Impeachment Round Two (2 Viewers)

[Yggdrasill]

I am in the camp that Trump must -not should- be impeached. If not this President, for this behavior, then what bar would have to be cleared to merit impeachment?

Impeachment not only sends a signal to the country and the world that fomenting a coup is unacceptable and will be punished, but it also removes much of the threat Trump could pose going forward as, I understand it, he would lose his pension, his access to daily security briefings, free medical care and other amenities and benefits afforded to former Presidents. If impeached, he would not meet the definition of a Former President under the Former Presidents Act. I don't think it is clear whether he would continue to receive Secret Service protection.

 

[Lapaz]

MAYBE 75-80% were peaceful and non-violent. I'll concede at least that but if some of these same protests had people screaming, yelling violent threats and inflammatory language and a few of them may have tried to cause trouble or tear down statues because that, do did happen.

I'd love to know what the interpretations these researchers used in defining non-violent or peaceful. Even if there's no physical violence or injuries or deaths, if I'm a cop and I am trying to keep order and leaving people alone and exercise their Constitutional rights and some hot heads want to deliberately fork with me and threaten to kill me, and members of my family, thats in a way trying to incite violence. If we were co-workers and had this personal, bitter rivalry at our firm and I made veiled threats of physical harm or death threats to you or your family, that's perpetuating violence, IMHO, and not non-violent even if I didnt attack you or leave behind any significant damage to our shared office.

The violent BLM protesters were wrong, and should be prosecuted, but they weren't attempting to overthrow the Republic. Also, I'd impeach any official that incited any BLM protesters to violence. Is there such an official?

Regarding Trump, it doesn't matter if the riot was planned in advance. Trump incited and directed an already dangerous crowd to take action. The obvious action to stop the steal had only one logical interpretation, and it wasn't non-violent. He's guilty!

 

[Saintman2884]

I didn't forget anything.

I'm very glad to hear that. I really am. Don't want us to be misunderstanding one another.

Thank you for your time and engagements on this matter.

 

[DaveXA]

Can you elaborate on that? It feels like a TDS argument, that the Democrats have been hysterical in their reaction to Trump without merit vis a vis to Tan Suit or Lock her up.

It's not a TDS argument. It's contrasting the language the Democrats (and really, any politician) using figurative language in their rhetoric. Essentially showing they all use the same language.

Regardless, what I've always had an issue with is that Trump never conceded, and misled his followers into believing the outcome was in doubt and that they were still fighting to change the outcome of the election. It's a cumulative thing, and largely due to the President's rhetoric between election day and Jan 6.

His speech that day only tangentially impacted the mob attack. It had already clearly been planned and orchestrated prior to Jan 6. Just a massive failure on the part of intelligence agencies not being prepared for this event happening. The warning signs were there.

 

[DaveXA]

He quoted her tweet that was specifically about that one DC peaceful protest and went off about riots nationwide.

Gotcha. I had my wires crossed there. Makes sense.

 

[Saintman2884]

The violent BLM protesters were wrong, and should be prosecuted, but they weren't attempting to overthrow the Republic. Also, I'd impeach any official that incited any BLM protesters to violence. Is there such an official?

Regarding Trump, it doesn't matter if the riot was planned in advance. Trump incited and directed an already dangerous crowd to take action. The obvious action to stop the steal had only one logical interpretation, and it wasn't non-violent. He's guilty!

I think most people on SR.com and on here on MAP know my feelings towards Trump. He is what happens when as Ecclesiastes warns readers never "elect a child to be your king or leader" and is incompetent, stupid, incorrigible, and has failed in every meaningful venture he's ever been involved in and sadly, in terms of our national political mood and tenor, has been frighteningly terrible.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

MAYBE 75-80% were peaceful and non-violent. I'll concede at least that but if some of these same protests had people screaming, yelling violent threats and inflammatory language and a few of them may have tried to cause trouble or tear down statues because that, dc.d happen.

I'd love to know what the interpretations these researchers used in defining non-violent or peaceful. Even if there's no physical violence or injuries or deaths, if I'm a cop and I am trying to keep order and leaving people alone and exercise their Constitutional rights and some hot heads want to deliberately fork with me and threaten to kill me, and members of my family, thats in a way trying to incite violence. If we were co-workers and had this personal, bitter rivalry at our firm and I made veiled threats of physical harm or death threats to you or your family, that's perpetuating violence, IMHO, and not non-violent even if I didnt attack you or leave behind any significant damage to our shared office where we work and you would be perfectly within your rights to have me arrested and convicted and sentenced to maximum sentencing guidelines allowed under British criminal law, which I believe, still does issue life sentences in some cases, although recently they've moved away from such sentences in these types of criminal cases. Even though the UK outlawed the death penalty in 1963, a life sentence with no parole is essentially a death sentence in of itself just no state-sanctioned death penalty.

