub my eyes. you just don't want to see what I'm saying. your so locked in to your bias that you can't do the simple task of holding those leaders that are responsible accountable. its a sad state when you diminish ordinary peoples pain and suffering on the absurd basis of it being a "dumbing down argument"

 

so breaking a window on a small buisness owners or somones home is different then breaking the most hollowed windows of congress. whatever you say. threatening a life is much more important if your a elected official then a innocent bystander. good point? its no wonder we live under differing  sets of laws for the rich and privlaged. people actually advocate on their behalf of them. 

 

sorry,thats a world i will never live in. the life of the police officer killed in the capital is worth the EXACT same as the life of secoria turner. i dont care what plot of land or building it occured. 

 

but since its all about federal.

 

 attempting to burn down st johns church. https://www.kens5.com/mobile/article/news/st-johns-church-washington-dc-george-floyd-protest/65-6dc44732-8560-4179-91ca-0ad56b96e0c9

 

yes? no? broken window?

 

the federal building in portland repeatedly attacked...as stated. but you say "all was well". you vacationed there. well not so much for  Aaron J. Danielson. stalked and shot by someone who declared themselves 100% antifa. 

 

speaking of which.

 

maybe you need to see what social justice that antifa was fighting for because it certainly wasnt for black lives.

 

 

 

but yet holding the leaders accountable who led the rioters to the gate of the FEDRAL BUILDING "is different".  elected leaders saying antifa is a myth and brushing the riots off "not the same as trump". nothing like sabotaging a meaningful movement...javing innocent people killed and then letting those who advocated for it off the hook. your doing well. 

 

i dont need to read anything to see that both left and right wing violence is destroying this country. i dont need anything to say trump is as responsible as ted wheeler and ALOT of others regardless of politics.

 

do what you need to do, read what you need to read and tell yourself whatever you need to justify these actions and only condemn who you disagree with politically. my moral compass is straight and doesn't veer off in the way yours does with any alignments or jurisdiction they fall.

 

i tried my best but i don't think there is much else to "prove".  saying we need to hold people accountable for instigating and advocating violence i thought was just universal understanding. i guess i was wrong. if your willing to do that for violence theres no telling what else you will look the other way for. 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Buffarukus

[Warcodered]

4 hours ago, Buffarukus said:

i tried my best but i don't think there is much else to "prove".  saying we need to hold people accountable for instigating and advocating violence i thought was just universal understanding. i guess i was wrong. if your willing to do that for violence theres no telling what else you will look the other way for. 

Why don't you actually say who's doing this because I don't remember anyone actually advocating for violence.

 

Besides that the two things you're comparing are so very different. The protests and the violence that came around them from the tension of the situation and some people taking advantage were not created by elected officials. They pretty much become a sad repeating cycle that's been happening over the years though this year seemed worse with people being frustrated that nothing seems to change.

 

What happened at the capital was created by the disinformation being spread by elected officials and right wing media groups feeding into peoples delusion that this was a rigged election. I mean even the people that didn't go into the building aren't without blame as they were there spreading and reinforcing that same delusion. The assault on the capital wasn't some fringe effect from the protest but an inevitable culmination in what it was about.

[Buffarukus]

4 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Why don't you actually say who's doing this because I don't remember anyone actually advocating for violence.

 

Besides that the two things you're comparing are so very different. The protests and the violence that came around them from the tension of the situation and some people taking advantage were not created by elected officials. They pretty much become a sad repeating cycle that's been happening over the years though this year seemed worse with people being frustrated that nothing seems to change.

 

What happened at the capital was created by the disinformation being spread by elected officials and right wing media groups feeding into peoples delusion that this was a rigged election. I mean even the people that didn't go into the building aren't without blame as they were there spreading and reinforcing that same delusion. The assault on the capital wasn't some fringe effect from the protest but an inevitable culmination in what it was about.

 

this is disingenuous. i litterally named ted wheeler. told you how he stood at the federal courthouse gates in solidarity with antifa. showed A VIDEO of how black people thought storming a federal building was derailing the message, you know, where ted wheeler was . have said how democratic leaders ignored antifa claiming they are a myth. 

 

 

https://nypost.com/2020/07/27/jerry-nadler-calls-violence-from-antifa-in-portland-a-myth/

 

 

gave the name of the unarmed man shot by them after they were repeatedly allowed to gather and ignored. repeatedly advertised on twitter, which was never removed after repeated nights of violence.

 

but why wont i name anyone!!! its different!! only one was disinformation!! these are random!! it happened blocks away from the widespread looting!!

