Fu*%face Von Clownstick

Burrapeg said:
Can you explain in clear terms, without the word salad Rico aludes to, why you think Trump bears no responsibility for what happened on Jan6 and why you don't believe the intent of the rioters that day was to stop the certification of the election?...
Click to expand...

Word salad, really? Your post clearly exemplifies how your dogmatic views hampers your ability to comprehend simple statements.

I never said I dismissed Trump responsibilities and involvement. Nor did I say that the mob lacked intent or disagree with what that intent was.

What I said was it was not possible for them to achieve that goal no matter how much they wanted to.

I also said it never should have happened. The risk was well known and registered, yet the needed personnel required to control a demonstration of that size was not deployed.

My thoughts, whether you agree or not makes no difference to me and changing your mind is not my intent.
 
DSMc said:
I never said I dismissed Trump responsibilities and involvement. Nor did I say that the mob lacked intent or disagree with what that intent was. . .
Click to expand...
OK, well actually you did, when you (with a clearly understood simple statement) disagreed with Cory's remark that Trump instigated the Jan6 riot and that the intent of the mob was to overturn the certification of the election. Why disagree with those premises and now try to say you didn't? It is right there in black and white in your previous post. Rico's comment about word salad results from your constant introduction of stuff that has little to do with the actual question, like the bit about the fact that they failed. What does that have to do with intent? Or the lack of enough preparations? How does that excuse what happened or deflect from who is ultimately to blame? Trump in fact is the very one who could have immediately called for more help, just like he did with LA. There is nothing 'dogmatic' about observing that he obviously did not because he himself caused and encouraged the riot, and it was his own supporters.
 
You either have a problem with reading compression or purposely jump to negative conclusions. Me saying that Trump was not the sole cause of the riot is in no way saying he had nothing to do with it. Am I wrong?
 
DSMc said:
Me saying that Trump was not the sole cause of the riot . . .
Click to expand...
You want to enlighten us as to who else's 'stolen' election they were there to object to? A simple answer, please, so my dogmatic narrowmindedness doesn't obscure the 'truth'. As to jumping to negative conclusions, I am afraid Trump himself makes that rather difficult to resist.
 
If it was all Trumps fault and no body else's, it would have been a very small riot.
I know, that's a complex thought, deal with it.

Sorry, but if you believe you are level headed and thinking clearly, you do not understand how Trump dominates your every thought.
 
DSMc said:
If it was all Trumps fault and no body else's, it would have been a very small riot.
I know, that's a complex thought, deal with it.

Sorry, but if you believe you are level headed and thinking clearly, you do not understand how Trump dominates your every thought.
Click to expand...
I don't see anything complex about it at all. We were not dealing with who was at fault; many hundreds were at fault, mostly for believing his Big Lie and following thru with the attack. This is more of your clouding the discussion, just as Rico said. Cory's statement claimed Trump was ultimately the entire 'cause' of it. I still agree totally with this. Further, he could have even stopped it later, before it got out of hand. Instead he did nothing but enjoy it on TV. As to this stuff dominating much of my thoughts, well yes, and it seems to dominate many millions of other ordinary Americans' thoughts too, from the evidence yesterday, innumerable people who care about where the country is headed if Trump is not stopped. Maybe you don't care, and that's fine. Maybe you even agree with a lot of what he is doing. That is your right also; that is what this country is about. The right to disagree with things without being labelled the 'enemy within'.
 
Meanwhile, you'd think MAGA heads would explode when Trump allowed a foreign (Asian) company to take over America's grand old steel company. Now it's revealed that he holds a "special share" that allows him to basically veto any business decision the company makes. A republican now has control over the investment decisions of a private enterprise and has effectively nationalized the company, i.e., State Control of the Means of Production. Where are the howls of SOCIALISM! from the right? How long until shares of US Steel end up in the pockets of the Trump clan?

