• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Trump's Coup - Part 3

Warp12 said:
I don't think Trump should be the leader of the party. That is the main problem, as I see it. I think (hope?) they will distance themselves well before 2024, though. I believe some factors will come into play to force that outcome.
Click to expand...

factors such as?

Carlson just whipped Cruz back into line behind Trump, Graham told McConnell to bow to Trump, and you yourself proclaimed that Never-Trump Republicans such as Kitzinger and Cheney are not really Republicans.

If you want to rid the GOP of Trump, stop making excuses for TRumpublicans and support the Jan 6th Commission.

Otherwise you are exactly like any other Trump supporter.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
You might note that I wasn't referring to their findings/conclusions. I said quite specifically that it was not what *I* call a coup, per *their* criteria.

Looking at their website, I see where the discrepancy lies. They have expanded the definition of a coup from "seizing/wresting power" to general insurrection, including preventing the enacting of any law. By their definition, I'd agree that it was an attempted coup, dissident fueled. But if you expand the definition of "coup" that far, there is no point to the word anymore.

That's really the bulk of the debate. "Is coup the right word for this brand of insurrection?" I don't think so, based on the usual meaning, but agree based on the Cline Center's broader one. Does that put us plus or minus in agreement?
Click to expand...

In which Thermal explains how he understands the Cline Center’s criteria for defining a coup better than the Cline Center.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
factors such as?

Carlson just whipped Cruz back into line behind Trump, Graham told McConnell to bow to Trump, and you yourself proclaimed that Never-Trump Republicans such as Kitzinger and Cheney are not really Republicans.

If you want to rid the GOP of Trump, so making excuses for Republicans and support the Jan 6th Commission.

Otherwise you are exactly like any other Trump supporter.
Click to expand...

I'm not fighting against the January 6th commission; I just realize that it is largely serving a political purpose. And I think it will play a part in sinking Trump.

The two Republicans you mentioned broke solidarity with the party. So, of course, their motivations are going to be in question by the party at-large. If 99% of the party supports one thing, and these two go against it...are they really representing their party in this matter?

As far as being "exactly like any other Trump supporter", I find that an invalid characterization. I'm not a Trump supporter. But, I'm also not going to roll over and become a fervent Dem over my disapproval of Trump.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I'm not fighting against the January 6th commission; I just realize it is largely serving a political purpose. And I think it will play a part in sinking Trump.

The two Republicans you mentioned broke solidarity with the party. So, of course, their motivations are going to be in question by the party at-large. If 99% of the party supports one thing, and these two go against it...are they really representing their party in this matter?

As far as being "exactly like any other Trump supporter", I find that an invalid characterization. I'm not a Trump supporter. But, I'm also not going to roll over and become a Dem over my disapproval for Trump.
Click to expand...

The Party broke loyalty with them -and all Americans.
There can't be a bigger breach of loyalty than supporting and shielding the people who tried to kill you.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I'm not fighting against the January 6th commission; I just realize that it is largely serving a political purpose. And I think it will play a part in sinking Trump.

The two Republicans you mentioned broke solidarity with the party. So, of course, their motivations are going to be in question by the party at-large. If 99% of the party supports one thing, and these two go against it...are they really representing their party in this matter?

As far as being "exactly like any other Trump supporter", I find that an invalid characterization. I'm not a Trump supporter. But, I'm also not going to roll over and become a fervent Dem over my disapproval of Trump.
Click to expand...

Everyone with a Brain cell knows why the Insurrection happened, Trump's own people caused it.
The Fact the party will not hold him responsible Is because they were complicate in at as Co conspirators.
 
Upchurch said:
Every one of Thermal's objections have been either immediately or eventually rebuffed.

They didn't have a plan: Yes, they did. Get Pence to not certify the vote, sending it back to the states.
Click to expand...

If the hingepin factor of your plan is not on board, it's not a plan, it's a pipe dream.

