Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don’t like nor agree with the things Trump and his advisors said or did that day. What I question is whether the evidence amounts to criminal charges that can be brought before a court of law. The standard for guilty is “beyond a shadow of doubt”. Unless the prosecutor can produce evidence of direct collusion between the Trump administration and the people who invaded the capital then all the current evidence is not likely to result in a guilty verdict unless the judge and jury are all people who absolutely hate Trump. Without evidence of members of the Trump administration orchestrating the protestors to action it may not be enough for an indictment.
Then let it be known that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers were on Parlor- Plotting the events for Jan6. They met with Good Ole Roger Stone( trumps' go to guy to spread misinformation--- also the guy Trumpy pardoned for all his illegal shanigans) at the Willard Hotel in DC days before to go over the capitol invasion . Its a matter of linking the actors to the crime. Which is clearly being brought forth at this hearing. Or have you not listened to the testimony of the oath keeper and Proud boy chaps?
I think there is a huge misconception of "Beyond a reasonable doubt" - the fifth amendment carries some determination on this. The prosecutor has the task of presenting the " evidence /testimony to the juror or the judge. To prove someone guilty, the prosecutor does not need to eliminate all doubt. This would be impossible, as only a witness to a crime can declare with absolute certainty that something occurred.
A judge has already made clear that an insurrection occurred on January 6- the "More likely than NOT" fits here to bring forth changes . Trump plotted and orchestrated that days event - knowingly . He willfully defied his duty to intervene on the threat and harm done at the capitol. You have to be some kind of dumb if you think his picking THAT DATE and THAT TIME to have a ( editor sarcasm interjecting)- Peaceful rally to commiserate with his crowd of armed supporters about the COMPLETELY FALSE "STOLEN election" . Though Trumpy himself WAS actually TRYING to the STEAL the election and stay in power. How bizarre is that?? HE was going to stop at NOTHING to see that HE wore the crown and ruled this country under HIS terms. You dont have to like or dislike the criminal to set a fair verdict of guilty. Weird that you make the assumption that someone has to HATE a person to find them guilty or innocent. A person can be very much dislike the CRIME itself and HOLD the person accountable for engaging in that act.
I think this committee is being thorough . Where I think they fall short is - certain important pieces of information are being kept from the public. Maybe so the case isn't tainted PRIOR to charges. Gosh knows if Trumpy gets wind of any truths of evidence, he will completely spin it til its morphed into yet another tale of lies. He isnt the victim here, he is the perpe- TRAITOR.
I don’t like nor agree with the things Trump and his advisors said or did that day. What I question is whether the evidence amounts to criminal charges that can be brought before a court of law. The standard for guilty is “beyond a shadow of doubt”. Unless the prosecutor can produce evidence of direct collusion between the Trump administration and the people who invaded the capital then all the current evidence is not likely to result in a guilty verdict unless the judge and jury are all people who absolutely hate Trump. Without evidence of members of the Trump administration orchestrating the protestors to action it may not be enough for an indictment.
Whether Trump is tried criminally is not the point. The hearings have shown unequivocally that he lost the election, knew he lost the election, lied to his followers for two months that the election was stolen, called them to D.C. on 1/6, urged them to march on the Capitol knowing they were armed, tweeted that Mike Pence was a coward and letting him down as they were breaking windows, and waited 2 additional hours while his staff and family begged him to call off his dogs before telling them he loved them and they should go home in peace.
But you'd vote for him again because you think he did good things for the country. What he said about shooting someone on 5th avenue is true. Appalling, but true.
Except he did in fact tell folks to go home, and you’re assuming had he made a video earlier they’d have stopped, yet we hear how unruly the rioters were and how they were on a mission to take over the Capitol, albeit unarmed against a huge amount of armed Capitol police that could’ve easily taken them out. But since we’re assuming, it’s unlikely with all of this going on that they would’ve listened.
So what did he do for the almost 2 hours after they started to ransack the capital, wouldn't a normal president go right on national TV and tell them to stop, where was he.
Now it turns out that they did have guns and he knew it.
So finally at 4:17 PM after the damage is done he tells them to go home with that weak statement, is that supposed to be some sort of victory. His entire staff looked on in horror for hours and he did nothing and he tells them he loves them after all the damage.
Quote:
2:24 p.m.
Trump tweets: "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution."
He continues with more baseless claims about a fraudulent election.
2:38 p.m.
Trump tweets again, calling for support of the Capitol Police and law enforcement. He urges people to "stay peaceful."
But at that moment, inside the Capitol, the riot continues to unfold.
He grudgingly Tweeted for them to go home at 4:17 PM after his staff and the SS pressured him:
"I know your pain. I know your hurt," he begins. "We love you. You're very special. You've seen what happens. You've seen the way others are treated. ... I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace."
I thought the best part of the night when they showed Josh Hawley with his power fisting the rioters then showed him running through the Capitol to save his treasonous hide.
I read a lot of speculation and allegations but I don’t see anything that is a crime on the part of the previous administration. Is there any evidence of someone in the previous administration actively orchestrating the events on January 6? Any answers to the allegations of capital authorities opening the doors to the capital and waving in protestors? Any answers why the Speaker of the House denied National Guard and or additional law enforcement at the capital?
I believe the crux of this matter IS whether someone in the previous administration 'actively orchestrated' the events on January 6th. It's the correct way to look at this, IMO. I'm not sure anyone has clearly defined the inception of this riot, insurrection, violent protest, whatever we are going to ultimately call this.
Did Trump himself sit down with his minions and plan this out? I don't think so. But it certainly seems clear to me at this point that he did nothing to quell the violent protest once it started and in fact did throw gasoline on the fire.
I believe the crux of this matter IS whether someone in the previous administration 'actively orchestrated' the events on January 6th. It's the correct way to look at this, IMO. I'm not sure anyone has clearly defined the inception of this riot, insurrection, violent protest, whatever we are going to ultimately call this.
Did Trump himself sit down with his minions and plan this out? I don't think so. But it certainly seems clear to me at this point that he did nothing to quell the violent protest once it started and in fact did throw gasoline on the fire.
Not his responsibility to tell any American citizen how to vent their frustration. President Trump did not pay them to break into the Capital. If a band has a concert and afterwards a few drunks decide to rob a food truck on their way back home, the band is not responsible.
Not his responsibility to tell any American citizen how to vent their frustration. President Trump did not pay them to break into the Capital. If a band has a concert and afterwards a few drunks decide to rob a food truck on their way back home, the band is not responsible.
We disagree. This wasn't an AC/DC concert gone wild. Your analogy doesn't pencil here. Not the same thing.
Not his responsibility to tell any American citizen how to vent their frustration. President Trump did not pay them to break into the Capital. If a band has a concert and afterwards a few drunks decide to rob a food truck on their way back home, the band is not responsible.
Were he Joe Citizen I would agree, but he was not an ordinary citizen. He was the country’s leader. It absolutely was his responsibility to them how NOT to vent their frustrations. It absolutely was his responsibility to protect the smooth operation of the nation he was supposed to be leading. He absolutely was his responsibility to stop them from threatening the life of his Vice President. He was supposed to, you know, lead.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
