User

He sent several public messages calling for peace. He was not in charge of security that day, the local police, the Capitol police... he had no magic "stop" button like he just sat there not pushing it. If only the Democrats cared more about security than their hate of men in uniform, there could have been more National guard that day. As a matter of fact, he posted that message at the direction of Trump.

Nope, it is your fantasy that pretends "stop" somehow was a call for violence. Something the vast majority of folks clearly missed out on. More Democrats believe that shit than any Trump supporters did by a magnitude of a million to one. Appears you guys got the secret decoder rings by mistake. LOL, he is a one time convicted felon, it was 34 counts of doing the same thing... but you keep acting like that 34 is some kind of meaningful number LOL And I imagine sometime later this year or next when it is overturned on appeal, you will be here celebrating the rule of law still.

To kill a human baby? So, like I said, you are just fine with 1 Million dead babies a year for the mere convenience of it.

As opposed to folks on the left who reduce the unborn human babies to nothing more than clumps of cells and don't care about 1,000,000 killed every year, mainly for the mere convenience of it?

Where is the corruption?

There were no shootings in Sandy Hook before there was one. There were no shootings in Uvdale before there was one... Again, your point is absurd.

Again, are you lying or just ignorant about the timeline that day? He did not just watch for 3 hours. And nothing you said here shows Trump intended for this to happen. That is your twisted speculation. Magically cover him? I am just telling you what he explicitly said. You choose to ignore it because it is inconvenient to your bogus argument. Well, without Columbus sailing the Oceans like he did... none of this may have ever happened. So what? If Democrats had not lied with their inflammatory bullshitting the summer of BLM violence would not have happened. No, I do not need to answer your question, because it is based on ignorance or a lie on your part. He did not just sit there for 3 hours. I already told you this. So, why are you ignoring that?

Above the law? Do you attack the legitimacy of the Federal courts now?!

Wow, you think Trump had a live feed inside the Capitol that day, and could hear them saying "Hang Mike Pence" when he tweeted that? He tweeted this about 15 minutes later: "Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!" Maybe... just maybe you are dishonestly framing things that happened that day. Hmmmm. Just maybe.

No, they didn't. The vast majority showed up and left peacefully that day. As you guys love to say about all the BLM protests and violence, the vast majority were peaceful! I present factual things he actually said. It is you are the one imagining he meant something more. Clearly the vast majority of folks that day didn't get that hidden message. It is you who imagines Trump knowingly caused this. Trump had no power to let it go on or not, he was not in charge of security that day. If Trump had his way, there would have been vastly more National Guard on site to keep the peace. But Democrats didn't like that when he had them there for the BLM riots.

You mocked the notion that it "had nothing to do with him" which is not any argument at play in the post of mine you responded to. I am glad you acknowledge it was in fact a lie to claim he directed people to invade the Capitol. No, the people I responded to were being dishonest. Now, you are claiming this was what Trump intended. Where do you get that from, other than your imagination? Trump clearly told them to go march in peace. It was a peacefully rally and protest that was organized. There is ZERO evidence Trump was ever involved in anything in any way that was meant to make this a day of violence, which is why 99+% of the people who showed up had no plans to engage in violence. The vast majority of people showed up and left. The vast majority who marched to the Capitol, left peacefully. The vast majority of the folks at the Capitol who engaged in illegal activity still did so peacefully and left. It was only like a dozen right wing extremists who were found to have any plans for actual violence that day and they had nothing to do with any plan with Trump. Most who engaged in violence that day got caught up in a mindless mob, which I fully condemn. So, no, I am not being dishonest here at all. And if you want to talk about shameless lying and "incitement" lets hear your take on the summer of BLM violence and how much blame you lay at the feet of Democrats who did the same crap and pushed the same kind of lies to "incite" all of that violence. It makes a hell of a difference if he explicitly ordered violence that day when you (or someone else) are here claiming he did. No, he made no such implications, see my argument above. It is either dishonest on your part or ignorance, that you claim he did nothing for 3 hours. The timeline shows otherwise. He made several different public statements/tweets while it unfolded before 3 hours.

Same old stupid arguments from dumb politicians on the left. They act like an armed population can't even fight back against F-15's. It is just pure ignorance. For starters, armed populations can in fact fight back, because you can't win a war just by dropping bombs and those F-15's (and the American logistical Military machine) is based all over the country. Who is going to defend those air fields? Protect the fuel supply? Protect the parts delivery? Protect the food, water, and medical supplies all needed by all of the military bases spread out across the country? Yes, an armed population can in fact defeat those F-15's.

Was there anything in particular you wanted to share here, or were you just mindlessly posting random links?

So, naturally, if they respect power your big plan is to stop supporting Ukraine. So, naturally, if it is that you think they sense weakness, you want to project even more weakness. How do you presume to know how worried or not they are? NATO and the West have continued to show they are willing to pour the money, and military equipment needed, to help Ukraine defeat Russia. This has proven out as Russian advances were mostly pushed back after the initial invasion and they can't get much farther and have wasted massive amounts of manpower and their war machine in trying to do so. And so now... you want to bail on Ukraine. If you are so concerned about showing strength, you sure have a funny way of showing it now. That is your false presumption, that it will only be solved at a negotiating table, and right now what is it that Russia is offering that you want Ukraine to accept? Because all you are offering now is to stop supporting Ukraine. That is not going to help with any negotiations. That is going to give Russia an upper hand in destroying more of Ukraine if not outright conquering them. You don't even support helping Ukraine now... but you are willing to help them if Putin continues? Putin is trying to invade them now, right now, there is a war right now, and you are not willing to commit to any protections or deterrents. Nothing you are saying makes any sense. No, you want to abandon them and are here trying to argue like you know what is best for them, when you do not. We are two folks arguing on a forum, your positions are either good ones or bad ones, you are making factual statements or ignorant ones... my calling out your arguments for being what they are, mostly ignorant and supporting of Russia is just that. You threatening to somehow care less because of it... only shows how much more incredibly awful your position is. I am not the government, if you feel shamed, good. You are here putting forth these two faced arguments wanting to bail on Ukraine and give in to Putins aggression.

Go March in peace... Yeah, it's just amazing how you ignore the parts inconvenient to your dishonest narrative and twist obvious figures of speech.

Wow. You moved those goalposts from a claim that Trump directed them to invade to “had nothing to do with him” If you were a farmer, I’d imagine you’d have zero problems with the crows with these fantastic Strawmen.

That isn't what you said. It seems you are moving the goalposts now that I proved you wrong. I had to provide multiple links to things you seemed unaware of happening. Well, the point of warfare is not to level cities, in fact, that kind of warfare is expressly forbidden by international law and norms today. Ukraine is in fact making strategic attacks on Russian resources and if you bothered to look at the link I provided, you will see they are significant ones. Ukraine has also been hitting airfields and other military targets on Russian soil. They can certainly resist Russian aggression enough to make it too painful for him. Your argument seems to be that you want Putin stomped out, but if all Ukraine can do is push him out and give him a bloody face, well, nevermind then, just surrender. No, they do not need to negotiate. You want them to negotiate... and from all indications, it is because the outcome you support here is in favor of Russia. You just restated your position again. I asked you why. Why is it your opinion that it has. Except, your position does favor Russia. Peace can be obtained from opposing aggression. Surrendering to it invites more aggression. Again... you are the one who now opposes giving Ukraine tools for the job you criticize them for not having. It is a two faced argument. No, that is the best for Russia, not Ukraine. Ukraine leadership wishes to fight on to defend themselves and their homeland. Yes, you are siding with Russia. This isn't what Ukraine wants.

LOL, again, you admit this is all politics. Garland is keeping this to protect Biden from how we all know how awful he will look. I understand that we all know he will look like an old man with dementia on that video.

