This question is sincere as I'm trying to find out myself. I'm a fairly active reader of news but have only seen outrage in mainstream news outlets about the DC protests and not specific claims of what Trump did or how the protests were more violent or dangerous than the months of BLM protests last year. The attached video by JP Sears seems to suggest that Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Apple, and Google have teamed up with Liberals to censor dissent and promote that Trump is dangerous via propaganda. In the video, he shows two tweets of Trump, shown below, that he says is what the fuss is all about - is that right?
Bonus question: Nancy Pelosi says that the protesters have chosen their "whiteness" (see " Is "whiteness" required for a healthy modern society?" ) over democracy. Is the support for "whiteness" the same as violence?
President Trump did NOT incite violence, however a number of leftist Congress critter have done so over the past 10 years.
It is sad that JP has been forced by current events to move from poking fun at vegans to political commentary. This may be a canary in the coal mine sign.
He won the presidency in 2016, despite efforts to steal the election for Clinton.
That was his crime. From that point on, lies, deception and theft have characterized everything they’ve done. Filling the front ranks with Antifa thugs thinly disguised as Trump supporters on January 6 was exactly their MO.
Didn’t you get the memo? Trying to investigate the biggest criminal theft in history is now defined as stealing the election.
As for the Pelosi nonsense, why don’t you spend a week listening to Ben Shapiro videos and get a clue about how to avoid letting the left frame all your questions?
Is support for whiteness the same as violence? Yeah, in Pelosi’s wet dreams. The question is unworthy of a response.
Fuck ‘em all.
Liberals repeatedly inciting VIOLENCE against Trump Supporters. Encouraging "punching us in the face", assisinating the president, encouraging unrest in the streets, blowing up the white house, creating crowds and telling us we are NOT welcome anymore, anywhere!
Stop and think. What would a real call to action from Trump look like?
What would be the outcome. If Trump put in a call for civilian infantry what would happen?
You quicikly realize the answer to the above question is a resounding no. The left is using us any way they see fit. All of us, not just populists or Trump supporters. You want change fine, lets not throw the baby out with the bath water. Can we please not become a communist country. Pretty please.
Not that I saw. I watched the speech and did not hear one inciting comment. If anything, with him being late and his speech running long, I believe that most people were more concerned with getting walking to warm up.
What I saw of the March, it was peaceful as well.
I had seen a timeline posted on the internet that apparently shows the capital being entered before the walk even reached the capital. Not sure how accurate it was though.
That's some pretty hate filled speech. To call out a single demographic, a single race and to seek to denigrate them for being evil because of the color of their skin is racist. Oh, yeah, that was Pelosi and she was calling out white people. Totally legit. My bad.
If you take the Democrat position at face value, anyone who questioned the outcome of the election incited violence, irrespective of whether they had a Constitutional right to question the outcome.
I mean, they are - as we speak - trying to expel lawmakers from Congress for "inciting violence" by supporting Trump and his assertion that there were irregularities. Never mind the fact that we've lived through four years of Democrats citing irregularities and a compromised election.
The question is more, how much do the main stream media and left wing politicians through four years of making false claims and charges against Trump, need to take responsibility?
People who made these claims and continue to do so, how much are they responsible for the growing anger in the conservative US?
If a boy pokes a dog every day and eventually the dog bites the boy, is it the dog or the boy at fault?
The Communist left - and the Repube parties became tacitly and explicitly violent when Trump had the audacity to WIN the election and took up residence in the White House.
His presence at the table of - the seat of - gov't did not so much "incite" violence as it triggered a level of hate and avarice and evil that already existed - Trumps Presidency effectively took those evil means out of the closet and thrust them into the daylight. Every time the Communists attacked Trump they revealed their own faces of contorted evil. The behavior of the Swamp people is akin to the gnasing of teeth and the wailing of the unrighteous ones at the end of an age.
No, Trump did NOT incite violence - he merely provoked evil men into acting out openly on their utter contempt for ideals of liberty, freedom and righteousness.
People are very happy to fall for the con of distraction, as everything Mr.President says is broadcast for opinion, as many forget the word "if" was debated before Congress and the Supreme Court by a president that people loved and hated. At times in speaking to a crowd the President has made sarcastic remarks of violence, but the conversation lead to the statement and was obvious to be sarcastic. He has always pushed peace with law and order without violence. So far I've heard those in government claiming the President responsible for violence are the ones that have publicly pushed and prompted violence during the last years. Fools support hypocrites.
If he believes the election is fraudulent and all legal remedies are exhausted then patriots that agree have ever right to revolt if he is right. The problem is the establishment will not allow the election to be properly examined. In other words nobody knows if a revolt is justified.
Personally I think massive fraud has always been part of U.S. politics. Keeping that in mind I'm asking myself if this is time for armed sedition. I lean heavily towards a no. I don't think a better government can be constituted with the available leadership.
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." - Trump's 1/6 transcript recorded by Al Jazeera. Violence started at 1 pm Trump's speech ended at about 1:10 pm about 30 to 40 minute walk from the Capitol. The premise that Trump's 1/6 speech incited the Capitol Hill violence is not legally founded with the current known evidence (However, by the plain English definition, every political speech can be construed as incitement as can anything).
As for promoting the "stolen election" conspiracy, also not a legal standard for charging incitement. However, when you consider that the party that promoted the first "impeachment" is the party that will now own the legislative and executive branches because Americans love to be lied to and entertained, it would seem that impeachment is a win win. Should be interesting to see what they throw in the coliseum once the lions get hungry again.
No, Trump didn't incite violence with his words, human interpretations of his words did!
Sure his words can be taken in various ways-either in a negative light or positive, however, with the current political climate as it is, more or less anything is seen as offensive, or violent, or racist nowadays.
There are many sensitive people out there getting offended at anything and everything, the term 'racist' for example has been very heavily diluted, so that even picking your nose, or scratching your behind in front of a person of colour is seen as racist (BTW: a non-white female here-in case somebody decides I'm a white supremacist, and just don't understand blah blah blah!)
When you take the 'they will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form' it can be interpreted in many different ways, if you want to see violence in those words, then you'll only see violence.
If somebody sees the posts from Trump as inciting violence, then I'd like to ask them to explain what some members of black lives matter have said about white people and the 'patriarchy'.
Yes it's not the same as Trumps posts, but still explain to me what the words of some BLM members towards whites/the patriarchy mean!
You cannot have only one side or one group of people as being seen as evil whilst seeing everybody in the other side or group as right, or virtuous-people are people and there are good and bad in every group.
The massive blunder here was Trump putting himself in a position that is open to interpretation: We are going to walk down to the Capitol... he said, not to wage an assault but to cheer on Republicans questioning the vote. Even more problematic, as he sent them off: You’ll never take back our country with weakness, you have to show strength.
I don’t believe Trump wanted the chaos that ensued, but the fact that he’s a central figure in it, is a profound failure of leadership.
Historians may look back at this day as the beginning of the end of the United States. Don’t laugh. We saw the Soviet Union disintegrate just 30 years ago.
The Take-Back-Our-Country speech is a powerful, and unearned victory for Democrats, woke-progressives, socialists, and everyone who hates America. How can we criticize Antifa or BLM after this?
The newly fired-up Democratics, while calling for unity, are doing the opposite, working night and day to racialize the attack, changing the narrative from election fraud to white supremacy.
The fiasco also helps the left achieve another major goal: to categorize Trump supporters as armed terrorists who are in the same league as Hamas, Hezbollah or ISIS.
It’s also empowered what was a weak incoming Biden Administration.
The big loser in this chapter, rightly or wrongly, are conservative values. In the space of a few chaotic hours, a handful of people wiped out almost all the achievements of the past four years.