You are completely lost if you equate intelligence agencies (not even Clinton) indicating the possible influences on the 2016 election AFTER Trump took office with the lame
duck president of the United States inciting a literal insurrection to stop the certification of the 2020 election results in an attempt to stay in power (who, by the by, publicly asked Russia to influence the 2016 election… multiple times).
Clinton was never president, by the way, so I am not even sure what the fuck you are even trying to say.
There isn't much actual thoughts involved, just blind hatred for the other. Ironically pretty much the same as the maga crowd in that respect.What? So are you saying Trump kept his Pres seat and is till pres now?
Does it matter if he complained if he's out of office? Clinton never held her hands up to losing an election for pres race without fucking complaining either. Even dragging Stein into the reason she lost!
You're all hypocrites at what you use and don't.
Selective politics.
You have again posted nonsense under the guise of “impartiality”.What? So are you saying Trump kept his Pres seat and is till pres now?
Does it matter if he complained if he's out of office? Clinton never held her hands up to losing an election for pres race without fucking complaining either. Even dragging Stein into the reason she lost!
You're all hypocrites at what you use and don't.
Selective politics.
You are actually losing the plot and making things up now. What you are experiencing is a few (only a couple really) of people disagreeing with you on the internet. Although you find it uncomfortable, it's not a hostile or threatening action, it's a discussion, or at least it should be.You have again posted nonsense under the guise of “impartiality”.
You are the one making things up to support equating actions that are in no way equivalent.
There have only been two recent administrations that have used the apparatus of government in a wholly bad faith (and extremely dangerous) attempt to gain or keep power (one successful, and one unsuccessful), and they both involved the republican side.
This feigned both sides position, and the “blind hatred” nonsense from MSC, are feeble attempts at covering actual political motivations and beliefs that neither of you have the courage or conviction to express in the open.
And it is said to see both of you lower yourselves to such cowardice.
Thank you for making my point for me. And way to read something that is not there from my post. Again, bad faith actions.You are actually losing the plot and making things up now. What you are experiencing is a few (only a couple really) of people disagreeing with you on the internet. Although you find it uncomfortable, it's not a hostile or threatening action, it's a discussion, or at least it should be.
The idea of trumpers hiding behind every lamp post and for some reason not having the courage to be open about it is bonkers. You need to grow up and accept that not everyone agrees with you, but even those people might not be rabid trumpers.
You are quick to accuse others of cowardice but are one of the biggest online crybabies on here.
Thank you for making my point for me.
Very sad to see you lower yourself to this state.
I will now take my own advice regarding debating fools and disengage completely.
I and others have talked about why January 6th (and all of the actions and rhetoric of Trump et al before and after, which needs to be included as part of it, as Jack Smith credibly argues in his latest filing) were and are a credible threat to democratic institutions at length in various threads. I and others have particularised it numerous times, as have scholars, historians, prosecutors, and political analysts.I do think the potential impact of January 6th is overstated in some quarters. I’ve seen people on here argue it represented a genuine threat to the institutions of American democracy without particularising how that would have occurred. How a rag tag collection of weirdos, conspiracy nuts and nonces would have overwhelmed the US military and other forces of the state to seize power, if they’d somehow managed to take the Capitol, which when all is said and done, is just a building.
That doesn’t mean I don’t think Trump’s intention wasn’t to at least subvert democracy, but the notion that it was going to be in any way effective simply doesn’t bear scrutiny imo.
Surely the worst elements of maga were trying to say the j6 mob were not angry weirdos but trying to legitimise them as patriots or whatever?I and others have talked about why January 6th (and all of the actions and rhetoric of Trump et al before and after, which needs to be included as part of it, as Jack Smith credibly argues in his latest filing) at length in various threads. I and others have particularised it numerous times, as have scholars, historians, prosecutors, and political analysts.
I don’t have the energy to go through all of it again, but I will summarise by saying January 6th was not simply the violent (and deadly) attempt of a mob to take the capital building and stop the certification of the 2020 election results. It was tens of other schemes being perpetrated in Washington and many states in tandem, many of which have lead to prosecutions and convictions of those that lead or participated in them. Congress members—and the Vice President of the United States—were genuinely and acutely in danger on 6 January, that alone is an attack on the institutions of democracy, even ignoring the fake electors scheme, the MAGA voting block refusing to certify the election results, the very near purge of the Justice Department to allow for the appointment of acting leadership who would reject the election results, the prevailing narrative on the right that the 2020 election was stolen (despite absolutely no evidence), and the many other local, state, and federal actions undertaken before, during, and after January 6th.
The flippancy shown by many toward the full depth and scope of January 6th is arguably one of the most dangerous outcomes of the failed insurrection and, in my mind, is the actual greatest threat to democratic institutions (and not just in the US). And that is not even a particularly novel or insightful stance, given we have seen many times in history what can occur when these types of actions are not taken seriously.
To look at January 6th as simply the failed attempt to take the capital building by an angry mob of weirdos is an exceedingly myopic, naive, and, yes, dangerous stance. And is exactly the one the worst elements in the MAGA (far-right and alt-right) movement have encouraged observers to take.
All those things you describe and I’m still none the wiser about how they were going to assume, exercise and retain power in a federal nation of 50 states and over 300 million people. How were they possibly going to have the military onboard? Or federal police forces? Or the FBI? Or States like California or New York? You think someone like Gavin Newsom would just let them get on with it? You think the people of New York would just shrug their shoulders if there was a coup?I and others have talked about why January 6th (and all of the actions and rhetoric of Trump et al before and after, which needs to be included as part of it, as Jack Smith credibly argues in his latest filing) at length in various threads. I and others have particularised it numerous times, as have scholars, historians, prosecutors, and political analysts.
I don’t have the energy to go through all of it again, but I will summarise by saying January 6th was not simply the violent (and deadly) attempt of a mob to take the capital building and stop the certification of the 2020 election results. It was tens of other schemes being perpetrated in Washington and many states in tandem, many of which have lead to prosecutions and convictions of those that lead or participated in them. Congress members—and the Vice President of the United States—were genuinely and acutely in danger on 6 January, that alone is an attack on the institutions of democracy, even ignoring the fake electors scheme, the MAGA voting block refusing to certify the election results, the very near purge of the Justice Department to allow for the appointment of acting leadership who would reject the election results, the prevailing narrative on the right that the 2020 election was stolen (despite absolutely no evidence), and the many other local, state, and federal actions undertaken before, during, and after January 6th.
The flippancy shown by many toward the full depth and scope of January 6th is arguably one of the most dangerous outcomes of the failed insurrection and, in my mind, is the actual greatest threat to democratic institutions (and not just in the US). And that is not even a particularly novel or insightful stance, given we have seen many times in history what can occur when these types of actions are not taken seriously.
To look at January 6th as simply the failed attempt to take the capital building by an angry mob of weirdos is an exceedingly myopic, naive, and, yes, dangerous stance. And is exactly the one the worst elements in the MAGA (far-right and alt-right) movement have encouraged observers to take.