Trump has been removed from the Colorado ballot (but not really)

[Deleted member 365]

I'm talking about Trump telling the mob to fight. Trump's plan all along was to get the mob to come to Washington and send them over to the Capitol. It's the plan a 6th grade class president would draw up to get the third graders to do his bidding. Trump is a brilliant 6th-grader and his flock are really dumb third-graders.

THIS

 

[str8line]

Wondering if people like Ivana Trump and Melania Trump poisoned the blood of America. I'm thinking if anyone could poison the blood of our country it would be those who add more Trump blood.

 

[olden_undercover]

ok, so show me these text messages you're so sure exist.

Read: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/interior-watchdog-january-6-report_n_658081d0e4b036ecab461422#

...but I kinda know how you're going to reply to this, and you're totally right that I'm invested in this narrative and believe what's been reported here like a stupid sheep. So. My bad.

I'm just curious, though, what you think all of this does signify. I mean, you're comfortably stating what January 6th was not. And that's fine. What was it, though? What was the text message described in this article between the rally organizer and Mike Lindell-- just two doofuses making up complete fiction? Just a lefty newspaper citing something out of context? C'mon. There was intent behind it, and that intent was informed by something/-one, and what happened in consequence is eerily aligned with the rhetoric coming straight from the top. We may never get a recording or a transcript of Trump stating "March to the Capitol and attack members of Congress in a violent manner in order to sabotage the election, and then I will appear on national television and state 'THIS IS A COUP, EVERYONE! And then I'll drag Joe Biden and our political enemies into the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot all of them.'". But there was never a need for it. The right-wing extremist groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers inferred very well what to do-- and had direct affiliation with people in Trump's inner circle, by the way, and were collaborating between groups before showing up-- when Trump said things like "Stand back and stand by," and invited them to join him at the Ellipse rally because it was going to "be wild". What the hell do you think that rhetoric meant to groups like that? Because I can promise you "stand by" was not interpreted as "make some cookies and work on your New Years resolutions". This wasn't a blowhard accidentally riling people up; he knew what he was doing, and he did largely by proxy, and it could not be more clear to anyone willing to look at it honestly. It's dishonest to excuse it as anything but. That's like saying "Well, I know we have a can of gas sitting in the summer sun over there, and over here we have a lighted blowtorch, and then there's this giant fan, and also this loyal pile of extremely dry wood, but I can't control what happens when they get together, which I believe they have the right to do, by the way, and I think they're all very special and should join me at a rally". It's silly and so disingenuous.

But anyway. How about that Hunter Biden mess, huh? Joe Biden; so corrupt. Probably.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Read: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/interior-watchdog-january-6-report_n_658081d0e4b036ecab461422#

...but I kinda know how you're going to reply to this, and you're totally right that I'm invested in this narrative and believe what's been reported here like a stupid sheep. So. My bad.

I'm just curious, though, what you think all of this does signify. I mean, you're comfortably stating what January 6th was not. And that's fine. What was it, though? What was the text message described in this article between the rally organizer and Mike Lindell-- just two doofuses making up complete fiction? Just a lefty newspaper citing something out of context? C'mon. There was intent behind it, and that intent was informed by something/-one, and what happened in consequence is eerily aligned with the rhetoric coming straight from the top. We may never get a recording or a transcript of Trump stating "March to the Capitol and attack members of Congress in a violent manner in order to sabotage the election, and then I will appear on national television and state 'THIS IS A COUP, EVERYONE! And then I'll drag Joe Biden and our political enemies into the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot all of them.'". But there was never a need for it. The right-wing extremist groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers inferred very well what to do-- and had direct affiliation with people in Trump's inner circle, by the way, and were collaborating between groups before showing up-- when Trump said things like "Stand back and stand by," and invited them to join him at the Ellipse rally because it was going to "be wild". What the hell do you think that rhetoric meant to groups like that? Because I can promise you "stand by" was not interpreted as "make some cookies and work on your New Years resolutions". This wasn't a blowhard accidentally riling people up; he knew what he was doing, and he did largely by proxy, and it could not be more clear to anyone willing to look at it honestly. It's dishonest to excuse it as anything but. That's like saying "Well, I know we have a can of gas sitting in the summer sun over there, and over here we have a lighted blowtorch, and then there's this giant fan, and also this loyal pile of extremely dry wood, but I can't control what happens when they get together, which I believe they have the right to do, by the way, and I think they're all very special and should join me at a rally". It's silly and so disingenuous.

But anyway. How about that Hunter Biden mess, huh? Joe Biden; so corrupt. Probably.

I agree with all of this. The question is will a judge or jury determine beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump willfully and knowingly caused an insurrection? Seems like there is more than enough evidence to have a strong argument. The fighting language in his speech is not enough, but if you have enough credible witnesses from his team, etc., that can point to their intent from words, actions, etc., it may be enough. Once all the facts are laid out in court, we will see. I truly hope he is convicted.

 

[fishonjazz]

I sure. I'll take that because Trump did tell the people listening to him to go there and that they had to fight or they wouldn't have a country anymore. So yeah. Just like what fishonjazz said. The truth.

He also compared them to boxers. What do boxers do? Fight
He said they are like boxers fighting with both hands behind their backs (gotta make them feel like victims of course)

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[fishonjazz]

Read: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/interior-watchdog-january-6-report_n_658081d0e4b036ecab461422#

...but I kinda know how you're going to reply to this, and you're totally right that I'm invested in this narrative and believe what's been reported here like a stupid sheep. So. My bad.