 

like i said im done "proving".  no matter what i say or how i say it there will always be a excuse for your side and condemnation for the other. i explained my point as best i can. now im just reiterating and repeating. plenty of info to look into..before its removed but your not interested in it. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Buffarukus

[WEATHER DOT COM]

I missed Ted Wheeler's speech that incited the riots in Portland. Can someone post the video?

[Buffarukus]

1 minute ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

I missed Ted Wheeler's speech that incited the riots in Portland. Can someone post the video?

 

lol yeah. you "missed" when he went up to the gate in solidarity after weeks of "protests"

 

lets play that game.

where did trump call for direct violence? i missed it.

 

 

[WEATHER DOT COM]

1 minute ago, Buffarukus said:

lol yeah. you "missed" when he went up to the gate in solidarity after weeks of "protests"

 

There were weeks of legitimate protest, though. What's wrong with that?

[Buffarukus]

3 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

There were weeks of legitimate protest, though. What's wrong with that?

you react but.. dont read.

 

edit:

actually ITS A VIDEO!! 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Buffarukus

[wnyguy]

2 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

There were weeks of legitimate protest, though. What's wrong with that?

Idiot

[WEATHER DOT COM]

2 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

you react but.. dont read.

 

Do you disagree with the right to protest? Should politicians not share those same rights?

 

I'd be interested in the video of Ted egging on the rioting and violence. 

7 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

where did trump call for direct violence?

 

Been doing it for months. Started in April with this.

 

[Buffarukus]

2 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

Do you disagree with the right to protest? Should politicians not share those same rights?

 

I'd be interested in the video of Ted egging on the rioting and violence. 

 

Been doing it for months. Started in April with this.

 

 

sigh...im not here to defend trump. thats not a call to violence. actually read all the posts i wrote if you want my stance. its like i have to rehash for every person that decides to chime in.

[WEATHER DOT COM]

2 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

thats not a call to violence.

 

lol

 

Have a nice day.

 

Not here to defend Trump but in a thread about his impeachment someone is here to blame the summer protests and Ted Wheeler

 

my word

[Buffarukus]

11 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

lol

 

Have a nice day.

 

Not here to defend Trump but in a thread about his impeachment someone is here to blame the summer protests and Ted Wheeler

 

my word

 

watch the video i posted where black people were against the attack. in your head try to figure out how attacking a federal courthouse helps social justice. watch the video of ted wheeler standing at said courthouse. when it comes together..get back at me.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Buffarukus

[WEATHER DOT COM]

Have a nice day

[WideNine]

14 hours ago, Buffarukus said:

 

all i can do is shake my head and rub my eyes. you just don't want to see what I'm saying. your so locked in to your bias that you can't do the simple task of holding those leaders that are responsible accountable. its a sad state when you diminish ordinary peoples pain and suffering on the absurd basis of it being a "dumbing down argument"

 

so breaking a window on a small buisness owners or somones home is different then breaking the most hollowed windows of congress. whatever you say. threatening a life is much more important if your a elected official then a innocent bystander. good point? its no wonder we live under differing  sets of laws for the rich and privlaged. people actually advocate on their behalf of them. 

 

sorry,thats a world i will never live in. the life of the police officer killed in the capital is worth the EXACT same as the life of secoria turner. i dont care what plot of land or building it occured. 

 

but since its all about federal.

 

 attempting to burn down st johns church. https://www.kens5.com/mobile/article/news/st-johns-church-washington-dc-george-floyd-protest/65-6dc44732-8560-4179-91ca-0ad56b96e0c9

 

yes? no? broken window?

 

the federal building in portland repeatedly attacked...as stated. but you say "all was well". you vacationed there. well not so much for  Aaron J. Danielson. stalked and shot by someone who declared themselves 100% antifa. 

 

speaking of which.

 

maybe you need to see what social justice that antifa was fighting for because it certainly wasnt for black lives.

 

 

 

but yet holding the leaders accountable who led the rioters to the gate of the FEDRAL BUILDING "is different".  elected leaders saying antifa is a myth and brushing the riots off "not the same as trump". nothing like sabotaging a meaningful movement...javing innocent people killed and then letting those who advocated for it off the hook. your doing well. 

 

i dont need to read anything to see that both left and right wing violence is destroying this country. i dont need anything to say trump is as responsible as ted wheeler and ALOT of others regardless of politics.

 

do what you need to do, read what you need to read and tell yourself whatever you need to justify these actions and only condemn who you disagree with politically. my moral compass is straight and doesn't veer off in the way yours does with any alignments or jurisdiction they fall.

 

i tried my best but i don't think there is much else to "prove".  saying we need to hold people accountable for instigating and advocating violence i thought was just universal understanding. i guess i was wrong. if your willing to do that for violence theres no telling what else you will look the other way for. 

