3 ms·

I think we can at least agree that despite his double-speak, the fact that he has been stirring his crowd to act on the 'steal' is not inconsequential. It seem

by Renaud 6y ago

I think we can at least agree that despite his double-speak, the fact that he has been stirring his crowd to act on the 'steal' is not inconsequential. It seems unlikely that he would not have been briefed on the plots that were being organised and the dangers of feeding this crowd that rhetoric. He has a large responsibility in inciting the level of denial that have led to his supporters to intimidate or threaten officials, many from his own party no less. Allowing this to go for weeks without disavowing or distancing himself publicly has only embolden a crowd that believed in the legitimacy of their actions because the president would not say otherwise. Maybe we can be generous and say that things got out of hand but that would only show some lack of responsible judgement on his part and I'm not sure it's not somehow even worse.

TeeMassive 6y ago
> his double-speak I'm sorry but you're no mind reader. How do you know he meant something else? There is absolutely nothing to that effect, this is the kind of "signs" that the QMorons base their crackpot theories on. > the fact that he has been stirring his crowd to act on the 'steal' is not inconsequential No, "stirring a crowd" is by no means incitement to anything. And accusing someone with broad accusations because what he did was "not inconsequential" is just very Kafkaesque. > It seems unlikely that he would not have been briefed on the plots You worked at WH? No? Well it "seems unlikely" that you don't know what kind of briefings make their way to the office of the President. > He has a large responsibility in inciting the level of denial that have led to his supporters to intimidate or threaten officials, many from his own party no less. "inciting a level of denial", what does that even mean? This feels like I'm reading what a neural network trained on Twitter headlines would spew on.

by Renaud 6y ago

TeeMassive 6y ago

> his double-speak I'm sorry but you're no mind reader. How do you know he meant something else? There is absolutely nothing to that effect, this is the kind of "signs" that the QMorons base their crackpot theories on. > the fact that he has been stirring his crowd to act on the 'steal' is not inconsequential No, "stirring a crowd" is by no means incitement to anything. And accusing someone with broad accusations because what he did was "not inconsequential" is just very Kafkaesque. > It seems unlikely that he would not have been briefed on the plots You worked at WH? No? Well it "seems unlikely" that you don't know what kind of briefings make their way to the office of the President. > He has a large responsibility in inciting the level of denial that have led to his supporters to intimidate or threaten officials, many from his own party no less. "inciting a level of denial", what does that even mean? This feels like I'm reading what a neural network trained on Twitter headlines would spew on.