They didn't seize anything: Yes, they did. They held the Senate floor and attempted to seize the House floor.
Click to expand...

Seize *power*, I said. Occupying the floor temporarily gave them no political power over the government at all, any more than the night janitors.

They didn't have coordination: Yes, they did, as documents have shown.
They haven't been charged with sedition: Now, they have, probably with more to come.
Click to expand...

A dozen out of what, more than a thousand, have been charged with coordinating their part of the physical occupation. Well, duh. No word yet on anything beyond that, except the Oath keepers saying they planned to make a citizen's arrest of VP Pence. Nutty for sure, but as we saw, nothing coordinated beyond Storming the Castle. The PowerPoint and other moves never got off the paper stage, so more pipe dreaming rather than coordinated efforts.

I truly don't get some of you guys. In everything but the term of their particular variety of insurrection, we are all in agreement. Yet you keep blasting these strawman representations around. Why?
 
Last edited:
Okay, this has all been explained to you before:
  • Just because you don’t think much about their plan doesn’t mean they didn’t have one. They did.
  • They literally seized enough power to prevent the certification for several hours, which was the plan.
  • Individual groups had coordination within the insurrection. We saw that in that audio file, for example.
  • The investigation is still ongoing. The charges are still coming. This is not likely to be the last.
 
Warp12 said:
I'm not fighting against the January 6th commission; I just realize that it is largely serving a political purpose. And I think it will play a part in sinking Trump.

The two Republicans you mentioned broke solidarity with the party [stood their ground on Republican principles]. So, of course, their motivations are going to be in question by the party at-large. If 99% of the party supports one thing, and these two go against it...are they really representing their party in this matter?
....
Click to expand...
ftfy

The two represent their actual party against a hostile takeover of sorts: the Trump cult invaded the Party and took it over instead of building their own party.

As for the Jan 6 Committee serving a political purpose, maybe way down on the list of things the investigation might accomplish. But if you really think that is the main purpose of the investigation, you've missed 90% of the story here.
 
Okay, this has all been explained to you before:
  • Just because you don’t think much about their plan doesn’t mean they didn’t have one. They did.
  • They literally seized enough power to prevent the certification for several hours, which was the plan.
  • Individual groups had coordination within the insurrection. We saw that in that audio file, for example.
  • The investigation is still ongoing. The charges are still coming. This is not likely to be the last.
Click to expand...


Also, these people were following orders from the same man who ordered Pence not to certify the election results on that same day, which according to the first post in this new section of this thread, was agreed by those in question to "probably" be an attempted coup.



The argument has been over for 4 pages now. These people were a part of Trump's coup attempt, period.
 
Warp12 said:
I'm not fighting against the January 6th commission; I just realize that it is largely serving a political purpose. And I think it will play a part in sinking Trump.

The two Republicans you mentioned broke solidarity with the party. So, of course, their motivations are going to be in question by the party at-large. If 99% of the party supports one thing, and these two go against it...are they really representing their party in this matter?

As far as being "exactly like any other Trump supporter", I find that an invalid characterization. I'm not a Trump supporter. But, I'm also not going to roll over and become a fervent Dem over my disapproval of Trump.
Click to expand...

Actually I am worried the January 6th committee might actually save Trump, unless they find a direct link between Trump and the planned Coup the Waco Whackos, the Oath Keepers Insurrection might just play into the pro Trump hands.
The Green Bay Plan might have been Unconstitutional but it wasn't Illegal on Trump's part, it would be protected under Free Speech.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
...The two represent their actual party against a hostile takeover of sorts: the Trump cult invaded the Party and took it over instead of building their own party...
Click to expand...

If you go back to early- mid-2016, and look at the Republican leadership's reaction to the trump primary push, the way they vilified and opposed him, you can see it is very much a takeover. trump won the Republican nomination the same way he won the 2016 presidential election. By winning a minority of the vote but doing it in a way that worked for him.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Actually I am worried the January 6th committee might actually save Trump, unless they find a direct link between Trump and the planned Coup the Waco Whackos, the Oath Keepers Insurrection might just play into the pro Trump hands.
The Green Bay Plan might have been Unconstitutional but it wasn't Illegal on Trump's part, it would be protected under Free Speech.
Click to expand...

