Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Jul 28 2021 02:47pm)
I said he's a threat to Democracy, and that he was the inciting incident to the riots on the 6th. Trump actively undermined trust in the electoral process by fabricating his claims of electoral fraud, and inciting violence against those involved in the electoral process. The fact that the rioters came directly from his rally is testament to that. Whether you want to classify it as "an attempted overthrow of government" is immaterial. You're just using that so you can hide from the discussion. "Oh, it's not sedition, so I don't have to think about how the president actively undermined trust in institutions which culminated in an attack on the certification of the process coming directly from his rally".
Ask yourself real quick, let's assume I'm wrong and we don't have reports he was talked down from a coup. Do you think the top military commanders only fearing a coup attempt is something normal? Do you think that proves your point at all? Do you think it doesn't still totally support what I just said?
Be honest with yourself for once. Stop trying to hide behind technicalities and get real, and deal with the fact that you supported a person who did all the things he did.
I am explicitly not doing this. I am saying that you cannot call something an "insurrection" unless it was in fact a violent uprising against the government. You cannot conflate Trump's actions with those of the rioters. If what Trump did amounts to attempted insurrection, then fine, call Trump an insurrectionist. But the question here is whether the January 6th rioters, acting on their own, were attempting to overthrow the government of the United States.
Of course it's not normal, but that doesn't make it true. Some of our top congressional leaders feared that Trump was an actual Russian mole, and that was a pretty dumb thing to believe in hindsight. So no, it is not sufficient to say that "Milley feared..." is somehow in the same realm or just as bad as Trump having actively planned a coup. The latter is orders of magnitude worse.
Quote (thesnipa @ Jul 28 2021 02:51pm)
you're strawmanning. i havent heard anyone say "this committee is needed because Jan 6th was as serious as 9-11". nor would that bar need be met to support the committee. 9-11 is just the more recent example to let people know these committees aren't unprecedented.
to be clear i dont care about the committee, i dont think it will solve anything, and its a waste of taxpayer funds. but that doesnt make calling people who came in with zipties to kidnap senators insurrectionists incorrect, or even hyperbolic, even if they dont get charged. and backchannel radio analysis has shown the militias most intent on actually fucking with the democratic process were the ones fanning the flames of the protest and leading a much larger group of mostly vanilla MAGA types in so they could use the crowd as cover.
putting that together we have actual insurrectionist leading a mob into the capital building to stop the voting in of the next president, and we have idiots taking issue with politicians using the word insurrection. because they're idiots.
Adam Schiff has made that comparison directly, as have a host of other journalists and correspondents.
Can you show me credible reports of people actively bringing zip ties into the Capitol? I keep reading this.
https://www.insider.com/zip-tie-guy-capitol-riot-plastic-handcuffs-police-prosecutors-2021-1Taking zip ties off of an officer might be a crime, but his ostensible reason, to prevent it from being used on rioters, is obviously very different from an attempt to kidnap senators.
I think there should be an investigation of January 6th, not the least because we should understand what sort of involvement militias and other organized groups might have had. But it certainly shouldn't be congressional, not only because public trust in Congress is nonexistent, but because it will inevitably devolve into the sort of political circus we're witnessing today.
This post was edited by bogie160 on Jul 28 2021 01:28pm