‘Golden Share’ in U.S. Steel Gives Trump Extraordinary Control

New details of the agreement show that the structure would give President Trump and his successors a permanent stake in U.S. Steel, significant sway over its board and veto power over a wide array of company actions, an arrangement that could change the nature of foreign investment in the United States.

Under the terms of the national security pact, which the companies said they signed Friday, the U.S. government would retain a single share of preferred stock, called class G — as in gold. And U.S. Steel’s charter will list nearly a dozen activities the company cannot undertake without the approval of the American president or someone he designates in his stead.

Activities requiring the president’s permission include the company transferring production or jobs outside the United States, closing or idling plants before agreed-upon time frames and making certain changes to how it sources its raw materials.

Under the terms of the deal with the steel companies, the president could exert significant influence over U.S. Steel’s board. The president has the authority to directly appoint one of the board’s three independent directors, and approve or reject appointments for the other two, the two people familiar with the negotiations said.
 
A little more of Dave's circular double speak-

POST # 8104- "January 6 was an asinine event done with very little thought. Intent implies a plan with a goal. They got in, what did they plan for next? The answer is they didn't plan shit."

Post # 8161- "Nor did I say that the mob lacked intent or disagree with what that intent was."
 
Last edited:
Well, these protests Saturday have at least sent a clear message. Even the most rabid MAGA nutjob, if they will open their eyes and what tiny bit of mind they have, must see that tRump is not making anything great except the chaos and division happening under his 'leadership' (a term which hardly fits). No attempt to unite the country at all and absolutely no concern for bettering the lives of ordinary Americans of either party. He goes on and on about people hating America. He actually means anyone hating him and what he is doing. He seems to be the one that hates the country, always bitching about what is wrong with it and how he is going to make it great again. We were already great. Sure some problems, but nothing any other country isn't dealing with. But he is making it so much worse. True greatness is not when a bully thumps his chest and threatens everyone with how great he himself is. It is when others admire that person, or country, and agree that they are great and want to associate and trade with them. People quietly distance themselves from a bully and cooperate together to work around them, both economically with trade and also with international diplomacy and security. That is economic and stability suicide for a nation. We have already lost incredible amounts of goodwill, trade, and tourism with countries like Canada who were previously friends and close allies. Some of this is almost permanent damage and will be hard to undo. It has destroyed feelings of trust that were firmly in place before. His sucking up to Putin and insulting attitude towards NATO and our principal strategic allies is inexcusable, even treasonous. Again, this is lasting damage to any feeling of trust or desire to cooperate with us in any time of crisis. It is isolating us from Global customers, suppliers, and partners in defense. This is good business? You would think that numerous bankruptcies, regular shafting of his own employees and contractors, and multiple felony convictions for serious bank fraud would be some indication to voters of his qualifications or lack thereof.
 
Stumpsprouts said:
Wake me when groceries are affordable again..
In the meantime I’m gonna continue to build local solidarity networks and not wait for electoral politics to improve things. Complete garbage system, not even worth arguing over.
Click to expand...
Remember in 2016 when Trump was outraged at the thought of losing the election in the electoral college (seemed like he just learned it existed, lol) that he wanted to eliminate it, and then he won the election thanks to it?
 
Tuebor said:
Remember in 2016 when Trump was outraged at the thought of losing the election in the electoral college (seemed like he just learned it existed, lol) that he wanted to eliminate it, and then he won the election thanks to it?
Click to expand...
He was raging against it in 2012 too. Sure got quiet as soon as it worked in his favour. Same attitude he displays about violence and protests. When the mayhem and destruction is his own supporters, suddenly they're 'patriots'.
 
rico said:
A little more of Dave's circular double speak-

POST # 8104- "January 6 was an asinine event done with very little thought. Intent implies a plan with a goal. They got in, what did they plan for next? The answer is they didn't plan shit."

Post # 8161- "Nor did I say that the mob lacked intent or disagree with what that intent was."
Click to expand...
Are you guys really that dense as to misinterpret everything I say or is it just the current craze of, if you don't agree with the message, just attack the messenger?