 

 

 

You are right in that I was not reading through your entire post.

 

Guilty as charged.

 

My compromise is that all those that advocate and participate in riots and violence should be held accountable, but that the laws and jurisdictions dictate that there will be differences in how that accountability is assessed and legally remediated.

 

Also, the simple adage that two wrongs do not make a right.

 

You press Trump supporters and his followers, as well as GOP enablers regarding their role in an unprecedented insurrection and riot and rather than face and address that event they immediately go into the equivalency-mode of deflecting to riots events in cities across the US.

 

Each event has their own dynamics, accountability, and legal and moral liability. They likely also have different requirements to ensure they are prevented in the future.

 

That is why I continue to stand by my belief that it is a false equivalency.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by WideNine

[Buffarukus]

2 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

You are right in that I was not reading through your entire post.

 

Guilty as charged.

 

My compromise is that all those that advocate and participate in riots and violence should be held accountable, but that the laws and jurisdictions dictate that there will be differences in how that accountability is assessed and legally remediated.

 

Also, the simple adage that two wrongs do not make a right.

 

You press Trump supporters and his followers, as well as GOP enablers regarding their role in an unprecedented insurrection and riot and rather than face and address that event they immediately go into the equivalency-mode of deflecting to riots events in cities across the US.

 

Each event has their own dynamics, accountability, and legal and moral liability. They likely also have different requirements to ensure they are prevented in the future.

 

That is why I continue to stand by my belief that it is a false equivalency.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

two wrongs don't make a right. we agree. but two wrongs definitely make a wrong.

 

as long as you look at the situations without the force fed narratives or any internal bias, that's all i can ask for. 

 

that's a good compromise and a good start to end the polarization. ill give you credit for admitting to not fully reading my post and engaging in a conversation many others avoid. 

 

 

[reddogblitz]

On 1/20/2021 at 7:25 AM, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

Do you disagree with the right to protest? Should politicians not share those same rights?

 

I'd be interested in the video of Ted egging on the rioting and violence. 

 

Been doing it for months. Started in April with this.

 

 

AOC is also calling for violence.

 

Quote

"The only way our country is going to heal Is through the actual liberation of southern states."

 

https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-nation-only-heal-once-135815248.html

[Big Blitz]

6 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

AOC is also calling for violence.

 

 

https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-nation-only-heal-once-135815248.html

 

 

I remember when a bunch of people in this country got really upset when Trump talked about "liberating" states actually oppressed and on lockdown.  They even said the comments should be used again him in sham impeachment 2.0

 

Sounds like AOC is also calling for an insurrection of some sort but against what????  Whitey?  Definitely doesn't sound like "unity."

 

Does she even know what this statement her handlers gave her means?

[Motorin']

57 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

AOC is also calling for violence.

 

 

https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-nation-only-heal-once-135815248.html

 

Voting is violence! Voting is Violence! Voting is Violence! 

 

Trump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[daz28]

57 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I remember when a bunch of people in this country got really upset when Trump talked about "liberating" states actually oppressed and on lockdown.  They even said the comments should be used again him in sham impeachment 2.0

 

Sounds like AOC is also calling for an insurrection of some sort but against what????  Whitey?  Definitely doesn't sound like "unity."

 

Does she even know what this statement her handlers gave her means?

You obviously didn't even read/watch it.  She said she wants states to liberate like Georgia did.  By voting

[TBBills]

59 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I remember when a bunch of people in this country got really upset when Trump talked about "liberating" states actually oppressed and on lockdown.  They even said the comments should be used again him in sham impeachment 2.0

 

Sounds like AOC is also calling for an insurrection of some sort but against what????  Whitey?  Definitely doesn't sound like "unity."

 

Does she even know what this statement her handlers gave her means?

Did you even read the article?

 

I know the OP didn't.

Edited January 21, 2021 by TBBills

[daz28]

2 minutes ago, TBBills said:

Did you even read the article?

 

I know the OP didn't.

Nope, they did what most people who want things to be the truth do:  Read the headline, and start commenting

[Big Blitz]

48 minutes ago, daz28 said:

You obviously didn't even read/watch it.  She said she wants states to liberate like Georgia did.  By voting

 

 

She said the "Southern" states need to liberate themselves from Suppression.

 

How much more incendiary can you be?

 

It's not clear if she thinks North Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, or Kentucky have been "liberated" nor is it clear why she has a problem with "Southern" Red States.  

 

Can she define a red state?  Can she define Suppression?  

 

This is the most divisive rhetoric in the country.   

[WEATHER DOT COM]

12 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

This is the most divisive rhetoric in the country.   