You say BLM, but I’m sure you know that BLM, like most every left leaning mass mobilization movement before it, was infiltrated by right wing activists if not govt agents
And their presence is for the exact reasons you complain about

Now I’m certainly not saying each and every BLM protestor was peaceful- Langston Hughes why they might not be -

But as well read as you are, I can help but wonder I your ‘peaceful protest’ harumphing is an argument of convenience more so that one of acute perspective

 

[DaveXA]

So they're doing Q&A now. First question was whether this wouldn't have happened if not for Trump's conduct. I would simply state that all Trump had to do at any point was concede the election and admit he lost. Maybe it still happens, but it would be clear that Trump wasn't behind it.

 

[Saintman2884]

You say BLM, but I’m sure you know that BLM, like most every left leaning mass mobilization movement before it, was infiltrated by right wing activists if not govt agents
And their presence is for the exact reasons you complain about

Now I’m certainly not saying each and every BLM protestor was peaceful- Langston Hughes why they might not be -

But as well read as you are, I can help but wonder I your ‘peaceful protest’ harumphing is an argument of convenience more so that one of acute perspective

I have no doubt that there was infiltration by feds agents--or there werent some white supremacists hijacking their protests to cause confrontations, violent threats, or physical attacks or injuries, its just logically, to wholesale blame it all or frame most of the violence that did occur in 7% of those protests seems like a lazy argument or an attempt to use it as a wholesale moral/ethical justification that just seems self-serving and deflection tactic. There's just something about it that feels incomplete.

 

[Yggdrasill]

It's not a TDS argument. It's contrasting the language the Democrats (and really, any politician) using figurative language in their rhetoric. Essentially showing they all use the same language.

Regardless, what I've always had an issue with is that Trump never conceded, and misled his followers into believing the outcome was in doubt and that they were still fighting to change the outcome of the election. It's a cumulative thing, and largely due to the President's rhetoric between election day and Jan 6.

His speech that day only tangentially impacted the mob attack. It had already clearly been planned and orchestrated prior to Jan 6. Just a massive failure on the part of intelligence agencies not being prepared for this event happening. The warning signs were there.

I highly recommend the Axios podcast, "How it happened". It documents in detail Trump's actions in the months leading up to January 6th, using sources who were in the room when conversations were had and decisions made. It's damning.

 

[CoolBrees]

I think we do a massive disservice by equating what happened here in Portland in any way to what happened in DC on 1/6.

They aren’t the same. It’s the differencebetween shooting a bullet and throwing it.

Portland was not peaceful. But overwhelmingly non violent. There were isolated incidents between individuals, including 1 death. In over 100 days. And Government buildings were graffiti’d and then fenced (with 12’ high fence) and then... nothing was destroyed. Just a bunch of people getting tear gassed. If people pushed on the fence too hard they were pepper sprayed.

The rest of the city was normal. like a block away you couldn’t tell anything was going on. The only boarded up restaurants and businesses were across the street and had signs of solidarity with the protesters. They were closed for the pandemic anyways.

None of that even begins to approach an angry mob taking down no less than four physical barricades before breaking down the gd door(!) at the Capitol building, and trying the hang the Vice President and the Speaker of the House. That is unprecedented. And it needs to have severe consequences for the actors and anyone who is found guilty of orchestrating it.

 

[zztop]

I'd love to see the statistics of how many of those violent BLM protests "coincidentally" turned violent after the police showed up in tactical gear, started firing rubber bullets and teargas into the crowd

 

[DaveXA]

I think we do a massive disservice by equating what happened here in Portland in any way to what happened in DC on 1/6.

They aren’t the same. It’s the differencebetween shooting a bullet and throwing it.

Portland was not peaceful. But overwhelmingly non violent. There were isolated incidents between individuals, including 1 death. In over 100 days. And Government buildings were graffiti’d and then fenced (with 12’ high fence) and then... nothing was destroyed. Just a bunch of people getting tear gassed. If people pushed on the fence too hard they were pepper sprayed.

The rest of the city was normal. like a block away you couldn’t tell anything was going on. The only boarded up restaurants and businesses were across the street and had signs of solidarity with the protesters. They were closed for the pandemic anyways.

None of that even begins to approach an angry mob taking down no less than four physical barricades before breaking down the gd door(!) at the Capitol building, and trying the hang the Vice President and the Speaker of the House. That is unprecedented. And it needs to have severe consequences for the actors and anyone who is found guilty of orchestrating it.

They couldn't break down those doors. They had to go through the windows to smash the doors open from the outside. Same difference though.

This made me raging angry because I used to work for the Architect of the Capitol and it's my favorite building in the city, along with the Library of Congress.

On top of everything else that happened, it just felt personal seeing these idiots damaging a building so full of history and the architecture is amazing. That, and this is supposed to be a place where the public can see the seat of our nation's government in action. It won't be the same for a while, maybe for good, idk.

 

[Saintman2884]

I think we do a massive disservice by equating what happened here in Portland in any way to what happened in DC on 1/6.

They aren’t the same. It’s the differencebetween shooting a bullet and throwing it.

