6 ms·

You say it like “getting caught in the moment” and assaulting the Capitol is something completely reasonable that anyone in that situation might do.

throwawaysea 6y ago
I don't think it is reasonable - I am just explaining the psychology of how people can get swept up in the fervor of crowds. I am fully in support of arresting all who participated. But my point is that it is not reasonable to conclude that Trump's speech incited people to illegally invade the capitol, commit theft/vandalism, and assault officers. His speech literally had a line saying "peacefully protest". The vast majority of people hearing his speech did not break the law. So how can there be a conclusion that he incited people to break the law? Those who broke the law are independent humans who hold personal responsibility for their actions. Unless Trump explicitly urges them to commit crimes, charging him with incitement is wrong.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- nelsondev 6y ago
  On that note, what specifically from Trump’s speech was inciting violence? “March” != “Riot” This is the section about marching to the Capitol. “ And we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four year period.” “ Full text of his speech (rambling and painful to read, but there was no advocating for violence: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-stormed-capitol-hill/story?id=75110558 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-storme...
  - mushbino 6y ago
    Rudy: "Let's have trial by combat" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo Trump: The entirety of this speech, but specifically the "fight like hell" part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 Trump: "Be there, it will be wild": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-trump-supporters.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-t... This article covers a lot of it too. It's been stoked for a while: https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-riots-pence-we-will-never-concede-maga-rally/ https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-r...
    - lliamander 6y ago
      All figurative language that politicians (and non-politicians) use all the time. Joe Biden literally expressed a desire to physically harm the President, and dramatic, ecstatic portrayals of his death have been shared for his entire presidency.
      - mushbino 6y ago
        It's looking like there might be a trial in the senate so we'll see if the "figurative language" argument holds up. Trump telling the rioters "I love you" after they stormed the capitol doesn't look too good in that regard. Comparing what you're saying about democrats and Biden to what the president has been saying for years and all of the talk on facebook, twitter, r/thedonald, Parler, and Gab is being willfully ignorant. The results speak for themselves.
        lliamander 6y ago
        He said "I love you" in order to connect emotionally with the crowd as part of a message to tell them to go home. It's also just how he speaks to his supporters. He's not telling them that his loves them for having stormed the capitol. You are engaging in the most disingenuous interpretations of his words. And there is no willful ingorance here. I know the things said by randos on r/thedonald can often be pretty horrendous. There are horrendous randos everywhere. Just look at r/politics. The things people in power have said about Trump and his supporters is also quite terrible, and the fact that they have power makes it worse. The ignorance is yours.
- amanaplanacanal 6y ago
  If he does get charged, it will be a jury that decides, after they hear all the evidence. All we know are what we see in the internet.
- ryandrake 6y ago
  > I am just explaining the psychology of how people can get swept up in the fervor of crowds. So, “Whoopsie! I accidentally entered the Capitol through that broken window and got peer pressured right into the Senate?”
  - pixl97 6y ago
    "Oops, I may have committed some light treason"
  - 8note 6y ago
    People do get dumb in mobs, so that could be true
    - redisman 6y ago
      It’s pretty wild that statements like “people do dumb things in mobs” are controversial depending on the prism people are looking through
    - jusssi 6y ago
      Alcohol makes some people aggressive. The right solution, for those people, is to not drink alcohol. And "but I was drunk" is not considered a valid defense. Maybe the same standard should be applied to people who decide to join a mob, if we're assuming they're not dumb already before joining one.
- rodgerd 6y ago
  Ah, yes, the spontaneously generated pipe bombs, firearms, merchandise (t-shirts, caps, you name it), messages organising weeks before, zip-cuffs, hangman's platform, and spears.
  - eganist 6y ago
    It'd be an interesting twist in the simulation if the entities were materialized/determined only when the chest^H^H^H^H^H^H truck was examined.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
zdragnar 6y ago
Too many people are trying to rationalize the polarization of our society, focusing exclusively on the ends and ignoring the means. Remember NPR's puff piece justifying looting? Or (I think) CNN's reporter standing in front of a burning building while saying that the BLM protests were mostly peaceful? (They were, but the not-peaceful bits were downplayed in an obviously biased way). There was another interview I saw where some guy was talking about the change they wanted to see, and peace and justice and so on, and was interrupted when in the background the crowd cheered when they finally managed to topple a traffic light (that traffic light never hurt anyone)
- maroonblazer 6y ago
  False equivalence. Looting commercial districts (while objectionable) is not the same as falsely claiming a federal election was stolen and looting the Capital.
  - phkahler 6y ago
    OK. The dems ran around for 3 years claiming the Russians somehow handed Trump the 2016 election.
    - GavinMcG 6y ago
      "We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling." - Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chair https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-statement-on-senate-intel-release-of-volume-5-of-bipartisan-russia-report https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-s...
      - YarickR2 6y ago
        Now you trust Republicans.
      - lliamander 6y ago
        Nowhere near enough to actually influence the election.
watwut 6y ago
It is transparent lie. They came in prepared for it. They had bombs, zip ties, clubs, etc.
georgeplusplus 6y ago
Their opposition loses any credibility to attack these few 100s when they accepted the BLM riots and looting as peaceful. Either stop picking sides and come up with a meaningful solution or you’re contributing to the problem.

throwawaysea 6y ago

I don't think it is reasonable - I am just explaining the psychology of how people can get swept up in the fervor of crowds. I am fully in support of arresting all who participated. But my point is that it is not reasonable to conclude that Trump's speech incited people to illegally invade the capitol, commit theft/vandalism, and assault officers. His speech literally had a line saying "peacefully protest". The vast majority of people hearing his speech did not break the law. So how can there be a conclusion that he incited people to break the law? Those who broke the law are independent humans who hold personal responsibility for their actions. Unless Trump explicitly urges them to commit crimes, charging him with incitement is wrong.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nelsondev 6y ago
On that note, what specifically from Trump’s speech was inciting violence? “March” != “Riot” This is the section about marching to the Capitol. “ And we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four year period.” “ Full text of his speech (rambling and painful to read, but there was no advocating for violence: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-stormed-capitol-hill/story?id=75110558 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-storme...
- mushbino 6y ago
  Rudy: "Let's have trial by combat" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo Trump: The entirety of this speech, but specifically the "fight like hell" part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 Trump: "Be there, it will be wild": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-trump-supporters.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-t... This article covers a lot of it too. It's been stoked for a while: https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-riots-pence-we-will-never-concede-maga-rally/ https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-r...
  - lliamander 6y ago
    All figurative language that politicians (and non-politicians) use all the time. Joe Biden literally expressed a desire to physically harm the President, and dramatic, ecstatic portrayals of his death have been shared for his entire presidency.
    - mushbino 6y ago
      It's looking like there might be a trial in the senate so we'll see if the "figurative language" argument holds up. Trump telling the rioters "I love you" after they stormed the capitol doesn't look too good in that regard. Comparing what you're saying about democrats and Biden to what the president has been saying for years and all of the talk on facebook, twitter, r/thedonald, Parler, and Gab is being willfully ignorant. The results speak for themselves.
      - lliamander 6y ago
        He said "I love you" in order to connect emotionally with the crowd as part of a message to tell them to go home. It's also just how he speaks to his supporters. He's not telling them that his loves them for having stormed the capitol. You are engaging in the most disingenuous interpretations of his words. And there is no willful ingorance here. I know the things said by randos on r/thedonald can often be pretty horrendous. There are horrendous randos everywhere. Just look at r/politics. The things people in power have said about Trump and his supporters is also quite terrible, and the fact that they have power makes it worse. The ignorance is yours.
amanaplanacanal 6y ago
If he does get charged, it will be a jury that decides, after they hear all the evidence. All we know are what we see in the internet.
ryandrake 6y ago
> I am just explaining the psychology of how people can get swept up in the fervor of crowds. So, “Whoopsie! I accidentally entered the Capitol through that broken window and got peer pressured right into the Senate?”
- pixl97 6y ago
  "Oops, I may have committed some light treason"
- 8note 6y ago
  People do get dumb in mobs, so that could be true
  - redisman 6y ago
    It’s pretty wild that statements like “people do dumb things in mobs” are controversial depending on the prism people are looking through
  - jusssi 6y ago
    Alcohol makes some people aggressive. The right solution, for those people, is to not drink alcohol. And "but I was drunk" is not considered a valid defense. Maybe the same standard should be applied to people who decide to join a mob, if we're assuming they're not dumb already before joining one.
rodgerd 6y ago
Ah, yes, the spontaneously generated pipe bombs, firearms, merchandise (t-shirts, caps, you name it), messages organising weeks before, zip-cuffs, hangman's platform, and spears.
- eganist 6y ago
  It'd be an interesting twist in the simulation if the entities were materialized/determined only when the chest^H^H^H^H^H^H truck was examined.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

zdragnar 6y ago

Too many people are trying to rationalize the polarization of our society, focusing exclusively on the ends and ignoring the means. Remember NPR's puff piece justifying looting? Or (I think) CNN's reporter standing in front of a burning building while saying that the BLM protests were mostly peaceful? (They were, but the not-peaceful bits were downplayed in an obviously biased way). There was another interview I saw where some guy was talking about the change they wanted to see, and peace and justice and so on, and was interrupted when in the background the crowd cheered when they finally managed to topple a traffic light (that traffic light never hurt anyone)

maroonblazer 6y ago
False equivalence. Looting commercial districts (while objectionable) is not the same as falsely claiming a federal election was stolen and looting the Capital.
- phkahler 6y ago
  OK. The dems ran around for 3 years claiming the Russians somehow handed Trump the 2016 election.
  - GavinMcG 6y ago
    "We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling." - Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chair https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-statement-on-senate-intel-release-of-volume-5-of-bipartisan-russia-report https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-s...
    - YarickR2 6y ago
      Now you trust Republicans.
    - lliamander 6y ago
      Nowhere near enough to actually influence the election.

watwut 6y ago

It is transparent lie. They came in prepared for it. They had bombs, zip ties, clubs, etc.

georgeplusplus 6y ago

Their opposition loses any credibility to attack these few 100s when they accepted the BLM riots and looting as peaceful. Either stop picking sides and come up with a meaningful solution or you’re contributing to the problem.