 

[daz28]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

She said the "Southern" states need to liberate themselves from Suppression.

 

How much more incendiary can you be?

 

It's not clear if she thinks North Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, or Kentucky have been "liberated" nor is it clear why she has a problem with "Southern" Red States.  

 

Can she define a red state?  Can she define Suppression?  

 

This is the most divisive rhetoric in the country.   

She did explain all of that.  Maybe try watching/reading it, like I suggested.

[Orlando Tim]

10 minutes ago, daz28 said:

She did explain all of that.  Maybe try watching/reading it, like I suggested.

Trump stated in his speech on January 6th the March should be peaceful, so he is clear right?

[daz28]

Just now, Buffalo Timmy said:

Trump stated in his speech on January 6th the March should be peaceful, so he is clear right?

He also said that's what happens when you steal an election, and refused to stop it.  That is also clear

[Orlando Tim]

1 minute ago, daz28 said:

He also said that's what happens when you steal an election, and refused to stop it.  That is also clear

Are we taking the comments in full context or not- you seem to change the rules based on who said them.

[daz28]

Just now, Buffalo Timmy said:

Are we taking the comments in full context or not- you seem to change the rules based on who said them.

The only rule that changed is they closed Parler, and now more people are in here grasping at straws.  It's real simple, if you wanted peace, you'd have tried to restore it IMMEDIATELY.  Not to mention he took a constitutional oath to do so.

[Orlando Tim]

8 minutes ago, daz28 said:

The only rule that changed is they closed Parler, and now more people are in here grasping at straws.  It's real simple, if you wanted peace, you'd have tried to restore it IMMEDIATELY.  Not to mention he took a constitutional oath to do so.

You are aware that during the address on January 6th he said to protest peacefully at the capitol, right? Not just later on twitter, but during the speech were you are claiming he invited the riot by telling people to fight like hell. 

[daz28]

5 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

You are aware that during the address on January 6th he said to protest peacefully at the capitol, right? Not just later on twitter, but during the speech were you are claiming he invited the riot by telling people to fight like hell. 

I know what happened, you know what happened, and that's not gonna change by trying to shuffle words around on a message board, and shift blame to AOC.  It's called deflecting, and it's a horrible attempt, because AOC said red states need to be liberated "like Georgia was".  As we all know Georgia VOTED itself Blue.  

[SoTier]

5 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

AOC is also calling for violence.

 

 

https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-nation-only-heal-once-135815248.html

 

Nowhere in that piece did AOC call for violence.   The word "liberation" does NOT equate to "violence".

 

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

I know what happened, you know what happened, and that's not gonna change by trying to shuffle words around on a message board, and shift blame to AOC.  It's called deflecting, and it's a horrible attempt, because AOC said red states need to be liberated "like Georgia was".  As we all know Georgia VOTED itself Blue.  

 

AOC was talking about "liberating" working people from economic, social, and racial oppression.   That rhetoric is borrowed directly from various American social movements going back to at least the 1830s. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by SoTier

[ziltoid]

18 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Nowhere in that piece did AOC call for violence.   The word "liberation" does NOT equate to "violence".

 

 

AOC was talking about "liberating" working people from economic, social, and racial oppression.   That rhetoric is borrowed directly from various American social movements going back to at least the 1830s. 

Or the Cuban “social” movement of the 1950s. Perfectly peaceful and without any violence.

 

Either one.

[Tenhigh]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

Nowhere in that piece did AOC call for violence.   The word "liberation" does NOT equate to "violence".

 

 

AOC was talking about "liberating" working people from economic, social, and racial oppression.   That rhetoric is borrowed directly from various American social movements going back to at least the 1830s. 

I am sure it's my right leaning brain skewing what I hear, but when AOC talks about liberating people who are already free  I can help but think of Lenin and liberating the proletariat from the oppressive bourgeois. That's probably something I need to work on. 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Tenhigh

[SoTier]

1 minute ago, Tenhigh said:

I am sure it's my right leaning brain skewing what I hear, but when AOC talks about liberating people who are already free  I can help but think of Lenin and liberating the proletariat from the oppressive bourgeois. That's probably something I need to work on. ?:)

 

I think of abolitionism, the woman's rights movement, the labor movement, the civil rights and lgbt rights movements, but then I'm a retired leftist techie originally trained in American history.

[daz28]

10 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

I am sure it's my right leaning brain skewing what I hear, but when AOC talks about liberating people who are already free  I can help but think of Lenin and liberating the proletariat from the oppressive bourgeois. That's probably something I need to work on. 

Anything AOC says is always heard by Republicans in the "GET OUT" voice that a possessed house uses.  She could come up with the most brilliant idea, and they'd hear SOCIALIZM!