"Violence is the language of the unheard"

[TemplarKormac]

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office.

Of course not. It can't be helped, you'll believe what you want to believe. However, that's not the point. If there is any effort to impede the transfer of power, or undo it, that is not a peaceful transfer of power. Not even remotely.

Yes, Obama left office, and so will Trump. But what won't happen is one will not launch a covert investigation into their successor using the full power of the mightiest government on earth. They won't be looking for ways to unseat a sitting president, rightly elected or not. After today, there will be a longing for peace. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants a repeat of the last four years.

So, was what the Obama administration doing in the last year of his presidency a commitment to a peaceful transfer of power? No.

 

[Coyote]

He maintained this refusal to commit and fueled it with claims of rigging, fraud, etc that he maintains still - and built upon his base's anger and sense of being wronged with this.

And yet, from where I'm standing, he spent the last two months presenting evidence in court in five states. The courts refused to listen. They arbitrarily decided his case had no merits even though he had reams of evidence ready to present. Even the SCOTUS was not interested.

Arbitrarily? Refused to listen? We are talking multiple courts, multiple judges, some 60 lawsuits or maybe more. And the SCOTUS. And you forgot the DoJ and AG. Doesn't that indicate that the "reams of evidence" didn't really exist? That there really wasn't evidence, just a lot of stuff people thought was evidence inflated by smoke and mirrors?? I could understand if one court, one jurisdiction refused - but that is not the case.

Imagine how someone on my end of the spectrum feels when nobody they voted for bothers to listen to them or their interests. Compound that with the other end who are effectively trying to suppress their interests. Imagine having no other options. Fill the shoes of one who feels they have been betrayed by their government.

That is really the real problem I think. But attempting to violently circumvent or overthrow our entire electoral system, which is in fact the will of the people is not the answer.

I had to live with 4 years of Trump. I did not vote for him. He and his administration is the antithesis of everything I believe in. In my view, he tore our country apart. But I accepted the validity of an election that was every bit as close as this one and process by which disputes (Jill Stein) were resolved. I swallowed it and bitched to holy hell. Our system may not be perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than much of the world who's constitution changes with each new dictator and it's a hell of a lot better than a violent mob over turning an election and installing their candidate.

 

[TemplarKormac]

There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit.

I would ask you what the merits were, but I don't want to jump down this rabbit hole. I'm pretty sure the rabbits want to live in peace.

 

[Lesh]

True. All the violence, left and right, came about by the act of our leaders toying with the emotions of the citizenry for their own political gain. Lying about Jacob Blake to enrage a certain demographic, or exciting a rancor over the election. None of them are faultless. Not even the people you worship.

Except nobody lied about Jacob Blake. They didn't have to "lie", we all got to see exactly what happened on videotape from two different angles. The only difference is how you interpreted what you saw.

Most Democrats would have liked very much for the BLM demonstrations not to have happened. They really didn't help Democrats at the polls.

yeah we saw a man accused of rape fight with cops and pull a knife on them while trying to kidnap children,,,

You saw no such thing

 

[Coyote]

He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Can you think of that ever happening before?

Yeah, I can. January 20, 2017. From then on, the Democratic Party chose to launch a scurrilous investigation against Trump about his supposed collusion with the Russian government. They spent the better part of four years looking for ways to remove him from office. There was NEVER a peaceful transfer of power then, and sadly, there won't be one now.

The die is cast.

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office. All the processes were followed. Obama's team transitioned with Trump's team. Nothing - nothing like what Trump is doing with Biden's team.

Investigation Trump was not scurrilous. Was there a political aspect to it? Of course. There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit. It was determined the Russians were engaging in activities in an attempt to influence not just our election, but elections in other western countries. It is also factual that multiple people in Trump's campaign, and he and his family, had meetings and connections with Russian officials. And they lied about it. That merits at least an investigation. IF you TRULY think investigations and impeachments represent a "unpeaceful transfer of power" then surely you would agree then that the Republican investigation of Clinton also represent an "unpeaceful" transfer of power right?

I don't agree that either of those were not peaceful transfers of power, they were simply politics and other presidents have also faced hostile politics and investigations from the opposition.

Nothing - nothing was like what we have been seeing in recent months.

what did you expect to happen when you call people names for four yrs and refuse a transparent election???

