3 ms·

Sorry, I don't see how anything you've said 'proves' that Trump's post-hoc statement condoned, much less incited the actions of the violent minority within the

Sorry, I don't see how anything you've said 'proves' that Trump's post-hoc statement condoned, much less incited the actions of the violent minority within the protest. In regards to the separate topic of the BLM protests, you could've presented quotes such as this: "All Americans were rightly sickened and revolted by the brutal death of George Floyd. My administration is fully committed that for George and his family, justice will be served. He will not have died in vain. But we cannot allow the righteous cries and peaceful protesters to be drowned out by an angry mob. The biggest victims of the rioting are peace-loving citizens in our poorest communities. And as their president, I will fight to keep them safe. I will fight to protect you. I am your president of law and order, and an ally of all peaceful protesters." https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-trump-mobilize-federal-resources-stop-violence-restore/story?id=71008802 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-trump-mobilize-fe... Instead you cherry picked to present a narrative that fits your argument.

croon 6y ago
I'm not surprised that he's read a prepared measured speech. What I haven't seen, and I would love to see "cherry picked" is the rhetoric I posted but reversed between the two groups. I'll make a bet and say that that's never happened. Which brings us back around to; he's condoning the specific group storming the capitol, while fast and loose condemning every unruly edge case of the BLM movement.
- aww_dang 6y ago
  "...you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don't want anybody hurt." Sounds consistent. Peaceful protest, yes. Violence, destruction of property, no.
  - croon 6y ago
    That is during the capitol assault. Which is explicitly why he isn't consistent. Where are the "thugs", "terrorists", "anarchists", etc? He's never hesitated to use those terms before. It took him a full two days to condemn the events in Charlottesville. And he didn't call it terrorism. Because it was "his" side.
    - aww_dang 6y ago
      And now you want to turn the topic onto Charlottesville, where he explicitly condemned the violence and extremists. "To anyone who acted criminally in this weekend’s racist violence, you will be held fully accountable. Justice will be delivered. As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America." "Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America." "I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack on the United States Capitol. Like all Americans, I am outraged by the violence, lawlessness and mayhem." "The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. To those who engaged in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country. And to those who broke the law, you will pay." You've no issue quoting the prepared statement asking Capitol Building protesters to go home. Yet you take issue with a prepared statement about George Floyd. I'll agree that consistency is important here. This flavor of hyperpartisanship is part of the problem. There's very little you can change about Trump's supporters. Even less if you take an extreme partisan approach. This only contributes to the toxicity. https://time.com/4899813/donald-trump-charlottes-ville-remarks-transcript/ https://time.com/4899813/donald-trump-charlottes-ville-remar... https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-concedes-election-condemns-rioters-video-transcript-january-7 https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-concedes-e...
      - croon 6y ago
        > You've no issue quoting the prepared statement asking Capitol Building protesters to go home What I quoted wasn't the prepared statements. The prepared statements you quoted was long after he got massive pushback and moves to impeach him (again). Exactly his modus operandi. > And now you want to turn the topic onto Charlottesville I am establishing a pattern, yes. > where he explicitly condemned the violence and extremists. After multiple days and massive flack from all sides of the aisle. > This flavor of hyperpartisanship is part of the problem. [...] Even less if you take an extreme partisan approach. This only contributes to the toxicity. I agree, which is exactly why I've been writing these posts. > There's very little you can change about Trump's supporters. You could start by not choosing rhetoric based on politics, which is exactly what he's been doing for 4 (+) years. Ducks are ducks regardless of politics, but he treats them very differently.

croon 6y ago

I'm not surprised that he's read a prepared measured speech. What I haven't seen, and I would love to see "cherry picked" is the rhetoric I posted but reversed between the two groups. I'll make a bet and say that that's never happened. Which brings us back around to; he's condoning the specific group storming the capitol, while fast and loose condemning every unruly edge case of the BLM movement.

aww_dang 6y ago
"...you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don't want anybody hurt." Sounds consistent. Peaceful protest, yes. Violence, destruction of property, no.
- croon 6y ago
  That is during the capitol assault. Which is explicitly why he isn't consistent. Where are the "thugs", "terrorists", "anarchists", etc? He's never hesitated to use those terms before. It took him a full two days to condemn the events in Charlottesville. And he didn't call it terrorism. Because it was "his" side.
  - aww_dang 6y ago
    And now you want to turn the topic onto Charlottesville, where he explicitly condemned the violence and extremists. "To anyone who acted criminally in this weekend’s racist violence, you will be held fully accountable. Justice will be delivered. As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America." "Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America." "I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack on the United States Capitol. Like all Americans, I am outraged by the violence, lawlessness and mayhem." "The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. To those who engaged in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country. And to those who broke the law, you will pay." You've no issue quoting the prepared statement asking Capitol Building protesters to go home. Yet you take issue with a prepared statement about George Floyd. I'll agree that consistency is important here. This flavor of hyperpartisanship is part of the problem. There's very little you can change about Trump's supporters. Even less if you take an extreme partisan approach. This only contributes to the toxicity. https://time.com/4899813/donald-trump-charlottes-ville-remarks-transcript/ https://time.com/4899813/donald-trump-charlottes-ville-remar... https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-concedes-election-condemns-rioters-video-transcript-january-7 https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-concedes-e...
    - croon 6y ago
      > You've no issue quoting the prepared statement asking Capitol Building protesters to go home What I quoted wasn't the prepared statements. The prepared statements you quoted was long after he got massive pushback and moves to impeach him (again). Exactly his modus operandi. > And now you want to turn the topic onto Charlottesville I am establishing a pattern, yes. > where he explicitly condemned the violence and extremists. After multiple days and massive flack from all sides of the aisle. > This flavor of hyperpartisanship is part of the problem. [...] Even less if you take an extreme partisan approach. This only contributes to the toxicity. I agree, which is exactly why I've been writing these posts. > There's very little you can change about Trump's supporters. You could start by not choosing rhetoric based on politics, which is exactly what he's been doing for 4 (+) years. Ducks are ducks regardless of politics, but he treats them very differently.