"Trump incited a riot" - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Agent Steel
#15149485
There is a claim that has been falsely and irresponsibly made by a number of news sources that needs to be fact-checked. The claim is that "Trump incited a riot" or that "Trump incited violence" onto the capital.

The Facts: On January 6th Donald Trump and his followers gathered in Washington D.C. to protest Joe Biden's disputed presidential victory. At no point in Trump's hour long speech did he direct or instruct his audience to violently attack the capital. The reality is that Trump called for a march towards the capital, a common occurrence that has taken place throughout American history. The only arguable inference to violence was the use of the words "fight" by Trump, a word often and commonly used to denote a metaphorical fight - a fight of protest. Trump did not plan, instruct, or condone any act of violence or criminal behavior. Within just an hour of violence breaking out, Trump immediately denounced it and called for the violence to cease.

My verdict for the claim that Trump "incited a riot" thus in my opinion has a rating of Mostly False.
#15149517
Agent Steel wrote: Within just an hour of violence breaking out, Trump immediately denounced it and called for the violence to cease.


False.

Trump speech to fight and march on capitol grounds: 12:01 pm

First incident of violence: 12:32pm, when an initial group of protesters breaks through the police barricade forcefully.

Trump finishes speech: 13:10pm

First breach of capitol building: 14:15pm

Trump tweets calling Pence "a coward that didn't have the courage to do what needed to be done": 14:24 pm (notice this is after the breach of the capitol!)

Trump tweets: "Stay peaceful" 14:34pm Two hours after first incident of violence

Babbit is shot: 3:12pm
#15149558
Agent Steel wrote:There is a claim that has been falsely and irresponsibly made by a number of news sources that needs to be fact-checked. The claim is that "Trump incited a riot" or that "Trump incited violence" onto the capital.

The Facts: On January 6th Donald Trump and his followers gathered in Washington D.C. to protest Joe Biden's disputed presidential victory. At no point in Trump's hour long speech did he direct or instruct his audience to violently attack the capital. The reality is that Trump called for a march towards the capital, a common occurrence that has taken place throughout American history. The only arguable inference to violence was the use of the words "fight" by Trump, a word often and commonly used to denote a metaphorical fight - a fight of protest. Trump did not plan, instruct, or condone any act of violence or criminal behavior. Within just an hour of violence breaking out, Trump immediately denounced it and called for the violence to cease.

My verdict for the claim that Trump "incited a riot" thus in my opinion has a rating of Mostly False.

The part I highlighted is just a bold faced assertion for which there is little evidence.

Yes, his speech seems to lack any obviously inciting phrases.
However, that doesn't prove that he didn't "plan, instruct, or condone any act of violence or criminal behavior." There is an investigation going on. I bet you that the NSA or FBI will provide proof that Trump did help plan it, or instruct others to plan it.

The House seems to disagree with you. It voted to impeach him and10 Repubs voted with all the Dems for that .

In any case your assertion is not proof of anything, except that that is your opinion.
_____________________________.______________________________________

I'm amazed that your sort of people can't seem to grasp the need for proof. You think the election was stolen, but there were 60 court cases most of which allowed evidence to be provided, and no acceptable evidence was presented in even one case. Many of the Judges were appointed by Trump, were they all bought off?

Now, people like me think that Trump instigated the mob that attacked the Capitol with the intent to see that Trump became President for life.
Now, your sort are asking for EVIDENCE of that. IMHO, you guys have a lot of nerve. Your sort assaulted the Capitol and 5 people have died because you think the election was stolen and yet you could find NO EVIDENCE, none. And now, you demand us to show you our evidence after just a week, or failing that to shut the **** up.

You had 2 months to find any evidence that could convince a court, you found none.
We have had a week so far, and we have found some leads to follow. There are about 100 people under arrest. One of them may flip.
Don't worry. We will not act until we do find evidence. The vote to impeach him has little material effect. He will likely be out of office before his trial even starts. If there is no better evidence, then the House can apologize and take it back. No harm, no foul.
Can your side bring back the dead?
#15149560
Trump's incitement of the riot and insurrection might not pass legal criteria, but it is morally and ethically reprehensible and is more than enough to warrant the impeachment.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15149573
Godstud wrote:might not pass legal criteria

Irrelevant!

The Supreme Court decided that whether the Senate has properly tried an impeachment is a political question and cannot be litigated.

NIXON v. UNITED STATES et al.

No. 91-740. Argued October 14, 1992 -- Decided January 13, 1993.



:)
Last edited by ingliz on 14 Jan 2021 11:57, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15149575
@ingliz Let me clarify: It might not pass legal criteria to press criminal charges, but it is MORE than enough for an impeachment.
#15149576
Let's not be naïve,
The date and time of the march was deliberately chosen to coincide with the approval of Biden as President. The 'Stop the Steal' was a direct call to prevent Biden from becoming president. The speakers incited the crowd to act by marching on capital hill and preventing this claimed theft of an election.

It wasn't just Trumps speech, it was the timing and the speeches of those who came before him. Followed by Trumps family and associates holding a party with big screens so they could watch the result of their handiwork instead of acting to prevent further violence and an attack on the democratic process.
#15149586
Trump enjoyed flirting with language that constantly suggested "fight", "show them whos boss", etc. It should be of no surprise that a segment of his supporters interpreted it as "be willing to get violent for the cause". If you take his language in the context of his constant lies and bad faith actions. It clear he more certainly did incite the riot.

In short, even if legally he cannot be proven to have incited a riot, he still has violated any ethical norms so he needs to go for good. Ban his fuck ass.
By late
#15149590
Rancid wrote:
Trump enjoyed flirting with language that constantly suggested "fight", "show them whos boss", etc. It should be of no surprise that a segment of his supporters interpreted it as "be willing to get violent for the cause". If you take his language in the context of his constant lies and bad faith actions. It clear he more certainly did incite the riot.

In short, even if legally he cannot be proven to have incited a riot, he still has violated any ethical norms so he needs to go for good. Ban his fuck ass.



Giuliani and Don Jr were more blunt about it.

All manner of evidence is turning up that show this was planned. Not that it's needed, the geniuses incited insurrection on national tv...

I guess we don't have to worry now, Trump's legacy is to be the worst president ever.
User avatar
By Groom
#15149591
Steve_American wrote:The part I highlighted is just a bold faced assertion for which there is little evidence.

Yes, his speech seems to lack any obviously inciting phrases.
However, that doesn't prove that he didn't "plan, instruct, or condone any act of violence or criminal behavior." There is an investigation going on. I bet you that the NSA or FBI will provide proof that Trump did help plan it, or instruct others to plan it.

The House seems to disagree with you. It voted to impeach him and10 Repubs voted with all the Dems for that .

In any case your assertion is not proof of anything, except that that is your opinion.
_____________________________.______________________________________

I'm amazed that your sort of people can't seem to grasp the need for proof. You think the election was stolen, but there were 60 court cases most of which allowed evidence to be provided, and no acceptable evidence was presented in even one case. Many of the Judges were appointed by Trump, were they all bought off?

Now, people like me think that Trump instigated the mob that attacked the Capitol with the intent to see that Trump became President for life.
Now, your sort are asking for EVIDENCE of that. IMHO, you guys have a lot of nerve. Your sort assaulted the Capitol and 5 people have died because you think the election was stolen and yet you could find NO EVIDENCE, none. And now, you demand us to show you our evidence after just a week, or failing that to shut the **** up.

You had 2 months to find any evidence that could convince a court, you found none.
We have had a week so far, and we have found some leads to follow. There are about 100 people under arrest. One of them may flip.
Don't worry. We will not act until we do find evidence. The vote to impeach him has little material effect. He will likely be out of office before his trial even starts. If there is no better evidence, then the House can apologize and take it back. No harm, no foul.
Can your side bring back the dead?



" Non-Concession

I don’t understand why some people are upset that Trump has not conceded defeat in the presidential election. A concession in an election is simply a polite way of showing that one is a mature adult, and we have known for decades that Trump is a mature adult. A concession speech doesn’t even mean that one has lost, only that one has decent manners. Rather than giving examples of why we shouldn’t expect such manners from Trump, we should just remember how he has acted in the past.

On the other hand, the election for president has not yet been held, so there has been no defeat for Trump to concede. The votes will be cast on December 14. After that, the results from each state will be sent to the National Archives by December 23, and they will be presented in a joint session of Congress on January 6. Many of the electors were chosen on November 3, but those elections are not final; that is, the states have not certified the results, and in some states the will be recounts. The preliminary totals are such that it is possible that some may go to Trump.

By coincidence, I just ran into a piece by the Associated Press explaining why the press state their guesses as to who won. There isn’t much to the article, but some people might find it interesting. It’s mostly that the papers want to get a scoop, so they call the election far before it even happens.https://apnews.com/article/why-does-...48ea74b1c2f4dc

Earlier today, I saw an excerpt from The Art of the Deal, in which Trump describes how to avoid losing when he loses; he doesn’t admit the loss and claims that the winner cheated, and he never admits defeat. That may be effective in some circumstances, but on the national political scene it makes no sense, because everything is judged by others.

