Jan. 6th commission

[Berzerker]

so dodging the draft was a sin?

with all the outrageous crimes out there pardons are way down my list

 

[Birdjaguar]

so dodging the draft was a sin?

For fake medical reasons arranged by daddy, yes.

 

[Farm Boy]

so dodging the draft was a sin?

with all the outrageous crimes out there pardons are way down my list

I didn't say it was a sin, I said it was "*****ing out." And for somebody who seeks to be President? Was actually president? Yes. He stood in better men and women's shadows, in the Capitol, in this regard. Not all of them, true.

Of course the pardons are way down there. But Blagojevich attempted to sell my senate seat. An old, stupid, and utterly corrosive form of government corruption. The total swamp, Chicago swamp. The garbage I'm always complaining about when I'm complaining about government, swamp. Swamp capital "S" Swamp. And big poppa daddy from TV says, "Selling senate seats? Let's let bygones be bygones." Yeah, that's about Assclown alright. I think it's hilarious how brave he was right up until the moment it became utterly apparent Pence wasn't lining up in front of the firing squads for him. That's the point he *****ed out and let his protesters get shot, instead, if you followed the day. Never missed an opportunity to *****-out yet, near as I can tell.

 

[Berzerker]

didn't the guy spend time in jail? I thought it was more of a commutation.

McCain never met a war he didn't like, Pence too. Trump is disgusting on a personal level, priorities

 

[Farm Boy]

If you insist. You know, aside from the whole normalizing relations on one hand and being the same administration and a governor on the other.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Blagojevich was impeached in 2009, later convicted, and ultimately sentenced to 14 years in federal prison. After an appeal for his release, U.S. President Donald Trump formally commuted his sentence in 2020; though Blagojevich was imprisoned for nearly eight years, the executive order ended his sentence six years early.[5][6] In May 2020,

Total sleaseball.

 

[Berzerker]

For fake medical reasons arranged by daddy, yes.

Why? I can see 'sin' if Trump supported the Vietnam War while avoiding it, but I dont see any sin in avoiding the war. My older brother lucked out and got a high lottery number but if he faked a medical condition I would fully endorse doing so, I would have advised it. Would you rather he go off and kill people half way around the world?

If you insist. You know, aside from the whole normalizing relations on one hand and being the same administration and a governor on the other.

Blago was his buddy, he was on Trump's show. The only corruption I see in that commutation is Trump treated a friend better than a bunch of people who deserve their freedom. Thats a sin every President commits. Now if we find out Blago paid him off, that would anger me. I've grown accustomed to those kind of arrangements, party donors getting special treatment etc, but Blago's a Dem so the only apparent motive for Trump was friendship.

 

[Farm Boy]

I guess you're just ok with that. Noted.

 

[Jukebox The Ghoul]

Bringing up Trump on draft dodging is not really worth your time, he's done tonnes of heinous horsehocky that like is way more important lmao. Plus we don't even believe in the draft, so why pretend he has to do it?

so dodging the draft was a sin?

with all the outrageous crimes out there pardons are way down my list

So if this is the case why do you care about raising money for bail by Kamala Harris? You know in America often for poor people bail can often mean losing your job? That means before you even get a fair trial, you could lose your income, your healthcare, your house if your rent is due. Honestly if we're happy with letting richer suspects walk outside for a fee then why should there be a different rule for poor people? Why judge trustworhiness based on wealth?

No trespassing, no assaults with deadly weapons, no thefts, no injuries in 500 riots... really? MAGA attacked the capital, BLM and antifa destroyed neighborhoods. The economic bases of already stressed communities with higher unemployment and poverty. Old people in need of medicine watched their local pharmacies destroyed, lets ask them about Jan 6.

Also... coups don't happen in protests in 50 cities at once in their main streets. Coups happen in governmental buildings. Usually government buildings where government sits, like where your fellow travelers smashed their way into

You gonna back that "BLM and antifa destroyed neighbourhoods" statement up with any evidence?
Because I can back up my statement.


https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds

 

[Jukebox The Ghoul]

Berzerker friend, you seem a little confused here, did MAGA attack the capitol or was it some tourists off the beaten path? Were they rioters or being exaggerated? Did you already know about the guy picking up the wireties while you were here claiming they were overblowing it? You think they attacked the Capitol building but that's not an attempt at a coup? Tell me what is the definition of an attempted coup to you?

Your rhetoric seems to be all over the place.

If left wing people tried this would you still be refraining from calling it an attempted coup? If so, why?