Who called who names? I can give you a list of the names I have had to put up with for the past four years.

The election was perfectly transparent, just as transparent as 2016.

 

[Coyote]

There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit.

I would ask you what the merits were, but I don't want to jump down this rabbit hole. I'm pretty sure the rabbits want to live in peace.

Rabbit stew is always a possibility....

I listed what I considered the "merits" - concerns - that should lead to an investigation in that post...but to pursue it further would probably derail this thread. Basically, in my view it had at least as much merit as a number of investigations we've seen.

 

[progressive hunter]

True. All the violence, left and right, came about by the act of our leaders toying with the emotions of the citizenry for their own political gain. Lying about Jacob Blake to enrage a certain demographic, or exciting a rancor over the election. None of them are faultless. Not even the people you worship.

Except nobody lied about Jacob Blake. They didn't have to "lie", we all got to see exactly what happened on videotape from two different angles. The only difference is how you interpreted what you saw.

Most Democrats would have liked very much for the BLM demonstrations not to have happened. They really didn't help Democrats at the polls.

yeah we saw a man accused of rape fight with cops and pull a knife on them while trying to kidnap children,,,

You saw no such thing

it was on video,,,

 

[TemplarKormac]

Arbitrarily? Refused to listen? We are talking multiple courts, multiple judges, some 60 lawsuits or maybe more.

Of course. Those 60 lawsuits were not filed by the Trump team. They were lawsuits filed by various parties and organizations that had no affiliation with Trump or his lawyers. Those were rightly dismissed for lack of standing.

Let me clear something up: There were at a minimum 6 lawsuits filed, one directly to the Supreme Court and 5 in the Supreme Courts of the key battleground states by Trump's campaign.

They were all ignored or dismissed for somehow not being filed in a timely manner. It doesn't matter when the offense took place, the damage is there. The client is willing to prove it.

 

[Coyote]

Yeah, I can. January 20, 2017. From then on, the Democratic Party chose to launch a scurrilous investigation against Trump about his supposed collusion with the Russian government. They spent the better part of four years looking for ways to remove him from office. There was NEVER a peaceful transfer of power then, and sadly, there won't be one now.

The die is cast.

You know, you'd have a lot more credibility if you separated the good of the nation from the Ego of Donald J. Trump.

Every president has had to deal with investigations.... it comes with the territory. Bush had Plame, Clinton had Whitewater/Lewinsky, Reagan had Iran Contra, Nixon had Watergate.

Exactly, you said it better than I did. For some reason though, Trump personalizes it all, and puts himself out as a victim.

 

[progressive hunter]

He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Can you think of that ever happening before?

Yeah, I can. January 20, 2017. From then on, the Democratic Party chose to launch a scurrilous investigation against Trump about his supposed collusion with the Russian government. They spent the better part of four years looking for ways to remove him from office. There was NEVER a peaceful transfer of power then, and sadly, there won't be one now.

The die is cast.

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office. All the processes were followed. Obama's team transitioned with Trump's team. Nothing - nothing like what Trump is doing with Biden's team.

Investigation Trump was not scurrilous. Was there a political aspect to it? Of course. There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit. It was determined the Russians were engaging in activities in an attempt to influence not just our election, but elections in other western countries. It is also factual that multiple people in Trump's campaign, and he and his family, had meetings and connections with Russian officials. And they lied about it. That merits at least an investigation. IF you TRULY think investigations and impeachments represent a "unpeaceful transfer of power" then surely you would agree then that the Republican investigation of Clinton also represent an "unpeaceful" transfer of power right?

I don't agree that either of those were not peaceful transfers of power, they were simply politics and other presidents have also faced hostile politics and investigations from the opposition.

Nothing - nothing was like what we have been seeing in recent months.

what did you expect to happen when you call people names for four yrs and refuse a transparent election???

Who called who names? I can give you a list of the names I have had to put up with for the past four years.

The election was perfectly transparent, just as transparent as 2016.

no it wasnt transparent,,,

 

[TemplarKormac]

I had to live with 4 years of Trump. I did not vote for him. He and his administration is the antithesis of everything I believe in

Alas, I had to live with 8 years of Obama, for the same reasons you stated. But now, both parties are the antithesis of what I believe in. Today only made that more clear.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

If you support what happened today...you were a hypocrite when you were upset that thugs were storming the Wal*Marts during the summer.

