The Trump Post-Presidency and Insurrection

Who are the strong?Who are the weak?Generally( overwhelmingly actually), Trump is referring to Republican members of Congress.

Knowing that you're using a phone explains a lot. Your references to posts are text instead instead of links, and you quote nothing. Figuring out what you're trying to say would take more effort than you put into saying it.--Percy

I am on the road right now. I am trying to get to the run, in my short posts. They will become much longer later.You posted 2 quotes,demonstrating a call to violence, from Trumps infamous Jan 6 speech.They were in posts:45
73Both quotes were an attempt to show illegal incitement.I feel that your quotes are not only badly out of context, but they shos an unawareness of who Trump is talking about.The post 73 quote gave me an idea, so here it is.Let's read the whole speech, and label paragraphs by numerals.Example:Trump talking about Giuliani having guts, unlike some Republican Senators, was in paragraph 7.We need to look at every single word that mentions strength and weakness then quote it. Label it by paragraphs.We can probably figure out who he is referring to in your post 73 quote.

Trump always used the term "weak" about Republican members of Congress. Where he used the words "strong" and "strength" it isn't so clear who he's referring to, particularly since here he unambiguously refers to the rally crowd: In some places he's clearly referring to Republican Congresspeople. In other places, particularly when he's pretty free with the pronouns, it isn't so clear who he's referring to.But you're inappropriately focused on this weak/strong thing that's just a tiny part of the speech and ignoring the truly important point. The rally attendees thought Trump, and the speakers before him, were telling them to go down to the Capitol and halt the certification by interrupting the proceedings and intimidating, "arresting" and killing Congresspeople and the vice president. Their entitled behavior after breaking into the Capitol building makes this clear. Look at this guy. Does this look like someone who thinks he's breaking the law to you? He hasn't a care in world because he believes his president told him to do this: --Percy

Again, I'll respond to posts that make clear what is being said. If you eventually provide links and quotes
then that will be most welcome. I don't know that issuing a version of the speech with paragraphs numbered is necessary, but if you want to do that then knock yourself out.--Percy

Half the time I can't decipher what LNA is on about, but it seems like he has not seen the numerous videos of Trump's bullshit about not letting the Dems steal the election, from before the election until January 6. I'm not sure if it would make a difference to LNA's interpretation of the events leading up to the storming of the Capitol, but by now hundreds of millions, if not billions of people have seen and heard the video record, with more becoming public every day. This is the historical record of these events and it is global.I suspect that the corruption of the Trump Cult has been more thoroughly recorded than any other regime in the history of the planet. Between tweets and videos it's a huge amount of data. It should all be stored in the Trump Library of Shame.

quote:

---

Half the time I can't decipher what LNA is on about, but it seems like he has not seen the numerous videos of Trump's bullshit about not letting the Dems steal the election, from before the election until January 6.

---

Trump goes on and on about that in the speech. Almost every mention of the Democrats is accusing them of stealing the election.And let us not forget that there was plenty of hate for Democrats in general and Nancy Pelosi in particular in addition to that. As well as the fact that the Democrats in the House were sure to block any objections that made it past the Senate. The attack was the only way to win.

Or his many, many, many rally quotes where he condones and even encourages physical violence.

That has been a yuge part of his message and the swagger persona he projects. He's never been held accountable before but I hope that's about to change.

And we have to remember that Trump remains a clear and present danger to the US and our national security, if he continues to have access to classified briefings. He is an agent of chaos that must not be allowed to further compromise us.

There will be a presentation of evidence and all the impeachment trial buttons will be pushed for both pro and con ...But,When the House impeachment managers formally delivered their articles of impeachment to the senate, only a handful of the 50 republicans attended. This is a moment of some historical importance for the nation, so I would think, and 40+ republican senators couldn't be bothered to attend their duties.A political statement by the senate republicans who, en masse, are still trying to dodge and weave away this disaster in their party hoping it will just end.It will end when they, again en masse (give or take a handful), vote to acquit.There will not be 17 republicans brave enough, statesmen enough, politically or personally strong enough to join democrats to condemn cheeto's sedition. The excuses abound. This is the evil of the republican party.This impeachment trial is just a (vitally necessary) skit with a set final act already written.The republicans have forgotten, like it didn't even happen. The House presentation of evidence will be ignored. The high crimes and misdemeanors will be ignored.History will draw its own conclusions but I hope mine is shared: revulsion.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

The House impeachment brief has been delivered to the Senate. It lays out the full case detailing the facts and arguments for convicting Donald Trump of incitement of insurrection in the January 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol. Here's the full text: House Impeachment Brief--Percy

Just read a quotation of Cruz's from Monday, from his YouTube show apparently: I don't think I need to point out the jaw droppingly magnificent irony of this.

Well, vimesey, me being socially unsophisticated as I am, I think maybe bit of help might be good. Please.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Sorry - was referring to him seeking to overturn the legitimate voting choices of hundreds of thousands of democratic voters by joining in the Texas action against blue state votes (as well as seeking to nullify them in the Senate). Seems to me he was trying to do exactly what he said he never would :-)