Yes, it was. Run away! Where was that their conclusion? What was dishonest? You don't get to ignore it and then claim it was dishonest without actually making an argument for how or explaining it. You waste plenty of time on here responding to me, just like you are doing now... it is only when I have you dead to rights that you find it a waste of your time. How cowardly.

Wow. I never said Bowser was Pelosi. Any other irrelevant little observations you wish to make to distract from what you claimed? Not sure what you think that proves or says in response to your outright lie. Again, you lied. You are a liar. Trump never told or directed anyone to invade the Capitol.

You made a point about taking the war to Russian soil. They are. They have been. That was what the example was of. Make up your mind. Do you want Ukraine to negotiate their surrender with the man, or does someone like him need to be stomped out? Why has that window passed? Again... Russia is invading Ukraine, the end to the war is in their hands or in Ukraine forcing them to end it or you are wanting Ukraine to basically surrender. Buy time for what? You want the war to end... now you claim negotiations will buy time. You are "being a realist" entirely in Russias favor... Best... how? Certainly not the best for Ukraine. The best for Russia. Which seems to be exactly what you want.

You people have been brainwashed, duped, and lied to. Now all you can do is mindlessly parrot what you have been told. "A January 6 committee staffer asked Ornato, “When it comes to the National Guard statement about having 10,000 troops or any other number of troops, do you recall any discussion prior to the 6th about whether and how many National Guard troops to deploy on January 6th?” Ornato surprised the committee by noting he did recall a conversation between Meadows and Bowser: “He was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed,” Ornato told investigators." "Meadows “wanted to know if she need any more guardsmen,” Ornato testified. “And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’ I remember that number. Now that you said it, it reminded me of it. And that she was all set. She had, I think it was like 350 or so for intersection control, and those types of things not in the law enforcement capacity at the time.” Ornato was correct. Bowser declined the offer, asking only for a few hundred National Guard and requiring them to serve in a very limited capacity. " https://cha.house.gov/2024/3/chairman-loudermilk-publishes-never-before-released-anthony-ornato-transcribed-interview

This is an outright lie. Trump never directed anyone to invade the Capitol. This is an outright lie. Trump never encouraged anyone to storm the US Capitol.

"Executive privilege... for what?" <--------------------- QUESTION MARK So you think they are magic words that are uttered and make everything OK?

So, now you support Ukraine fighting back harder? Great! That is what they have been doing: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-military-says-it-carried-out-refinery-attack-june-5-2024-06-10/#:~:text=June 10 (Reuters) - Ukraine's,billion dollars in lost production. The consequences of having to deal with a Ukraine armed and equipped with more lethal firepower that has been devastating Russian armor, devastating Russian men with artillery, all the things that have been grinding down the Russian war machine. It's more than you just wanting to surrender. So now... you want more support and more aggression? OK, great! So, now you support more military aid, like more air support? OK, great! https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukraine-may-store-some-f-16-warplanes-in-other-countries-to-protect-them-from-russian-attacks I don't consider more than 100 Billion in aid and more "for show" support. So, now your tune has changed! Lets give them more support. OK, Great! Putin is struggling with manpower, weapons, and resources even more than Ukraine is. This notion that he can somehow just do this forever is nonsense; why... is it almost wish casting on your part. Nothing you have said here supports the only way out of this being negotiation. Nothing you have said explains how Putin is a trust worthy person to negotiate with. OK... sure isn't getting them very much more in the last 3 years now. Who said victory? I am merely pointing out that Russia is losing a lot of manpower and weaponry. You have no idea of what the future holds. Why... it is almost like you are cheering Russia on. Battlefield conditions change daily, strategy and tactics continue to evolve, there are way too many variables to definitively declare that Ukraine can't make any gains or that Russia will stay committed to their losses forever. You just got done saying in the same post that they were the only way... glad you are coming around to my position.