2 ms·

>trying to stop the electoral process, which amounts to a de-facto coup. Trump followed the electoral process which allows for legal challenges and never calle

by 99_00 6y ago

>trying to stop the electoral process, which amounts to a de-facto coup. Trump followed the electoral process which allows for legal challenges and never called on anyone to do anything illegal.

jariel 6y ago
Mafia bosses don't order someone killed either. Nevertheless, there was an insurrection on Capitol Hill whereby a few thousand people did overrun with the intent to stop the electoral process (and with a few others planning much worse). So it's established there was an insurrection in his name. Now: He called people to Capitol Hill from across the country specifically to protest the electoral validation. He publicly stated on many occasions - without factual evidence - that the election was stolen, giving his audience what they believed to be the credibility necessary to make very aggressively legitimate grievance. He condemned his on VP for failing in his duty (to commit sedition?) He called on protesters to 'fight fight fight' He called on them to commit 'political combat'. He called on them to 'walk down Pennsylvania Ave' with him. During the insurrection he didn't call in the National Guard, nor convene with Mike Pence, he wasn't publicly trying to get them to stand down, rather, he was on the phone with Republican Congressmen (who were in lock down facing threats to their lives!) pressuring them to stop the vote count, which would be illegal obviously. The President - at that moment - was a willing participant , along with the protesters, in an attempt to overthrow the Republic - which is a coup. This is Standard Authoritarian Playbook, it happens all the time, just not in places we pay attention to. I don't believe Trump planned a coup, but he put all the conditions in place and lit the match, and when it started to burn, he acted directly against his responsibility as President, and instead, acted with the insurrectionists. If, at the moment of insurrection, he were to have stepped in and quashed it all - which he could have done but chose not to - then the argument could be made that 'he didn't mean it, it just got out of hand'. His statements on Twitter were a primary vehicle for this insurrection ergo, a ban, which as Jack says ... 'is complicated'. No doubt. And of course there's hypocrisy and bias with him and the rest of social media.

by 99_00 6y ago

>trying to stop the electoral process, which amounts to a de-facto coup. Trump followed the electoral process which allows for legal challenges and never called on anyone to do anything illegal.

jariel 6y ago

Mafia bosses don't order someone killed either. Nevertheless, there was an insurrection on Capitol Hill whereby a few thousand people did overrun with the intent to stop the electoral process (and with a few others planning much worse). So it's established there was an insurrection in his name. Now: He called people to Capitol Hill from across the country specifically to protest the electoral validation. He publicly stated on many occasions - without factual evidence - that the election was stolen, giving his audience what they believed to be the credibility necessary to make very aggressively legitimate grievance. He condemned his on VP for failing in his duty (to commit sedition?) He called on protesters to 'fight fight fight' He called on them to commit 'political combat'. He called on them to 'walk down Pennsylvania Ave' with him. During the insurrection he didn't call in the National Guard, nor convene with Mike Pence, he wasn't publicly trying to get them to stand down, rather, he was on the phone with Republican Congressmen (who were in lock down facing threats to their lives!) pressuring them to stop the vote count, which would be illegal obviously. The President - at that moment - was a willing participant , along with the protesters, in an attempt to overthrow the Republic - which is a coup. This is Standard Authoritarian Playbook, it happens all the time, just not in places we pay attention to. I don't believe Trump planned a coup, but he put all the conditions in place and lit the match, and when it started to burn, he acted directly against his responsibility as President, and instead, acted with the insurrectionists. If, at the moment of insurrection, he were to have stepped in and quashed it all - which he could have done but chose not to - then the argument could be made that 'he didn't mean it, it just got out of hand'. His statements on Twitter were a primary vehicle for this insurrection ergo, a ban, which as Jack says ... 'is complicated'. No doubt. And of course there's hypocrisy and bias with him and the rest of social media.