Damn judge is far too lenient...off with their heads! The wife is already chewing out her hubby for ignoring her advice to use the main entrance, she got 14 days for following him thru a broken window. If only he listened to her, they went from selfie taking tourists to insurrectionists overthrowing the government all because he saw a short cut.

Rioters stealing, unheard of... They were committing a crime, just not an insurrection. The guy was accused of bringing twist ties with him as part of a conspiracy to abduct politicians. You repeated that here and I gave his side of the story. I'm sure if he's right there will be witnesses who saw the ties on a table or even video.

No, I dont think 1/6 or the 2020 summer of love riots are comparable to a home invasion. Nor do I think they're comparable to each other, 500 riots before an election sounds more coup-like than 1 riot after the election.
If MAGA has 500 riots in the summer of '24 then we can make comparisons.

No trespassing, no assaults with deadly weapons, no thefts, no injuries in 500 riots... really? MAGA attacked the capital, BLM and antifa destroyed neighborhoods. The economic bases of already stressed communities with higher unemployment and poverty. Old people in need of medicine watched their local pharmacies destroyed, lets ask them about Jan 6.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I think it's hilarious how brave he was right up until the moment it became utterly apparent Pence wasn't lining up in front of the firing squads for him.

Mike Pence wasn't afraid of the firing squads.

But please Dear God, not another four years of working for him.

That's your decision, Mike. It is called freewill.

 

[Farm Boy]

Bringing up Trump on draft dodging is not really worth your time, he's done tonnes of heinous **** that like is way more important lmao. Plus we don't even believe in the draft, so why pretend he has to do it?

It's the perfect issue to litmus test your conversational partner with here. This is for president, commander in chief, specifically as it relates to January 6th. Dodging the draft indicates exactly one thing and nothing else: a willingness to shirk social contract when everything goes wrong instead of right and let somebody else like you get shot in your place. That's it. And watch.

Mike Pence wasn't afraid of the firing squads.

President Trump was brave stoking his crowds when there was a chance Pence might give him cover by refusing to certify the vote. When Pence was the man in the sights, Trump was brave. Then Pence said no. He still egged them on, maybe the whole security situation would fold. Still no risk. But once the shooting started, Trump *****-ed out. Now he's on the hook if he doesn't back off. So he does. Trump is never the one to get shot at. He's vaccinated. He's not catching lead in the Capitol during the certification. It's a type of person. And if you have a friend like that, I think we all do, you just know you can't count on them when it might cost them something. It's just how they think.

 

[Berzerker]

I guess you're just ok with that. Noted.

I just said the only corruption I saw was in treating a friend better than the rest of us, that is not 'ok' with it. I'm just not outraged by it. I was told I need to be outraged to be consistent, I am consistent, I'm not outraged when Democrats and Republicans pardon their friends.

It's the perfect issue to litmus test your conversational partner with here. This is for president, commander in chief, specifically as it relates to January 6th. Dodging the draft indicates exactly one thing and nothing else: a willingness to shirk social contract when everything goes wrong instead of right and let somebody else like you get shot in your place. That's it. And watch.

So you have no moral objections to drafts and the sinners are the people avoiding them? If Trump went to Vietnam and was killed who'd be morally responsible? If he went to Canada instead and somebody else went in his place and was killed, who gets the blame.

 

[Berzerker]

So if this is the case why do you care about raising money for bail by Kamala Harris?

The subject is presidential pardons, Blago served time and was not a threat to run out and join a riot or sell another Senate seat. If MAGA had 500 riots before the election and Trump and the GOP were bailing out rioters I'd care. The reason Kamala et al became an issue is because the Democrats were making a fuss about Jan 6 as if their summer of love never happened. Its called hypocrisy. If I spent months condoning 500 riots I'd bite my tongue about Jan 6.

You know in America often for poor people bail can often mean losing your job? That means before you even get a fair trial, you could lose your income, your healthcare, your house if your rent is due. Honestly if we're happy with letting richer suspects walk outside for a fee then why should there be a different rule for poor people? Why judge trustworhiness based on wealth?

Yeah, that aint why the Dems were bailing out rioters. And the Democrats screwed up bail reform, no surprise there. A violent career criminal runs a woman over and gets $1000 bail ($100). Same guy kills people in a parade. There goes bail reform.

Also... coups don't happen in protests in 50 cities at once in their main streets. Coups happen in governmental buildings. Usually government buildings where government sits, like where your fellow travelers smashed their way into

You gonna back that "BLM and antifa destroyed neighbourhoods" statement up with any evidence?
Because I can back up my statement.