McCarthy's emails to Trump who subsequently didn't act for more than 3 hours was incriminating and Lizzy C. read the federal statute against that kind of "inaction".
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
McCarthy's emails to Trump who subsequently didn't act for more than 3 hours was incriminating and Lizzy C. read the federal statute against that kind of "inaction".
Click to expand...

Yes But they have to prove it, where the DOJ can Indict him for it.

I think he guilty and he is a Russian useful idiot Trying to destroy American faith in Elections and install a government more favorable too Moscow.
 
Last edited:
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Yes But they have to prove it, where the DOJ can Indict him for it.

I think he guilty and he is a Russian useful idiot Trying to destroy American faith in Elections and install a government more favorable too Moscow.
Click to expand...
What is it you think they have to prove beyond what they already have evidence for?

There are McCarthy's emails to Dump.

There were numerous accounts of people asking Dump to stop the siege.

Dump recorded multiple statements that were rejected because they did not ask the rioters to leave, rather he praised them.

After 3 hours, after the certification was delayed, Dump finally asked the rioters to leave and they did.

And it looks like there was a lead up to the insurrection with Dump putting pressure on at least 2 state's election people to deny valid votes, to find just the right number of votes for Dump. In Georgia to be specific, it was a recorded call and it was directly incriminating.

And IIRC he also pressured Michigan election officials.

That's only a sample of the evidence of direct involvement it looks like they have on Dump.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
What is it you think they have to prove beyond what they already have evidence for?

There are McCarthy's emails to Dump.

There were numerous accounts of people asking Dump to stop the siege.

Dump recorded multiple statements that were rejected because they did not ask the rioters to leave, rather he praised them.

After 3 hours, after the certification was delayed, Dump finally asked the rioters to leave and they did.

And it looks like there was a lead up to the insurrection with Dump putting pressure on at least 2 state's election people to deny valid votes, to find just the right number of votes for Dump. In Georgia to be specific, it was a recorded call and it was directly incriminating.

And IIRC he also pressured Michigan election officials.

That's only a sample of the evidence of direct involvement it looks like they have on Dump.
Click to expand...

The Republicans will protect him unless they have direct evidence of him being linked to the entry of the Capitol.
This is not a Sane world, don't expect anything sane to be done about the Insurrection.
Half the Government is bat Excrement Crazy, and I have known that for a long time.
 
I watched an interview with trump (with Steve Inskeep of NPR) in which trump is adamant, insistent, that in a number of major American cities Joe Biden received more votes in the 2020 election than there are residents. Take one of trump's favorite whipping boys, the city of Detroit. (Wonder why? Look at the demographics, it's made to order for trump.)
"You look at the findings, you look at the number of votes, go into Detroit and just ask yourself, is it true that there are more votes than there are voters?" - donald trump
Click to expand...

trump calls it a "tough problem" but it's all bullcrap. From Reuters:
The posts suggest that Detroit, with 672,662 residents and 850,441 votes, had a 126% voter turnout rate. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s July 2019 estimate, the population of Detroit is 670,031. It is possible that the post’s estimate comes from Data Commons, an online open data repository, which says here that Detroit’s 2018 population was 672,662.

As for Detroit’s vote count, the 850,441 figure is wrong. Official election results provided by the Detroit Department of Elections state that 257,619 out of 506,305 registered voters cast ballots, making voter turnout 50.9%. Accordingly, 38% of Detroit’s population voted in the 2020 general election. link to Reuters report
Click to expand...

trump isn't even a good liar. Yet, I read an opinion piece by a European correspondent who wondered, "This is all so infantile, yet trump's supporters take it (and themselves) so seriously." Based on absolute nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom