Right Wing Death Squad: Active duty Marine plotted to bomb DNC, murder blacks

[Faun]

The vice president is constitutionally required to be there.

So you are telling us that if pence didnt show up biden would not be president today?

Think carefully before answering

I'm not sure what would have happened but off the top of my head, I would guess Congress would have impeached him for not fulfilling his constitutional duties and either got him thrown out and replaced before the 20th so they could certify the election; or, if not convicted or replaced before the 20th, there would have been no president or vice president as of noon on the 20th, in which case, Nancy Pelosi would have become president.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This will be Rubberized shortly so read now if you dare.

‘Right-Wing Death Squad’: Active-Duty Marine Plotted to Bomb DNC, Murder Black People, Feds Say

The feds investigated USMC Private First Class Travis Owens for discussing the unrealized plan with two others, including one person tied to neo-Nazi group Atomwaffen.

www.thedailybeast.com

As it should be. I'm surprised they have internet in that padded room you're in, though.

 

[Mac-7]

The vice president is constitutionally required to be there.

So you are telling us that if pence didnt show up biden would not be president today?

Think carefully before answering

I'm not sure what would have happened but off the top of my head, I would guess Congress would have impeached him for not fulfilling his constitutional duties and either got him thrown out and replaced before the 20th so they could certify the election; or, if not convicted or replaced before the 20th, there would have been no president or vice president as of noon on the 20th, in which case, Nancy Pelosi would have become president.

That would have kept the dems out of mischef for a while
Actually I think pelosi would have sat in his chair

 

[Faun]

The vice president is constitutionally required to be there.

So you are telling us that if pence didnt show up biden would not be president today?

Think carefully before answering

I'm not sure what would have happened but off the top of my head, I would guess Congress would have impeached him for not fulfilling his constitutional duties and either got him thrown out and replaced before the 20th so they could certify the election; or, if not convicted or replaced before the 20th, there would have been no president or vice president as of noon on the 20th, in which case, Nancy Pelosi would have become president.

That would have kept the dems out of mischef for a while
Actually I think pelosi would have sat in his chair

I found this...

U.S. Senate: The Senate's President Pro Tempore

President Pro Tempore

www.senate.gov

The Constitution requires the Senate to elect a president pro tempore to serve as presiding officer in the absence of the vice president. The president pro tempore is authorized to preside over the Senate, sign legislation, and issue the oath of office to new senators.​

So Chuck Grassley would have filled in for Pence. Had Grassley also refused, I guess they might have kept looking for an appropriate replacement to proceed or what mentioned earlier might have occurred. Or they might have decided there was no candidate with a majority and then Congress would have picked the new president and vice president.

 

[hadit]

That's not happening and your post is a fine example of white victimhood.

You can’t target a black student for admission to a university for the sake of diversity without harming a white student who was denied admission

How do you know the black student wasn't more qualified than the white student or do you think being white automatically makes you right.

Standardized test scores.....black children are trapped in the worst public schools because the democrat party controls the teachers unions.......so their test scores are the worst of all the race groups in the U.S.......

Folks who are anti-black, white supremacists and racist, what party do they belong to? The Republican Party. Now these folks are the ones who love to lecture black folks about what Democrats are doing to us, but when you ask them what are Republicans doing all you hear are crickets. Since the 70s we see that black folks prosper better under Democrat presidents than we do Republican presidents. That is just facts.

There were more black folks employed during Trump's presidency than in the past 50 years.

Thats only because President Obama raised the rate for him.

If that was the case, he was smart enough to keep the trend going and go higher than Obama ever did, correct? IOW, hardly a racist because if he really was, he would have tried to set back progress, not boost it.

He had nothing to do with it until he fucked up on Covid which you know had the opposite affect and caused more unemployment. He was always begging for Black people to like him so he wasn't going to do anything to set that back until he was in his second term.

Oh, brother, have you ever drunk the Kool-Aid. Let's face reality. We could have 30 straight years of Republican led employment gains for black workers and you'd STILL reach as far back as you had to and find a democrat to credit. The reality is, no matter what TRUMP! was given, he kept it going and added to it, and that included black progress. As for his second term, which meeting were you lurking in, because that's not what anyone else heard.

Bullshit. Black people have always done worse under repubs the last 5 decades or so. Drumpf didnt keep anything going. He just didnt fuck it up until Covid hit.

So things were worse for black Americans under TRUMP! than under Obama? Are you really going with that?

In the last 30yrs statistics show that black folks do better under Democrat presidents than we do under Republican presidents. Economically, educationally, etc., why is that?

Then why were blacks doing better under Trump than Obama? And why are all dem controlled areas for blacks cesspools?

Black folks didn't do better under Trump, that is a lie that is repeated by lying Trump Humpers hoping black folks will fall for it. Tell me some great Republican controlled areas for black folks that are thriving.

Black unemployment was better under TRUMP! than Obama. By what objective measure are you claiming they weren't better off?

Black unemployment went from 7.4% to as low as 5.2% under Trump. A record low. That was only possible because Obama lowered black unemployment from its post recession high of 16.8% to 7.4%. A record low passed from one administration to the next. The average black unemployment rate passed to an incoming administration is 11.6%. Had Obama passed Trump 11.6% black unemployment, it wouldn't have gone as low as 5.2%.

Irrelevant to the point that it was better under TRUMP! than under Obama.

LOLOL

Uh, no, it's not irrelevant. Black unemployment had been falling for many years and continued under Trump.

​

It is when the assertion is that black Americans didn't do as well under TRUMP! as under Obama. This is one objective measure by which they did better.

Uh, no, they didn't if your comparison is how the did under Obama vs under Trump.

Under Obama, the black unemployment rate went from a post recession high of 16.8% to 7.4%. That's a 9.4 point drop or a 56% improvement. During that period of time, 43,671 jobs for African-Americans were added on average per month.

Under Trump, the black unemployment rate went from 7.4% to his lowest, 5.2%. That's a 2.2 point drop or a 30% improvement. During that period of time, 33,323 jobs for African-Americans were added on average per month.

You're measuring IMPROVEMENT, which is a valid measure, but is not the same as were they overall better off or not. So we're both right because we're talking about two different things.

They are 2 different ways of looking at it but measuring improvement is what impacts them the most. Case in point, had the unemployment rate under Trump only dropped from 7.4% to 7.3%, the difference would be negligible but you would still be saying they did better under Trump than Obama.

And I would be correct, but that's irrelevant to this case, because the difference is not that trivial.

Is an overweight person better off while they are losing 50 lbs or after they've lost 50 lbs then dropped another 20 lbs? To put it another way, would I, as a worker, be better off while the UE rate is dropping from 16.8% to 7.4%, or after it's dropped to 5.2%? I know you want to avoid giving TRUMP! any credit for anything if at all possible, but you have to admit that black unemployment was better under him than under Obama.

Great analogy -- it exposes why you're wrong. In your analogy, you point out someone is better off losing 70 pounds than 50 pounds. But "better off" wasn't what you said about Trump. You said blacks did better under Trump than they did under Obama and that's patently false. Far more blacks got jobs under Obama than under Trump. The black unemployment rate dropped far more under Obama than under Trump. Blacks did better under Obama than under Trump. Not to mention, Trump was handed an economy with an expanding job market. At least in the beginning of his one and only term, he was surfing on the Obama wave.

And you have to admit TRUMP! made choices and took steps to continue the trend, not to reverse it. You also ignored my second question, which is, are people better off while the UE rate is dropping, or when it is at its lowest?

You're basically trying to make the case that people are better of while more are unemployed in a vain attempt to avoid giving credit to TRUMP! for ANYTHING. How odd, and how useless to continue as long as you hold that bizarre belief.

I didn't say Trump gets no credit. I said at the beginning of his term he was still riding the Obama wave.

They're best off when it's at its lowest, but if you're comparing the performance of two presidents, the one who did better matters. Case in point ... black unemployment peaked at 16.8%. Obama handed that to Trump when it was 7.4%. Had that rate dropped 30% (as it did for Trump) and not 56%, Obama would have handed Trump a black unemployment rate at about 11.8%. Trump would never have gotten down to 5.2%. So both presidents get credit for their share. But Obama's share was bigger. Blacks did better under Obama than they did under Trump.

I see what you're driving at, and don't disagree that Obama did a lot. Of course, he had two terms to get more things done and a recovery he rode. I am, however, pointing out that TRUMP! made things even better, and I still maintain that people "do better" when more are working than when less are working, bottom line. Tell you what, let's look ahead. If Quid Pro adopts policies and does things that stifle the economy and black UE goes up, are you going to be consistent and say blacks did better under TRUMP!, or are you going to continue finding excuses to say they did better under Quid Pro?

trump got one term because he did a bad job. trump didn't make things way better. Not if growth had started before trump took office. You can say he maintained that growth, but he did not make it, therefore he could not have made things better. Things were gong to get better no matter who won if they let things continue. We would have been better off under Clinton because she would have had a informal top advisor who had experience growing the economy.

He continued the growth, which is the important point. He was what the economy needed at the time, and we were blessed that he sent Hillary into retirement. He made things better.

Since Bill Clinton set records relative to the economy, I seriously doubt if we were blessed by Hillary not being president. Trump did not make things better and no matter how much you want to pretend he did, be very glad he didn't get a second term. All economic data shows that Obama outperformed trump. And Obama entered with our country facing a depression, losing millions of jobs. Trump was handed a growing economy.

And promptly kept it growing.

No, he didn't. Obama out performed trump and that was before the pandemic.

Okay, when did the economy shrink before the pandemic?

You have been shown that trump produced less jobs. Furthermore at the end of 2019 America was beginning to see a manufacturing recession. And trumps trade war with China did not help.

The assertion is that TRUMP! continued and accelerated economic growth. You've also been shown that black unemployment was at historic lows under TRUMP!. So you can make all the emotional arguments you want, but the numbers are what they are.

And that assertion is incorrect. Emotional my ass, nothing trump did caused black unemployment to be that low, and despite the propaganda , Black UE was still double that of whites. Had trump made black unemployment equal to whites, that would have been something to give him credit for. Obama reduced black unemployment, yet he is not getting praised by blacks because we feel he should have done better. So why in the hell do you think somebody black is going to give trumps ass credit?

Because, like it or not, give him credit or not, he was president and his policies impacted the economy while black unemployment went to record lows. You can't deny that, no matter how long you hold your breath and stomp your feet. So yes, your reaction is emotional, not logical.

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Just because you claim that with nothing to back it up makes it bullshit.

The discrimination against white students a fact

We just dont know if the high court is going to allow it to continue or not

No it is not a fact, anytime your kid doesn't get into college the excuse is it was because of a black kid. Kind of like when you don't get a job, to save face with the boys you will lie and claim you didn't get it because they gave it to a black guy.

 

[Mac-7]

Just because you claim that with nothing to back it up makes it bullshit.

The discrimination against white students a fact

We just dont know if the high court is going to allow it to continue or not

No it is not a fact, anytime your kid doesn't get into college the excuse is it was because of a black kid. Kind of like when you don't get a job, to save face with the boys you will lie and claim you didn't get it because they gave it to a black guy.

Thats what scripted results does for your reputation

Those that were fully qualified always carry a suspicion that they really didnt earn it

 

[woodwork201]

There is no reverse discrimination against whites when the school is majority white.

That's an idiotic, short-sighted statement. If any white child who was more qualified than any non-white child was not admitted because the school weighed or considered at all the race of the white child versus the race of a non-white child then there's reverse discrimination.

 

[Faun]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Just because you claim that with nothing to back it up makes it bullshit.

The discrimination against white students a fact

We just dont know if the high court is going to allow it to continue or not

No it is not a fact, anytime your kid doesn't get into college the excuse is it was because of a black kid. Kind of like when you don't get a job, to save face with the boys you will lie and claim you didn't get it because they gave it to a black guy.

Thats what scripted results does for your reputation

Those that were fully qualified always carry a suspicion that they really didnt earn it

That's the excuse you use.

 

[Mac-7]

Just because you claim that with nothing to back it up makes it bullshit.

The discrimination against white students a fact

We just dont know if the high court is going to allow it to continue or not

No it is not a fact, anytime your kid doesn't get into college the excuse is it was because of a black kid. Kind of like when you don't get a job, to save face with the boys you will lie and claim you didn't get it because they gave it to a black guy.

Thats what scripted results does for your reputation

Those that were fully qualified always carry a suspicion that they really didnt earn it

That's the excuse you use.

I can only state the facts to you as they are

When government do-gooders try to assist the downtrodden and helpless black people they end up hurting them instead

AA is an albatross that causes everyone to wonder about your qualifications

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

 

[Faun]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

 

[Faun]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

 

[hadit]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

Because he never told them to hunt down Pence. The mob decided that on their own. Do you think that the BLM mobs were directed to set fire to buildings or did that happen as a result of mob hysteria in the moment?

 

[Faun]

Well this is embarrassing.... sorry, I missed that.

They revealed why... because Pence wouldn't send slates back to the states Trump lost. How did you not know that?

Okay, so you asked a question you already thought you knew the answer for, so why should I bother answering it?

I was checking to see if you would admit the answer. Turned out, you wouldn't.

The bottom line as related to the real target here (TRUMP!) is that they decided on their own that talking tough about Pence and rioting was a good idea. Claiming TRUMP! incited insurrection when he clearly told everyone to protest peacefully is a monumental stretch, (especially considering it started while he was still making his speech) and quite frankly is reflected in the fact that no one has been charged yet with insurrection. Why do you think that is? I mean, a bunch of random internet keyboard jockeys insist it was one and they've arrested hundreds, but nobody gets charged?

Basically this was, as I've stated before, a protest that turned into a riot.

The fact is the Capitol wasn't breached until after his speech. It's also a fact that some protesters at the Capitol were shouting to storm the Capitol while he was still speaking.

But that's irrelevant.

My question was a two-parter. You avoided answering the first part, so you can imagine why I'm doubtful you'll answer the second part. And yes, I already know the answer to this too. Again, I just want to see if you're willing to admit it...

Part 2: Who told America the vice president could unilaterally reject electoral votes and send them back to the states from whence they came?

I know what you're getting at so I'm not playing the game and I'm going straight to the point.

1. You ultimately want to make the case that TRUMP! incited people to attempt assassinating the Vice President, thus making him guilty of insurrection against his own administration and what, wearing white after Labor Day?
2. He did not do that. He told no one to attack anyone. Yeah, he was ticked off at some people. TRUMP! gets ticked off at a lot of people, but he's not stupid enough to tell people to try overthrowing the government with their bare hands.
3. He told the listeners to his speech to protest peacefully. You omit that.
4. The riot started BEFORE his speech was done, which weakens the case that the rioters were "incited" to attempt overthrowing the government with their bare hands. Not irrelevant at all.

The above is one big reason why anyone is yet to be charged with insurrection. Even the rabid prosecution knows that they would have a tough job selling a riot as a full-blown insurrection, and a REALLY tough job selling that TRUMP! planned the whole thing (except to the usual foaming suspect who will believe and glom onto any shred of anything, no matter how weak and disproven, that supports the narrative).

It's not a game. And it's not about just that one day. It started before the election when Trump started prepping his base that the election is rigged if he loses. He then sent that into hyperdrive when he did lose. He spent two months drilling into their collective heads that he was robbed. That's on him, no one else. He had his opportunity to challenge it following the process established since the inception of this nation and he failed and that should have been that. But instead of being a statesman, he marched forward like a 4 year old, stomping his feet. Of course, his base believes him wholeheartedly so he owns whatever results from his actions. He tried to get states to find votes to flip for him. That failed him and that infuriated his base. He tried to get states to submit alternate slates of electors to ignore the will of the people. Some actually did that. By the time Congress was prepared to certify the election, Trump convinced his base that despite losing the election, despite utterly failing to prove widespread fraud, despite his own government saying the election was fair, despite every state certifying their respective elections, despite virtually every claim of fraud being debunked, Trump threw one last hail mary to his base -- the lie that the VP could unilaterally reject electors without Congress. Do that and he wins the election he lost. And as always, his base believed every word he said. ALL that is on him. No one else. Pence, to his credit, sided with the Constitution, not Trump. THAT is the reason our Capitol was stormed on January 6th with Trump supporters calling Pence a "traitor" and hunting for him. That's the reason Pence, and Congress, had to be scurried away for their own safety. The people who stormed the Capitol are absolutely responsible for their actions -- but so is Trump. The Capitol would never have been attacked if not for the actions and outright lies of Donald Trump. He is responsible. And he should be held accountable.

All I can say is, good luck making that case in court. The reality that to date no one has even been charged with insurrection, much less anything leading to TRUMP! is telling.

LOL

You must be replying to voices in your head and not what I posted as the word "insurrection" does not appear in my quote.

Think you can respond to what I actually said?

Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly? Incendiary rhetoric? That's a staple in politics, and hardly exclusive to TRUMP!. If you want to make the case that "The Capitol would never have been attacked" save for TRUMP!, we could also make the case that the attempted assassination of the baseball players would not have happened save for <fill in the blank with your favorite democrat or socialist bogeyman>. The bottom line remains that TRUMP! called for peaceful protest. If you really want to "hold politicians accountable" for the actions and reactions of people who support them, you're opening a door you probably don't want to open.

"Yeah, you want TRUMP! "held accountable", for what exactly?"

I already explained why. Do you need me to repeat it?

Okay then, it's hold politicians accountable for the actions of their supporters should the politicians use incendiary rhetoric. Well, there are several who should have been held thusly accountable over the last year or so, we'll just leave it at that.

I'm still waiting for you to say who planted the idea in their heads that they were robbed, they were losing their country, and that on January 6th, ONLY vice president Pence could save that by unilaterally rejecting electors. And then telling them that Biden let them down because he lacked the courage to save Trump's presidency.

THAT was the reason Trump's base turned on the very same Republican vice president most of them voted for 4 years earlier. How on Earth do you not hold Trump responsible for his words which inspired them to hunt down Pence?

Because he never told them to hunt down Pence. The mob decided that on their own. Do you think that the BLM mobs were directed to set fire to buildings or did that happen as a result of mob hysteria in the moment?

They decided to do that because he lied to them that the election was stolen and then lied to them that Pence could still save the election for them and then lied to them that Pence didn't have the courage to save his presidency. Is he not responsible for whatever actions are taken by the mob he assembled at the Capitol based on all the lies he spoon-fed his supporters?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Just because you claim that with nothing to back it up makes it bullshit.

The discrimination against white students a fact

We just dont know if the high court is going to allow it to continue or not

No it is not a fact, anytime your kid doesn't get into college the excuse is it was because of a black kid. Kind of like when you don't get a job, to save face with the boys you will lie and claim you didn't get it because they gave it to a black guy.

Thats what scripted results does for your reputation

Those that were fully qualified always carry a suspicion that they really didnt earn it

That's the excuse you use.

I can only state the facts to you as they are

Claiming that something is racist against you doesn't make it a fact, you still have to prove it.

When government do-gooders try to assist the downtrodden and helpless black people they end up hurting them instead

A is an albatross that causes everyone to wonder about your qualifications

Why was AA created?

 

[Mac-7]

Why was AA created?

The intent was to help black people catch up with whites