They're not my fellow travelers, I dont like rioters and I didn't vote for Trump. You be sure to let us know when the coup plotters are convicted, but until then Jan 6 was a riot, not a coup or insurrection. As for BLM and Antifa, over 500 riots and the Democrats were mum, or bailing out rioters. Oh, but it was just a few % of protests... How many riots would you attend? The Democrats stoked those riots by smearing the police.

But MAGA has 1 riot and its a coup. No, its a legal process and the protest was about pursuing that process and a riot broke out. People can protest or vote against certifying elections. Why are we to assume the 500+ riots before an election had no political motive or effect? If MAGA did that before the 2024 election would the Dems bail them out or accuse them of domestic terrorism?

Berzerker friend, you seem a little confused here, did MAGA attack the capitol or was it some tourists off the beaten path?

I didn't say they were tourists off the beaten path, I said most of the people in the capital looked like tourists walking around taking selfies. See, it was a mostly peaceful protest lol.

Did you already know about the guy picking up the wireties while you were here claiming they were overblowing it? You think they attacked the Capitol building but that's not an attempt at a coup? Tell me what is the definition of an attempted coup to you?

I heard a story about a guy bringing ties and then I heard his version. I dont understand your question. Thats correct, rioters can attack the capital without it being a coup. If that was a coup I'd expect a big gun battle, not the QAnon Shaman walking about the Senate chamber. But so far Garland and the courts aint calling it a coup.

If left wing people tried this would you still be refraining from calling it an attempted coup? If so, why?

Yes, because it wasn't a coup

 

[TheMeInTeam]

How is this a witch hunt? There were politicians who worked with trump supporters who broke in to the Capitol buildinging with wireties and weapons. If someone broke in to your home, you'd atleast want it investigated, no? And if you found out they had inside knowledge given to them from someone who lives with you, you'd want to know why and who?

If you wish to discuss why this is or is not a witch hunt in good faith, you can start by presenting the information correctly and not advocating "politicians" who were not there/involved.

 

[Wastl]

If you wish to discuss why this is or is not a witch hunt in good faith, you can start by presenting the information correctly and not advocating "politicians" who were not there/involved.

It is kind of cute that you are trying to make this about "good faith" arguments, after you barged in and declared this to be a "witch hunt" against all logic, facts and common sense.

If you really cared about arguing properly, you would have offered a reasonable argument, layed out proof for why what everyone could see wasn't actually what was happening. Instead you offered none of those things, and went right in to declare that this was just a scheme to take down political opponents against all rhyme or reason. There is not an ounce of good faith to be found in such a comment. You didn't even try to make an argument, you went straight for the conspiracy theory. You don't care about the facts, you don't care about the truth, all you care about is that the people you support are the good guys, and everyone else are the bad guys. Just blind devotion without any critical thought.

A wild mob stormed a government building, trying to prevent the properly elected candidate from becoming president. They did so after being riled up by propaganda, and with tacid approval from Trump (until he got cold feet). They also were in contact with elected officials who helped them with all this. That, is a coup attempt. That is something that any place that isn't a banana-republic would come down on with the full might of the legal system. Instead you have elected representatives dragging their feet, trying their best not to go after those threatened everything they swore to defend. So much for honor, decency, and loyalty to the United States and the very principles it is founded upon. People like that should never be allowed to wield any sort of power at all. Yet here you are, not just blindly defending those who betrayed their own country, but actively accusing those who try to protect the nation, its citizens and its constitution from those who tried to undermine and destroy it, of themselves being the threat. That is simply pathetic. You try to turn the victims into the villains, while praising evil people who should rot in prison for the crimes they have committed. And yes, helping those people storm the capitol, or doing your best to keep these people away from justice is in itself a crime.

 

[Farm Boy]

So you have no moral objections to drafts and the sinners are the people avoiding them? If Trump went to Vietnam and was killed who'd be morally responsible? If he went to Canada instead and somebody else went in his place and was killed, who gets the blame.

Nah, this issue doesn't muddy up well. Those questions are beside the point. Of course drafts suck. Draft boards suck more than the draft lotto. Yet draft dodging is not a victimless crime. The drafts have quotas. They have need. If somebody dodged, somebody else filled the quota for them in thier stead. This is how drafts can suck and your countrymen can be parasitic losers at the same time. If we're fortunate, we may see neither drafts nor dodgers in our lives. Unless, of course, enough of us put cowardice on a pedestal and elect it president.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It is kind of cute that you are trying to make this about "good faith" arguments, after you barged in and declared this to be a "witch hunt" against all logic, facts and common sense.

