Fox Hosts Text Trump to Stop Insurrection

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
If Trump had proven indecipherable voter fraud in court within the deadlines, there would be a Constitutional crisis and the electors based on House of Representatives could be asked to decide. And, the regional count of electors favored Republicans.
 

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
By trying to do anything passed the deadlines, Trump is delving into areas the Constitution does not have a remedy for beyond impeachment of an illegitimate administration and that would lead to President Pelosi.

When Trump was still in the White House, he could have tried a range of dodgy nonsense clearly Unconstitutional. Thankfully the military had integrity.
 

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Tomo,
I see why you are meme-heavy. If you never say anything definitive, you can not be easily called to task.
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
By trying to do anything passed the deadlines, Trump is delving into areas the Constitution does not have a remedy for beyond impeachment of an illegitimate administration and that would lead to President Pelosi.

When Trump was still in the White House, he could have tried a range of dodgy nonsense clearly Unconstitutional. Thankfully the military had integrity.
Tomo,
I see why you are meme-heavy. If you never say anything definitive, you can not be easily called to task.
The Democrats were/are in control of the House, even with the single vote per state there is no way Trump could have pulled that off. Too many "Never Trumpers"
....Anything you are describing would have lead to President Pelosi.

I comment with memes because discussion is a waste of time with people who chose to remain ignorant.


The ONLY way Trump could have remained president with a halted Certification Process would have been if it was followed up with with a violent coup d'é·tat.

If you are trying to make the case that the pack of neck-beards, beer guts, & grandmas at the Capitol were there for that reason...Then please continue.
 
Last edited:

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
The Democrats were/are in control of the House, even with the single vote per state there is no way Trump could have pulled that off. Too many "Never Trumpers"
....Anything you are describing would have lead to President Pelosi.
During a contingent election in the House, each state's delegation casts one en bloc vote to determine the President, rather than a vote from each representative. You have unfounded faith in so called never trumpers. The number of Republican States was greater than Democratic states. This is the same flaw as the electoral college giving rural states more power
The ONLY way Trump could have remained president with a halted Certification Process would have been if it was followed up with with a violent coup d'é·tat.

If you are trying to make the case that the pack of neck-beards, beer guts, & grandmas at the Capitol were there for that reason.
Trump was hoping to create chaos, demonstrate fervent support from followers, and backing from many legislators, and the military: A non-violent, antidemocratic coup.
 
Last edited:

Omniskeptical

BANNED
Banned
During a contingent election in the House, each state's delegation casts one en bloc vote to determine the President, rather than a vote from each representative. You have unfounded faith in so called never trumpers. The number of Republican States was greater than Democratic states. This is the same flaw as the electoral college giving rural states more power

Trump was hoping to create chaos, demonstrate fervent support from followers, and backing from many legislators, and the military: A non-violent, antidemocratic coup.
@Skeeter Trump was going against his family and attempted to destroy his own legacy. He knew the FBI had organized the Oath Keepers to storm the capitol on January 6th. It explains everything about Trump and why the National Guard was suggested. And Pelosi didn't do this.
 

marke

Well-known member
The first issue is about timing. If Trump received a barrage of texts hours before reacting, it suggests he wanted the goings on at the capitol to continue. The behavior of the rioters was consistent with what Trump had wanted. I believe Trump wanted to intimidate congress and Pence to thwart the will of the people. This is a criminal act. EVERYONE knew that Trump was the inciter-in-chief on January 6th.

Second, it is hilarious to read the Fox news hosts texts and listen to their later attempts to minimize the event. Hypocrisy of this height tickles me greatly, and it speaks to the shallowness of the right.
Nothing in anything Trump said was wrong or seditious. Democrats, however, are claiming opposition to questionable democrat voting techniques is seditious. That is just another damnable lie designed to solidify illegitimate democrat control of power.
 

marke

Well-known member
Fox wanted Trump out? Amazing. Why did they rarely ever give Trump a tough interview and kiss his butt so much? They fooled me.

Fox called Arizona early which is surprising. I thought the news division was just going out of their way to show they were not biased.

Trump incited that crowd. One quick reference to peaceful protest does not negate the deceptive rhetoric in the speech and in comments in the weeks before it. I think Trump wanted them to be loud and threatening, but not violent. But, even when they were violent, he only acted to de-escalate them hours later. Which speaks volumes.