No you stupid bitch. We told you to stop supporting that shit or it would come back on you. You wouldn’t do it. The hypocrisy is all on you. We told you to stop.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You know, you'd have a lot more credibility if you separated the good of the nation from the Ego of Donald J. Trump.

No, I think I did that in the OP. The onus is on you if you are unable to see that. I never said I liked him.

Other than that, I do believe you just made my case for me. Republicans impeached Clinton, came 12 votes away from being convicted. Trump was impeached and never had a chance at being convicted in the Senate. One was a clear violation of rules and ethics, the other was a coup attempt. A direct effort by one party to overturn an election based on scant evidence.

 

[progressive hunter]

He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Can you think of that ever happening before?

Yeah, I can. January 20, 2017. From then on, the Democratic Party chose to launch a scurrilous investigation against Trump about his supposed collusion with the Russian government. They spent the better part of four years looking for ways to remove him from office. There was NEVER a peaceful transfer of power then, and sadly, there won't be one now.

The die is cast.

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office. All the processes were followed. Obama's team transitioned with Trump's team. Nothing - nothing like what Trump is doing with Biden's team.

Investigation Trump was not scurrilous. Was there a political aspect to it? Of course. There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit. It was determined the Russians were engaging in activities in an attempt to influence not just our election, but elections in other western countries. It is also factual that multiple people in Trump's campaign, and he and his family, had meetings and connections with Russian officials. And they lied about it. That merits at least an investigation. IF you TRULY think investigations and impeachments represent a "unpeaceful transfer of power" then surely you would agree then that the Republican investigation of Clinton also represent an "unpeaceful" transfer of power right?

I don't agree that either of those were not peaceful transfers of power, they were simply politics and other presidents have also faced hostile politics and investigations from the opposition.

Nothing - nothing was like what we have been seeing in recent months.

what did you expect to happen when you call people names for four yrs and refuse a transparent election???

Who called who names? I can give you a list of the names I have had to put up with for the past four years.

The election was perfectly transparent, just as transparent as 2016.

you call this transparent??

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[Coyote]

Arbitrarily? Refused to listen? We are talking multiple courts, multiple judges, some 60 lawsuits or maybe more.

Of course. Those 60 lawsuits were not filed by the Trump team. They were lawsuits filed by various parties and organizations that had no affiliation with Trump or his lawyers. Those were rightly dismissed for lack of standing.

They weren't all dismissed for lack of standing. They had no affiliation to Trump directly, but they did indirectly.

Let me clear something up: There were at a minimum 6 lawsuits filed, one directly to the Supreme Court and 5 in the Supreme Courts of the key battleground states by Trump's campaign.

They were all ignored or dismissed for somehow not being filed in a timely manner. It doesn't matter when the offense took place, the damage is there. The client is willing to prove it.

Weren't some of these ones in which Guilliani was forced to back down and admit he wasn't claiming fraud to the judge?

The one that was not filed in a timely manner is kind of an important one. If it's the one I'm thinking of it's about whether or not the legislature or someone else had the right to change a rule on mail in votes (something like that) - but it had been changed prior to the PRIMARIES...and the litigants hadn't made a peep. They allowed the primaries to proceed and the general election. It wasn't until AFTER the general election, when their candidate lost they decided to file. The judge was right on that. They would have disenfranchised thousands of voters who were following the rules. But it's not fraud.

 

[JoeB131]

And yet, from where I'm standing, he spent the last two months presenting evidence in court in five states. The courts refused to listen. They arbitrarily decided his case had no merits even though he had reams of evidence ready to present. Even the SCOTUS was not interested.

Except they didn't arbitrarily decide it. They weighed the word of appointed or elected officials against absolute fucking loons like Lin Wood, Rudy Guiliani and Sidney Powell, people Trump himself had to pretend he never met at a certain point.

magine how someone on my end of the spectrum feels when nobody they voted for bothers to listen to them or their interests. Compound that with the other end who are effectively trying to suppress their interests. Imagine having no other options. Fill the shoes of one who feels they have been betrayed by their government.

But you do have other options. If the people you voted for aren't listening to you, they'll be back up for election in 2 or 4 years.

The biggest problem here is that you and a lot of other Trump Cultists have wedded your own self-esteem to his Ego. If he's declared a "loser", you feel that you are declared a loser, too.


YOu know what, I've been both a Republican and a Democrat. In Presidential elections, I'm 7-4. Four candidates I supported (Bush-41, Dole, McCain and Hillary) lost. That was on them, not on me.

America has rejected White Grievance Politics... It sounds to me like maybe you need to find a way to articulate your grievances better.

 

[Coyote]

He refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Can you think of that ever happening before?

Yeah, I can. January 20, 2017. From then on, the Democratic Party chose to launch a scurrilous investigation against Trump about his supposed collusion with the Russian government. They spent the better part of four years looking for ways to remove him from office. There was NEVER a peaceful transfer of power then, and sadly, there won't be one now.

The die is cast.

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office. All the processes were followed. Obama's team transitioned with Trump's team. Nothing - nothing like what Trump is doing with Biden's team.

Investigation Trump was not scurrilous. Was there a political aspect to it? Of course. There almost always IS in these investigations, but that doesn't mean there wasn't merit. It was determined the Russians were engaging in activities in an attempt to influence not just our election, but elections in other western countries. It is also factual that multiple people in Trump's campaign, and he and his family, had meetings and connections with Russian officials. And they lied about it. That merits at least an investigation. IF you TRULY think investigations and impeachments represent a "unpeaceful transfer of power" then surely you would agree then that the Republican investigation of Clinton also represent an "unpeaceful" transfer of power right?

I don't agree that either of those were not peaceful transfers of power, they were simply politics and other presidents have also faced hostile politics and investigations from the opposition.

Nothing - nothing was like what we have been seeing in recent months.

what did you expect to happen when you call people names for four yrs and refuse a transparent election???

Who called who names? I can give you a list of the names I have had to put up with for the past four years.

The election was perfectly transparent, just as transparent as 2016.

you call this transparent??

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Were there observers in there?

Yes.

That is sufficient.

In fact...weren't a number of them also videos through surveillance cameras through out the process? I don't know if that is standard procedure but some at least were.

 

[Coyote]

I don't agree with that at all. Trump was sworn in. Obama left office.

Of course not. It can't be helped, you'll believe what you want to believe. However, that's not the point. If there is any effort to impede the transfer of power, or undo it, that is not a peaceful transfer of power. Not even remotely.

Yes, Obama left office, and so will Trump. But what won't happen is one will not launch a covert investigation into their successor using the full power of the mightiest government on earth. They won't be looking for ways to unseat a sitting president, rightly elected or not. After today, there will be a longing for peace. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants a repeat of the last four years.

So, was what the Obama administration doing in the last year of his presidency a commitment to a peaceful transfer of power? No.

Hold on...isn't that what Trump was attempting to do to Biden when he withheld aid to Ukraine and pressed the president to find "dirt" on his political opponent?

 

[Dragonlady]

The violence today came as a result of the President of the United States and members of his Administration lying to the American people about Trump's loss of the Presidential election.

True. All the violence, left and right, came about by the act of our leaders toying with the emotions of the citizenry for their own political gain. Lying about Jacob Blake to enrage a certain demographic, or exciting a rancor over the election. None of them are faultless. Not even the people you worship.

I don’t “worship” any people. I’m merely pointing out that one of these things is not like the other no matter how you try to frame it.

I note your automatic denigration of one of the victims of police violence. I also note that you have had not one critical word for the lies of Donald Trump and his enabler’s in missleading the people into thinking that he lost the election due to voter fraud. Inciting people to riot is a crime. Inciting them to riot with deliberate lies is reprehensible and a threat to national security.

I also note that you have had no criticism whatsoever of the people who incited violence for their own personal gain Trump and his minions.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, Obama left office, and so will Trump. But what won't happen is one will not launch a covert investigation into their successor using the full power of the mightiest government on earth. They won't be looking for ways to unseat a sitting president, rightly elected or not. After today, there will be a longing for peace. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants a repeat of the last four years.

Okay, but WHY were the last four years the way they were?

Because people were being such a bunch of meanyheads to Trump?

Or because Trump's personality, his utter disregard for societal norms, his ignorance of how government works, his inability to take any responsibility for his actions.

You guys took a severely damaged person and put him in the presidency, because you were mad about (Fill in the blank), and you got exactly the result you should have expected.