It's pretty obvious you're not willing/able to argue in good faith, given this quote.

But just in case you are, you might be interested in the fair number of unindicted co-conspirators of the riot who are still not even charged nearly a year later, despite FBI/common public knowing who they are. It might also be useful to see which charges actually stick on the people there that day, or maybe the FBI's stance on it.

This obviously isn't the first time the topic has been discussed, and I'm not inclined to rehash old arguments that were never answered. People have been given fake charges en masse' and held without bail for extended periods of time on the absurd notion that this was some kind of well-coordinated attack. All while the people who actually tried to incite a riot (or initially broke the path open) are a) identified and b) unindicted. Why?

Meet Ray Epps, Part 2: Damning New Details Emerge Exposing Massive Web Of Unindicted Operators At The Heart Of January 6 - Revolver

Note that while this article makes some fishy conjectures, it still gives enough video evidence and sequences to make holding non-violent actors w/o bail 8 months while others who committed violence outright walk seem suspicious. I don't buy a coordinated democratic effort any more than I buy a coordinated republican one, but I do find it interesting that some of the most obvious candidates for charges were never indicted at all. Political convenience, most likely.

Meanwhile, even after the FBI publicly claims they can't support the narrative of insurrection with evidence, congress still decides it has a "legislative interest" to go after specific politicians. You'd think the guy inciting the event on video or the people breaking through barriers might have the more useful information...

If you really cared about arguing properly, you would have offered a reasonable argument, layed out proof for why what everyone could see wasn't actually what was happening.

Sorry, but the burden of proof is not on proving a negative. We were told it was an insurrection, which was a lie. We were told that an officer was killed by the riot, which was a lie. We were told that 500+ people were rioters, which is a lie (a smaller % of them did, in fact, do violent acts meeting the standard).

But even before that, basic due process demands proof of wrongdoing, not proving the negative. If you want this being called a witch hunt to be anything other than reasonable, the evidential burden is not on me. If they want it to stop looking like a witch hunt, they should stop lying to us repeatedly while ignoring known criminals.

A wild mob stormed a government building

Derp.

A group of people broke in, follows by a large number who walked in peacefully/unopposed. Ever notice how many of these "insurrection" or rioting charges have actually stuck? Seems odd that they can't manage while trying this hard.

They did so after being riled up by propaganda, and with tacid approval from Trump (until he got cold feet)

Citation needed. Remember that part where you were talking about the importance of presenting evidence to back your assertions? Try that out.

They also were in contact with elected officials who helped them with all this.

Citation needed.

That, is a coup attempt.

Objectively false, how can anybody still make this assertion and believe it respectable? It's been debunked repeatedly, here and elsewhere.

So much for honor, decency, and loyalty to the United States and the very principles it is founded upon.

So much indeed, as you ironically advocate for trampling on those principles in the same paragraph, repeatedly.

You try to turn the victims into the villains, while praising evil people who should rot in prison for the crimes they have committed. And yes, helping those people storm the capitol, or doing your best to keep these people away from justice is in itself a crime.

That's some pretty libelous rhetoric for someone who comically challenges a request for "good faith", while acting against it at the same time! But perhaps the original poster I answered is more capable of avoiding abject hypocrisy.

You gonna back that "BLM and antifa destroyed neighbourhoods" statement up with any evidence?

Note that when you involve either violence or property damage, it is a riot, not a protest.

2020 burning and looting riots are the greatest loss to riots in US history. I don't see any reason we should respect the organization that affirms communist principles and continues to back Jussie Smollett, even independent of people who use it as a front to commit expensive riots with amazingly minimal penalty at large scale during an already-costly lockdown.

And of course, "insurance claims" doesn't cover the many businesses who aren't covered for rioting.

It's a type of person. And if you have a friend like that, I think we all do, you just know you can't count on them when it might cost them something. It's just how they think.

Completely aside from the above, I think most of us know at least a few people like this. While you can't count on them to save you when it really counts, watching how they behave as trouble comes can still be insightful/useful, because they are pretty good at keeping a pulse for when trouble is close. They have to be, in order to avoid it the way you describe. Trump isn't a good person, but he's pretty good at this particular technique.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

"This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election"

 

[TheMeInTeam]

"This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election"

Are you posting in response to someone else, or is that supposed to address anything in my post? I'm presuming the former, though it wouldn't be clear which other post it's meant to address.