Prone to violence or not, some were violent and callously so on January 6th. All deserve prosecution including their reckless and feckless leader.
Jan. 6 was not violent to the same degree as hundreds of democrat protests in 2020 that saw more than a thousand police officers injured and some killed. Democrats are trying to make the Jan 6 protest out to be some sort of effort at sedition which is preposterous nonsense.
 

marke

Well-known member
Oh, were you in the crowd? Did you walk to the capitol to fight and show your strength like Trump asked? Did Trump meet you there like he said he would?
I want to examine the emails of democrat leaders like Pelosi, Schiff, Schumer, and dozens of others, to see what part they played in the Jan 6 protest. Why should the public be denied those emails if republicans are forced to turn their over to democrat dogs seeking to kill them? Because democrats are dishonestly trying to frame republicans for crimes they did not commit? Yes, exactly.
 

marke

Well-known member
Nice. This is actually evidence I was unaware of. Trump's tweet seems too casual as a response to the breach. He does not say get out of the building and pretends no violence has yet been perpetrated. Given how fast tweets can be written and sent, I would have expected it faster. Had he given the exact same video message that he delivered hours later at that time, I would not be criticizing him on this point.
Democrats will take every message from every republican and twist the messages grotesquely to try to make them appear to be seditious. Democrats lie, they deceive, and they dishonestly accuse good people of doing bad things they know the good people did not do.
 

marke

Well-known member
This claim of doctoring a text message is bogus. Is Quoting an excerpt doctoring? Anytime we quote part of a post of a fellow poster are we doctoring it? The portion left out is Jordan's lame reach at precedent. It did not change the meaning of the sentence.
Schiff doctored a text from Jordan and Schiff should be sanctioned for that wicked effort to deceive the public.

Treason: Jan. 6 committee admits it doctored a Republican text message in Democrat Rep. Schiff’s presentation​

 

marke

Well-known member
Absolutely, they also had their rage; their willingness to turn flags into weapons; and they had bear spray to shoot at officers of the law. A league of Karens and obese uncles with B.O. who had no empathy when an officer was being crushed in a doorway, and no care for the actual results of an election opting instead to enact their will through intimidation with no care of the harm recklessness unleashes -- They wobbled their way into the Capitol.
Democrats are telling one side of the story, the dishonest side designed to cover up their massive crime of voter fraud. That is what democrats do because they do not fear God. Democrats think their stolen power gives them the right to commit unconstitutional atrocities without recrimination. In the democrat mind, God does not determine what is right but crooked people with power determine what is right.
 

marke

Well-known member
I do not have a way to assess their motivations or thoughts at that time. They did not have control of the Capitol -- ever. They were allowed to wander around rather than risk more injuries to themselves and police. The legislators and Pence refused to leave. They were not going to exit until they fulfilled their function. The military was about to intervene, there was tear gas, and Trump told them to leave. They were tired and out-of-shape. Come to think of it, you might be right about hunger being the main motivation in the crowd at that time.

Trump thought the politicians would be intimidated enough to flee - when they did not, there was nothing else to do but call off his dogs.
Democrats stupidly accuse Trump of thinking stupid things he never thought. That is what democrats do. They lie, they deceive, they falsely accuse the innocent of crimes while excusing and covering up their own sins and crimes.
 

marke

Well-known member
No the plan was to get Pence to refuse to certify the vote. Either alternate electors would be send from certain states or , more likely, Trump would say it was impossible to determine the results so the House would have to decide. The House would have placed Trump as President for another four years. His plan failed and hopefully he will finally get his comeuppance.
Democrats lie when they suggest the well-established process of challenging questionable votes in Congress is seditious.
 

marke

Well-known member
If Trump had proven indecipherable voter fraud in court within the deadlines, there would be a Constitutional crisis and the electors based on House of Representatives could be asked to decide. And, the regional count of electors favored Republicans.
Are you suggesting that certain avenues of electoral processes can give one party an illegal advantage over another, such as "the regional count of electors favored Republicans" over democrats?
 

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Are you suggesting that certain avenues of electoral processes can give one party an illegal advantage over another, such as "the regional count of electors favored Republicans" over democrats?
No, I am suggesting that legal but antiquated methods could yield anti-democratic results ( in this case also anti-Democratic.)
 
Last edited:

marke

Well-known member
No, I am suggesting that legal but antiquated methods could yield anti-democratic results ( in this case also anti-Democratic.)
Democrats are notorious for objecting to traditional voting methods that hinder the possibility of voter fraud.
 

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Democrats are notorious for objecting to traditional voting methods that hinder the possibility of voter fraud.
Sometimes efforts at eliminating voter fraud are too broad and eliminate voters. Do you see that as a problem?
 
Top