I don't know whether Trump is feeling sorry for himself or trying to find a way to win, but his lawyers seem to be a bit more rational. One in Pennsylvania admitted that there were no signs of fraud. I don't know how others are acting, but that sort of attitude may be contagious.

Since the Trump side has taken that step, and Pompeo even cracked a joke about the second Trump term, people who oppose Trump should lighten up and let him play his game until the actual election day arrives and the electors cast their votes. In the future, it would be nice, if the newsies avoided saying that someone won an election at least until the election takes place. "

http://www.online-literature.com/forums ... Concession
#15149741
Steve_American wrote:The part I highlighted is just a bold faced assertion for which there is little evidence.

Yes, his speech seems to lack any obviously inciting phrases.
However, that doesn't prove that he didn't "plan, instruct, or condone any act of violence or criminal behavior." There is an investigation going on. I bet you that the NSA or FBI will provide proof that Trump did help plan it, or instruct others to plan it.

In any case your assertion is not proof of anything, except that that is your opinion.

I'm amazed that your sort of people can't seem to grasp the need for proof.


Are you really demanding that I prove Trump's innocence before you prove Trump's guilt? Because that would go against everything the justice system is about. In this world a man is always presumed innocent until proven guilty. If Trump is guilty of inciting a riot, which is a crime, the burden is absolutely rests on the prosecution, not the defense.

The claim has been made - "Trump incited a riot". This is apparently based on two known facts: 1) Trump organized the gathering outside the capital, and 2) Some within the gathering rioted. From what I have found out from many people who were there, the majority of folks were peaceful. We also have reason to suspect that members of left-wing militias were involved on the scene and took part in the storm. I haven't verified this claim yet but videos have been released with eye witnesses alleging that left-wingers arrived onto the scene. Why would they come to this event?

We should certainly demand that if there is truth to the accusation, some sort of motive or intent needs to be established. We can trace the timeline of events leading up to the rally, Trump's prior tweets, and what the plans/goals were behind the rally in order to show that violence was part of the plan. We know that the rally was planned in advance and know that the intent was to protest the results of the election. But I do not believe that Trump intended for things to go the way they did. Nothing about Trump's prior behavior suggests to me that he would want to create chaos and disorder. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it just seems highly unlikely.

As for the evidence that there was voter fraud, here's a good link which lays out a reasonable case:

https://thomisticthinker.com/skeptical- ... Tpl3574OwY
#15149758
Agent Steel wrote:Are you really demanding that I prove Trump's innocence before you prove Trump's guilt? Because that would go against everything the justice system is about. In this world a man is always presumed innocent until proven guilty. If Trump is guilty of inciting a riot, which is a crime, the burden is absolutely rests on the prosecution, not the defense.

The claim has been made - "Trump incited a riot".This is apparently based on two known facts: 1) Trump organized the gathering outside the capital, and 2) Some within the gathering rioted. From what I have found out from many people who were there, the majority of folks were peaceful. We also have reason to suspect that members of left-wing militias were involved on the scene and took part in the storm. I haven't verified this claim yet but videos have been released with eye witnesses alleging that left-wingers arrived onto the scene. Why would they come to this event?

We should certainly demand that if there is truth to the accusation, some sort of motive or intent needs to be established. We can trace the timeline of events leading up to the rally, Trump's prior tweets, and what the plans/goals were behind the rally in order to show that violence was part of the plan. We know that the rally was planned in advance and know that the intent was to protest the results of the election. But I do not believe that Trump intended for things to go the way they did. Nothing about Trump's prior behavior suggests to me that he would want to create chaos and disorder. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it just seems highly unlikely.

As for the evidence that there was voter fraud, here's a good link which lays out a reasonable case:

https://thomisticthinker.com/skeptical- ... Tpl3574OwY

TLDR.
No, the official charge was that Trump incited an insurrection. IMHO, the elements to prove this are different from inciting a riot. This is because by almost definition a riot is not planned while an insurrection should always be planned.

I saw no reason to read the rest of your post defending one who incited an insurrection. You might be careful. The more trump supporters support Trump, the more they also look like traitors.

No, I'm not asking you to prove that Trump was innocent. I was saying that you had no evidence to support an assault on the Capitol. So, demanding evidence from my side is really rich, or ridiculous. I have seen TV images of his speeches and tweets over the last 3 months that convinced me of his guilt.
.
Last edited by Steve_American on 15 Jan 2021 08:02, edited 1 time in total.
#15149784
Agent Steel wrote:Are you really demanding that I prove Trump's innocence before you prove Trump's guilt? Because that would go against everything the justice system is about. In this world a man is always presumed innocent until proven guilty. If Trump is guilty of inciting a riot, which is a crime, the burden is absolutely rests on the prosecution, not the defense.


Trump talks like a mobster. He knows how far he can go legally (or rather his lawyers do). His intentions are obvious. You can only tell your supporters to "fight", to "stop the steal" and to "save our democracy" so many times until at least some of them will resort to violence.

So yes, he incited a riot.
#15149789
Check this article. It is very thorough and talks about the Red state secession group.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/p ... rters.html

If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism,” a member of the Red-State Secession group on Facebook posted on Tuesday, the eve of the appointed day, Jan. 6.

Beneath it, dozens of people posted comments that included photographs of the weaponry — including assault rifles — that they said they planned to bring to the rally. There were also comments referring to “occupying” the Capitol and forcing Congress to overturn the November election that Joseph R. Biden Jr. had won — and Mr. Trump had lost.
User avatar
By Verv
#15149793
There's the video from LegalEagle where he says it is extremely unlikely that he would be convicted of inciting a riot because the courts always work to protect political speech. The man just simply did not incite a riot in a way that would stand up based on the laws as they are written.

However, LegalEagle went on to say that he can totally be impeached and his actions leading up to the event can serve as a grounds for that. He also says that his words and actions may make him morally responsible.

My opinion on this last part is... Whatever that means. It's really quite easy to link the speech of famous people to make them culpable to big events that occur, at the center of which there are problematic actors. The only reason, though, that it is unacceptable to the people in DC to have encouraged protests that turned into riots is because they do not agree with the cause and the media does not cheer it on.
#15149794
Yep, @Verv I saw the video, as well. What he says around 19:30 and on, is 100% right.
#15149796
Rugoz wrote:Trump talks like a mobster. He knows how far he can go legally (or rather his lawyers do). His intentions are obvious. You can only tell your supporters to "fight", to "stop the steal" and to "save our democracy" so many times until at least some of them will resort to violence.

This is possible. It's totally possible he knew what he was doing, and knew how far he could go legally. But there needs to be proof somehow. They need to find texts or audio or a WH witness etc showing his intent to cause violence.

Trump is a giant piece of crap, an undemocratic piece of turd liar that should no longer hold political office anywhere let alone POTUS. HOWEVER, he still deserves justice, just like the worst criminals. From what I've seen, the case that he "incited a riot" may not be strong enough where he'd be convicted in any court. Trump just didn't call for anyone to do violence. Giuliani did, and he should get in legal shit for that. What Trump did was pile a bunch of flammable materials in a big pile in front of a bunch of angry people holding matches, but he didn't light the fire.

I do think Trump should be impeached, and investigated for "inciting a riot". @Fasces shows how his timing of tweets and words etc need to investigate, what he knew when. Congress also needs to do a deep investigation and question people to find a smoking gun.

WHAT TRUMP DID ILLEGALLY (arguably) and what he could get successfully impeached on is criticizing Pence for upholding the constitution, and trying to bully him to sabotage the vote confirmation. He could be found guilty of not upholding his oath of office to defend and uphold the constitution. Truly disgusting, maybe even treasonous behaviour.

Trump could ALSO get impeached on giving "aid and comfort" to an insurrection or rebellion, under the 14th amendment: https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/ ... peachment/
#15149797


This is what Trump said. He may have actually incited a riot and he could be held accountable for what happened by the Biden administration. But I'm not sure if the portion in the video was an unscripted speech or he planned the march in advance. Because of his involvement in the Capitol riot, Trump lost his access to Twitter, on which he garnered millions of followers. He may not be able to launch another presidential bid because he was deplatformed by Twitter. Trump should have kept his cool while Biden's victory was certified by the Senate. Trump kissed goodbye to his political career for good because of what happened in Washington, which is very disappointing for Trump supporters who wanted his second term. Iced Earth guitarist Jon Schaffer was one of the rioters and he is wanted by the FBI, which was not very surprising because many of us from a similar background are sympathetic to Capitol rioters.

January 28, Wednesday President Davis writes Ma[…]

Two quotes to ponder: https://www.[…]

Election 2020

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo[…]

Obviously the service in question needs to valida[…]