I'm just curious, though, what you think all of this does signify. I mean, you're comfortably stating what January 6th was not. And that's fine. What was it, though? What was the text message described in this article between the rally organizer and Mike Lindell-- just two doofuses making up complete fiction? Just a lefty newspaper citing something out of context? C'mon. There was intent behind it, and that intent was informed by something/-one, and what happened in consequence is eerily aligned with the rhetoric coming straight from the top. We may never get a recording or a transcript of Trump stating "March to the Capitol and attack members of Congress in a violent manner in order to sabotage the election, and then I will appear on national television and state 'THIS IS A COUP, EVERYONE! And then I'll drag Joe Biden and our political enemies into the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot all of them.'". But there was never a need for it. The right-wing extremist groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers inferred very well what to do-- and had direct affiliation with people in Trump's inner circle, by the way, and were collaborating between groups before showing up-- when Trump said things like "Stand back and stand by," and invited them to join him at the Ellipse rally because it was going to "be wild". What the hell do you think that rhetoric meant to groups like that? Because I can promise you "stand by" was not interpreted as "make some cookies and work on your New Years resolutions". This wasn't a blowhard accidentally riling people up; he knew what he was doing, and he did largely by proxy, and it could not be more clear to anyone willing to look at it honestly. It's dishonest to excuse it as anything but. That's like saying "Well, I know we have a can of gas sitting in the summer sun over there, and over here we have a lighted blowtorch, and then there's this giant fan, and also this loyal pile of extremely dry wood, but I can't control what happens when they get together, which I believe they have the right to do, by the way, and I think they're all very special and should join me at a rally". It's silly and so disingenuous.

But anyway. How about that Hunter Biden mess, huh? Joe Biden; so corrupt. Probably.

That's a fantastic post.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[str8line]

View: https://twitter.com/YouGovAmerica/status/1737557485110632925?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1737557485110632925%7Ctwgr%5E5dd5eb31af8a7aadb4de47804b0c94dbeebc31de%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newsweek.com%2Ftrump-colorado-supreme-court-ballot-disqualification-polling-1854359

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I'm just curious, though, what you think all of this does signify. I mean, you're comfortably stating what January 6th was not. And that's fine. What was it, though?

I appreciate the manner in which you have framed your question.

The events of January 6 were at minimum a riot, and could be argued to be insurrection. I’d even agree that Trump was the primary driver of the political climate in which the events happened, but I’ve seen no evidence that he planned it, and it certainly isn’t for lack of looking by those who want to take him down. If even you, as someone who has admitted to being invested in the narrative, needs to rely on what you perceive as insinuations or text messages from the ‘My Pillow’ guy for your proof then the proof isn’t there.

However, all of that is less important right now than the appearance of the system of justice being weaponized against half the country. I simply do not believe everyone had to wait 3 years to start these prosecutions. When Jack Smith decided to go straight to the Supreme Court so he could get the decision in time for the election, why didn’t Jack Smith start the case 2 years ago? All of us know the proceedings are being timed to have decisions coincide with the election, which means the side opposing Trump is making a show of their control over that process. The system and process is owned by a political side.

The decision by the Colorado State Supreme Court simply upped the ante in messaging. Not only can trials be arranged around maximizing political impact, but they can even refuse to let the leading opposition candidate on the ballot at all. It is shocking to me how many people are blind to how this can badly spiral out of control.

 

[Sardines]

I appreciate the manner in which you have framed your question.

The events of January 6 were at minimum a riot, and could be argued to be insurrection. I’d even agree that Trump was the primary driver of the political climate in which the events happened, but I’ve seen no evidence that he planned it, and it certainly isn’t for lack of looking by those who want to take him down. If even you, as someone who has admitted to being invested in the narrative, needs to rely on what you perceive as insinuations or text messages from the ‘My Pillow’ guy for your proof then the proof isn’t there.

However, all of that is less important right now than the appearance of the system of justice being weaponized against half the country. I simply do not believe everyone had to wait 3 years to start these prosecutions. When Jack Smith decided to go straight to the Supreme Court so he could get the decision in time for the election, why didn’t Jack Smith start the case 2 years ago? All of us know the proceedings are being timed to have decisions coincide with the election, which means the side opposing Trump is making a show of their control over that process. The system and process is owned by a political side.

The decision by the Colorado State Supreme Court simply upped the ante in messaging. Not only can trials be arranged around maximizing political impact, but they can even refuse to let the leading opposition candidate on the ballot at all. It is shocking to me how many people are blind to how this can badly spiral out of control.

So if people at at Trumps side communicated with the groups that promoted the "event" and got people to show up expecting to keep Trump in power and then Trump played his role in that plan by first priming the pump then delivering the ultimatum moments before the insurrection happened you'd call that not Trump not being directly responsible for what happened?

I mean this is basic RICO ****. Trump's direct reports carried out his wishes to stay in power, the next tier lower received the message and took direct action to further the objective. Trump gave them encouragement to follow the plan to achieve the objective before the ultimate event, and then gave a veiled order to initiate the plan. The plan was then initiated. Trump failed to take the actions of a reasonable person acting in good faith to stop those criminal actions. Once it was clear the ultimate objective was not achievable Trump gave the abort mission message and things started to settle down.

This is classic RICO **** man.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

So if people at at Trumps side communicated with the groups that promoted...

You say there was someone standing near Trump who talked about an event which is like different people violating a different law? Why didn't you say so? That changes everything!

 

[Sardines]

You say there was someone standing near Trump who talked about an event which is like violating a different law? Why didn't you say so? That changes everything!

RICO look it up

Organized crime has been playing these games for more than 100 years and the U.S. justice system has defined a way to hold them accountable

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Organized crime has been playing these games for more than 100 years and the U.S. justice system has defined a way to hold them accountable

Now you are claiming that organized crime has being doing insurrection for more than 100 years? Or are you playing so loose that you completely forgot that was what you were trying to tie Trump to?