Portland was not peaceful. But overwhelmingly non violent. There were isolated incidents between individuals, including 1 death. In over 100 days. And Government buildings were graffiti’d and then fenced (with 12’ high fence) and then... nothing was destroyed. Just a bunch of people getting tear gassed. If people pushed on the fence too hard they were pepper sprayed.

The rest of the city was normal. like a block away you couldn’t tell anything was going on. The only boarded up restaurants and businesses were across the street and had signs of solidarity with the protesters. They were closed for the pandemic anyways.

None of that even begins to approach an angry mob taking down no less than four physical barricades before breaking down the gd door(!) at the Capitol building, and trying the hang the Vice President and the Speaker of the House. That is unprecedented. And it needs to have severe consequences for the actors and anyone who is found guilty of orchestrating it.

Look Cool, you live there and I know based on last summer's SR conversations on the George Floyd police brutality and systemic racism in law enforcement and to a large extent, I sympathize and completely understand the real, noble intentions BLM is trying to achieve. And I won't insult your intelligence because IIRC, you mentioned in a SR.com thread last summer that you attended one or some of these marches. If I'm wrong, tell me so, but there were mainstream news articles that made what happened in Portland or that particular area of downtown Portland appear like it had a siege mentality and the longer it went on, more and more people got little upset or annoyed by it.

Did even some reputable print and news media outlets mischaracterize what happened where you live in Portland or maybe perhaps its this subconscious bias or this stereotypical view some Americans have towards Portland that its where loony-tune, weird, far-left anarchist types hanging around who come across or are depicted as being 2nd-or-3rd generation Grungeland types. I've heard some buddies of mine I know who live near Seattle or state of Washington who like to joke that the Rose City is a wannabe Seattle who never economically moved on from the late 1970's or early 80's as their still somewhat a little too reliant on the lumber industry.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Can anyone explain what this "doctoring" van der Veen keeps blurting about? I've been in meetings all day.

 

[DaveXA]

Can anyone explain what this "doctoring" van der Veen keeps blurting about? I've been in meetings all day.

Pretty sure he's referring to the clips the House Managers used to bolster their case. Basically stating that Trump's words were taken out of context. What they did earlier in the presentation was a side by side of the edited and original videos and showed the context of his words. Which actually was pretty effective.

I wouldn't call it doctoring, but it's clear the House Managers very deliberately showed snippets that didn't have much context.

It won't change my mind about Trump, but they did a good job debunking some of the arguments the House Managers used the last couple of days.

 

[SoggyBottomBoy]

From little I read from the defense team, Trump didn't need any lawyers. They just kept up some of the same ploys we've heard over his term as president - "It was a monstrous lie because it was pre-planned."
 Called the impeachment process an "unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance" and a "politically motivated witch hunt." Ah, the ever-reliable witch hunt.
 Dems didn't denounce the other riots (they did including Biden), Ah, the ever-reliable whataboutism.
 The insurrectionists were mixed political backgrounds (the Antifa disguised as MAGAs). there has been no evidence thus far of any significant presence of far-leftwing instigators, and an NPR assessment of arrests of Capitol insurrectionists shows clear ties to the far right. Ah, the ever-reliable it wasn't me, it was you comback.
 The "Charlotteville Lie" selective MSM cherry picking. Ah, the ever-reliable fake news retort.
 The phone call to Georgia was taken out of context, when he said "find just over 11,000 votes" he didn't really mean "find." He used that word but he doesn't think it means what we think it means. Ah, the ever-reliable Inigo Montoya argument.

Only thing I can see of semi-substance was the playing of videos of Dems using terms like "fight" in it.

 

[DaveXA]

From little I read from the defense team, Trump didn't need any lawyers. They just kept up some of the same ploys we've heard over his term as president -
 Called the impeachment process an "unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance" and a "politically motivated witch hunt." Ah, the ever-reliable witch hunt.
 Dems didn't denounce the other riots (they did including Biden), Ah, the ever-reliable whataboutism.
 The insurrectionists were mixed political backgrounds (the Antifa disguised as MAGAs). there has been no evidence thus far of any significant presence of far-leftwing instigators, and an NPR assessment of arrests of Capitol insurrectionists shows clear ties to the far right. Ah, the ever-reliable it wasn't me, it was you comback.
 The "Charlotteville Lie" selective MSM cherry picking. Ah, the ever-reliable fake news retort.
 The phone call to Georgia was taken out of context, when he said "find just over 11,000 votes" he didn't really mean "find." He used that word but he doesn't think it means what we think it means. Ah, the ever-reliable Inigo Montoya argument.

Only thing I can see of semi-substance was the playing of videos of Dems using terms like "fight" in it.

I would add that they made it a key point of emphasis that a lot of Trump's video clips used by the House Managers were taken out of context. When they played the full clips, it becomes a lot clearer exactly what Trump was getting at. I thought they did a decent job on that point.

None of it absolves Trump, but those clips aren't what you want to use to bolster the prosecution.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I am half-listening to the questions. Did the Trump team just say that Brandenburg v Ohio was a case about Bible believers being silenced?