Intent 'usually' is coupled with a goal. In order to achieve that goal there is 'usually' an accompanying plan that lays out procedures that will facilitate successfully implementing the intended action. The January 6 crowd was always going to fail achieving their 'intent' because they had no 'plan' or understanding of what that would entail.
 
DSMc said:
Are you guys really that dense as to misinterpret everything I say or is it just the current craze of, if you don't agree with the message, just attack the messenger?

Intent 'usually' is coupled with a goal. In order to achieve that goal there is 'usually' an accompanying plan that lays out procedures that will facilitate successfully implementing the intended action. The January 6 crowd was always going to fail achieving their 'intent' because they had no 'plan' or understanding of what that would entail.
Click to expand...
I intend to do shit all the time with no plan.

This is pretty damning that there was plain intent as you define it.
 
evo said:
I intend to do shit all the time with no plan.

This is pretty damning that there was plain intent as you define it.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I don't see how the overall intent and goal can be disputed, or that we are the dense ones. How is it some sort of coincidence that most of the morons there were wearing StopTheSteal shirts and other gear, and screaming the same thing? What the hell does that have to do the fact that they had little cohesive plan and failed? Actually, there were plenty of small plans in place, such as the one above with the noose to intimidate Pence into doing what their hero had ordered him to do. Another group had zip ties and intended to kidnap Pelosi and other top Dems. And there were Proud Boys and others there who were proven to be concealed-carrying and basically just itching for the shooting to start so their inner Rambo could come out. Plenty of fault to go around and I suggest again that has f**k all to do with Trump being entirely responsible for the whole shameful mess, for instigating it, completely avoiding trying to stop it later, and for dreaming up the whole 'stolen election' crap to start with, as a sop to his delicate, puffed up ego. This was classic insurrection 101 and the Constitution specifically forbid Trump from being allowed to run again. The fact that he did is clear proof there is not single spine among the GOP and a lot of the Democrats in DC.
 
The gaslighting by the right began almost immediately after the news broke of the assassinations in Minnesota, and worked its way up from disgruntled YouTube reporters like DSMc posts to U.S. Senators like Mike Lee. Stay classy Senator!

Mike Lee Draws Outrage for Posts Blaming Assassination on the Far Left

The Republican senator from Utah suggested in social media posts that the killings were the work of “Marxists,” and mocked Minnesota’s Democratic governor. He later issued a more sober condemnation of the violence.

Scarcely 24 hours after a Democratic lawmaker in Minnesota was assassinated in her home, Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, posted a pair of politically charged messages mocking the attack.

“This is what happens When Marxists don’t get their way,” Mr. Lee wrote on Sunday on his personal X account, a message accompanied by photographs of the suspect released by law enforcement officials.

An hour later, in a second post showing the suspect, Mr. Lee wrote: “Nightmare on Waltz Street,” in an apparent reference the Democratic governor of the state, Tim Walz.

By the afternoon, amid outraged responses to his postings, Mr. Lee issued a very different message on his official Senate account in which he hit all of the sober notes one would expect from an elected official reacting to a political assassination.

“These hateful attacks have no place in Utah, Minnesota, or anywhere in America,” Mr. Lee wrote on X. “Please join me in condemning this senseless violence, and praying for the victims and their families.”

But that standard-issue statement came long after his initial derisive posts, in which he appeared to lay responsibility for the shooting at the feet of Democrats and the political left.

While the political affiliation of the suspect is not clear — he was listed in some recent state records as “other” or “no party preference” — people who know him have said he is a religious conservative who supports President Trump and is passionately opposed to abortion.

Mr. Lee, a onetime anti-Trump evangelist who now regularly shares conspiracy theories online and has become a MAGA influencer, was at first unapologetic in the face of a firestorm of criticism for his early posts on the matter. He briefly pinned one of them to the top of his account.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom