Trump Pleads For Love ,Peace, And Understanding

  

Category:  News & Politics

By:  john-russell  •  4 months ago  •  47 comments

Trump Pleads For Love ,Peace, And Understanding









Tweet





See new Tweets










Conversation






















XrjaOfP__bigger.jpg













Charles P. Pierce

@CharlesPPierce








"My lawyers said I can skate if I CAPITALIZE everything."

========================================










Ryan J. Reilly

@ryanjreilly







· 29m



One thing that Trump could’ve said here, but didn’t, is that people shouldn’t come to D.C. at all to protest on his behalf.


ErokU7AXUAU4a0B?format=jpg&name=large




















Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  author  JohnRussell    4 months ago

In Trump's statement he asks that there be no violence. As the other tweeter observed, Trump did not ask that no one come to Washington and protest on his behalf. 

One thing that Trump could’ve said here, but didn’t, is that people shouldn’t come to D.C. at all to protest on his behalf.

Given the tone in the nation, it would be prudent to ask that there be no pro Trump demonstrations at the inauguration, wouldnt it? 

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Principal
1.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 months ago

It’s his way of saying I’m getting royally fucked for what I told you to do, so let’s pretend that I didn’t say it out loud.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1    4 months ago

It's never been difficult to understand what Trump is up to. 

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
1.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @1.1    4 months ago

trump released that within minutes of a democrat Rep saying trump hadn't said anything yet. bwah ha ha ha ha, that dumb ass is watching the impeachment from the white house. might be a little tough now to get a pardon from the moron he set up and then threw under the bus.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    4 months ago

Pence is like the battered wife who says it’s her own fault for not heating up his chicken pot pie quick enough.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Silent
1.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 months ago

No, it wouldn't.  Contrary to what Chris Cuomo said people can peacefully demonstrate.  We should not suggest that people give up that first amendment right based on the actions of a few.   

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.2    4 months ago
Contrary to what Chris Cuomo said people can peacefully demonstrate.

Didn’t he also indicate they had no particular obligation to be peaceful in the first place?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Silent
1.2.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tacos! @1.2.1    4 months ago

Yep, maybe the rioters were Chris Cuomo fans and following his directions.  He should be arrested.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.2.2    4 months ago

'Stop the Steal' Organizer Says Several GOP Congressmen Helped Plan the Rally

Alex Montrose
Tue, January 12, 2021, 8:59 PM EST
e1d2bb9f335f6ddd55727af34ea598eb

Image via Getty

One lead organizer of last week's "Stop the Steal" rally that morphed into an attack against the U.S. Capitol claims that GOP congressmen Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona, and congressman Mo Brooks of Alabama all participated in planning of the Jan. 6 catastrophe.

As CNN points out , Arizona resident and pro-Trump activist Ali Alexander implicated the three members of the House of Representatives during a December livestream on Periscope, where he told followers the four of them had been "planning something big."

“I’m the guy who came up with the idea of January 6 when I was talking with Congressman Gosar, Congressman Andy Biggs, and Congressman Mo Brooks. So we’re the four guys who came up with a January 6 event — #DoNotCertify — and it was to build momentum and pressure, and then on the day change hearts and minds of congresspeoples who weren’t yet decided, or saw everyone outside and said, ‘I can’t be on the other side of that mob,’” Alexander said in a livestream on Dec. 29.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.2.4  Tacos!  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.2.2    4 months ago
He should be arrested.

I think there is a lot of responsibility to go around.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Silent
1.2.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tacos! @1.2.4    4 months ago

Yep, it would be nice if both sides were held to the same standards.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Silent
1.2.6  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.3    4 months ago

I have no problem with someone looking into if they helped plan the rally or planned a violent insurrection.  Maybe something more than "CNN points out"

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 months ago

Given the tone in the nation, it would be prudent to ask that there be no pro Trump demonstrations at the inauguration, wouldnt it? 

And for god's sake, CONCEDE THE ELECTION!!!!

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.3.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Ozzwald @1.3    4 months ago

And say that there was no steal...!  (Trump can't do that though...)

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
2  Paula Bartholomew    4 months ago

Trump has advocated violence many times in the past so his words are bullshit and meaningless.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1  Tacos!  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2    4 months ago

His words are meaningless when he asks people to be peaceful, but if there is violence it must be connected to the deep meaning in his words. Somehow people miss the inconsistency of that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @2.1    4 months ago

Some people understand Trump better than others. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    4 months ago

Some people at least make an attempt to be consistent and fair.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
2.1.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.2    4 months ago

I have been consistent towards him for years and years, he is a piece of shit and should be treated as such. I have also been fair in that consistency because he has proven it time and again for decades with his actions such as stiffing contractors and creditors, his frivolous lawsuits that amount to little more than harassment, his constant lying, his pathetic attempts at pretending to be someone else and singing his own praises, his constant lying about everything, his shitty business record, his racism, his misogyny, the multiple accusations of rape/sexual assault (its what like 13 different women?) and his behavior for his entire presidency. That is just a general overview, he is much more awful person when you get into the details.

I have been calling Donald Trump a piece of shit for years, treating as such for years, and I think based upon his behavior his entire life it is entirely fair. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1    4 months ago

So is it your posit that ONE after that fact statement is supposed to quell over of month of 'Release the Kraken'? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.5  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @2.1.4    4 months ago
after that fact statement

After what fact? The attack of the building? He told people to be peaceful in his speech, not just after the fact.

month of 'Release the Kraken'

He is responsible for getting people riled up way beyond what was justified by the facts, no question. But that kind of thing is done by politicians of all stripes on a whole host of issues and it doesn't translate into "force your way into the capitol and beat a cop to death on your way in."

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.5    4 months ago
After what fact? The attack of the building? He told people to be peaceful in his speech, not just after the fact.

Nope. At about 18:00 into the speech he said: 

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

He then proceeded for another HOUR to call for them to 'fight like hell' to stop 'them' from counting 'illegal' votes. 

Then from the safety of the WH, while Pence was inside the Capitol under siege, Trump tweeted that "Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution". 

There were HUNDREDS of Trump's own LOYAL supporters working in the Capitol on Jan. 6th, including lawmakers, staff and LEO's. He sat and WATCHED HOURS of terror; looting, violence, assaults DEATH and did NOTHING. Trump abdicated his oath. 

He is responsible for getting people riled up way beyond what was justified by the facts, no question. But that kind of thing is done by politicians of all stripes on a whole host of issues and it doesn't translate into "force your way into the capitol and beat a cop to death on your way in."

Tacos!, go READ the speech. Trump spewed over an hour of lies and used buzz words that 'riled up' his minions. Any thinking person who READS that speech will understand what Trump expected of his sycophants. 

There is NO question that Trump was briefed on the threats from his own voters that day. There is NO question that he KNEW that there were plans to 'Occupy the Capitol'. Some day, the crayon drawings will be released. 

If those facts were NOT true, any other President would have been blown their top and been on National TV that night, firing those in his administration responsible for the intelligence and security failures.

Instead he reached out in a tweeted with his love and understanding of the insurgents. 

Of course the next day he denounced them. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.7  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @2.1.6    4 months ago

Is it so hard to both acknowledge facts and accept that they are what they are? You acknowledge that - contrary to your earlier statement - he called for peaceful demonstration during his speech and not simply after the fact of the riot. But when I say he called for peace in his speech, you say "Nope." That's just not logical.

'fight like hell'

Common political rhetoric. In fact, Democrats love it.

Sen. Sherrod Brown expects Democrats will ‘fight like hell’ against Trump Supreme Court nominee

Blumenthal, a key figure in looming Supreme Court confirmation battle, says he’ll ‘fight like hell’ against Trump nominee

“I want to make sure we’re going to fight like hell by investing in America first,” said Biden.

Gov. Wolf vows to ‘fight like hell’ to count every Pennsylvanian’s vote

Hours after the Little Sisters of the Poor won— again —at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Joe Biden pledged to fight like hell to roll back conscience protections for Catholic nuns and other religious employers who object to providing contraceptives.

I guess that means Joe is planning on throwing down with some nuns? It wouldn't be the first time he talked about actually physically fighting someone.

Biden says he would ‘beat the hell’ out of Trump if in high school

And his supporters love it.

‘If we were in high school, I’d take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him,’” said Biden, getting laughter and applause from the crowd at the University of Miami.

If only it were an isolated moment.

'You Wanna Go Outside With Me?' Joe Biden Tries to Fight Union Worker After Disagreement Over Gun Control

There's more, of course, but I have a life.

Trump spewed over an hour of lies and used buzz words that 'riled up' his minions.

I have already said as much. The fact remains that does not equate to "go commit crimes; force your way past barricades and into the capitol; attack cops; steal shit from the capitol, etc."

Any thinking person who READS that speech will understand what Trump expected of his sycophants.

No, I disagree. Any person looking for incitement due to partisan motivations will come to that understanding. That is, those looking for a problem tend to find it.

It's a matter of priorities. And my priority here is not to support Trump (because I don't particularly) but rather to defend free speech - speech that is often fiery, aggressive, and rhetorical.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.7    4 months ago
Is it so hard to both acknowledge facts and accept that they are what they are?

Not at all, I invite you to post some. 

You acknowledge that - contrary to your earlier statement - he called for peaceful demonstration during his speech and not simply after the fact of the riot.

That is FALSE. WHY are you misrepresenting my comment? 

I didn't say anything about Trump's speech in my original comment. 

But when I say he called for peace in his speech, you say "Nope." That's just not logical.

Actually, what I said 'Nope' to was this:

He told people to be peaceful in his speech, not just after the fact.

That too is FALSE. I quoted the ONLY thing he said the word 'peaceful'. He didn't 'tell' people to be peaceful in his speech. Just stop. 

That's just not logical.

Your inability to recognize that it is logical doesn't mean it is illogical. 

Common political rhetoric. In fact, Democrats love it.

Whataboutism, how adult...

I have already said as much. The fact remains that does not equate to "go commit crimes; force your way past barricades and into the capitol; attack cops; steal shit from the capitol, etc."

It may behoove you to review the definition of 'incite'. Hint: It does NOT include giving SPECIFIC instructions. 

No, I disagree. Any person looking for incitement due to partisan motivations will come to that understanding. That is, those looking for a problem tend to find it.

I wasn't looking for a fucking thing. I WATCHED the speech live. I KNOW what I heard and the EFFECT is clear. 

It's a matter of priorities. And my priority here is not to support Trump (because I don't particularly) but rather to defend free speech - speech that is often fiery, aggressive, and rhetorical.

Speech with a motive to incite violence and lawlessness isn't worthy of support.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.9  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @2.1.8    4 months ago
I didn't say anything about Trump's speech in my original comment. 

Yes, I know. Apparently, you either weren't aware of its content or chose to disregard it. My response was to correct your oversight. You have now acknowledged its existence, but refuse to face the implications of the facts you ignored.

That too is FALSE. I quoted the ONLY thing he said the word 'peaceful'. He didn't 'tell' people to be peaceful in his speech. Just stop. 

You literally quoted the line where he told people to be peaceful and you simultaneously claim he's not saying it. That's kind of insane.

Whataboutism, how adult...

Simply citing debate jargon - with nothing else to support it but a snide personal remark - is an empty argument. It's totally appropriate to point out other people using the same language because you have presented Trump's use of the words "fight like hell" as somehow unique, significant, and clearly indicative of a call to be actually violent. But again, you want to disregard facts that refute your narrative.

the EFFECT is clear

If the effect was clear, why didn't thousands of other people who heard the words - in fact, why didn't they all - proceed to the capitol to be violent? The fact is most people who heard those words did not engage in violent criminal behavior.

Speech with a motive to incite violence and lawlessness isn't worthy of support.

It's clear you will believe what you want to believe and ignore facts that contradict that belief. The facts have been presented to you and you choose to dismiss them without reason. That's on you, but I won't waste my time with it anymore. 

Peace. (Maybe look that word up if you're unclear on what it means)

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.7    4 months ago
It's a matter of priorities. And my priority here is not to support Trump (because I don't particularly) but rather to defend free speech - speech that is often fiery, aggressive, and rhetorical.

Then there is dog whistles:

  • "We're gathered together in the heart of our nation's Capitol for one very, very basic and simple reason, to save our democracy."
  • "We will not let them silence your voices. We're not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen."
  • "Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that's what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal."
  • "That's what they've done and what they're doing. We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved."
  • "When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very different rules."
  • "Let them get out. Let the weak ones get out. This is a time for strength....It's all part of the comprehensive assault on our democracy and the American people to finally standing up and saying, 'No.' This crowd is again a testament to it."
  • "You will have an illegitimate president, that's what you'll have. And we can't let that happen."
  • "We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we've been forced to believe over the past several weeks. We've amassed overwhelming evidence about a fake election."
  • "We're going to see whether or not we have great and courageous leaders or whether or not we have leaders that should be ashamed of themselves throughout history, throughout eternity, they'll be ashamed. And you know what? If they do the wrong thing, we should never ever forget that they did. Never forget. We should never ever forget."

All quotes from Trump's speech. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Bob Nelson  replied to  Dulay @2.1.10    4 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Participates
2.1.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Bob Nelson @2.1.11    4 months ago
p did not say "You must attack the Congress!", so he didn't incite. 

Do you believe in the rule of law, Bob? Sure sounds like you don't.

There's an actual legal definition of incitement. Whoever told you Trump's speech satisfies those requirements has played you like an accordion. 

Try supporting the rule of law, and not partisan passion. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.13  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @2.1.10    4 months ago
Then there is dog whistles:

Calling something a dog whistle is another way of twisting the truth to fit a narrative. It allows people to say that words mean whatever they claim they mean, as opposed to the plain meaning of the words. It also allows two different people to use the same words but it can allegedly mean something entirely different when different people say it.

Within such a paradigm it's impossible to have a fair discussion about what words actually mean. So any claim deflects any challenge.

I'll bet I can come up with quotes of Democrats using the kind of language that you list, using the exact same - or nearly exact wording - and you wouldn't think of it as calling for violence.

save our democracy

Trump assaulted American democracy – here's how Democrats can save it

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO SAVE OUR DEMOCRACY

Democrats kick off convention to nominate Biden and ‘save’ democracy

“Every four years we come together to reaffirm our democracy ,” the convention’s moderator, actress Eva Longoria, said in the opening moments.

“This year we’ve come to save it .”

...

“This election is the most important in the modern history of this country,” Sanders said in prepared remarks.

The future of our democracy is at stake ,” he said. “The future of our planet is at stake.”

Electing Biden over Trump is an absolute necessity, he stressed. “My friends, the price of failure is just too great to imagine.”

And from Joe Biden's nomination acceptance speech:

And second, I found the best way through pain and loss and grief is to find purpose. As God's children each of us have a purpose in our lives. And we have a great purpose as a nation: To open the doors of opportunity to all Americans. To save our democracy .

That's just the first one that you listed. I'm confident I could do the same for the rest.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.14  Tacos!  replied to  Bob Nelson @2.1.11    4 months ago

So it must be incitement when Democrats use those words, too, right? Because they do.

 
 
 
bugsy
PhD Guide
2.1.15  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @2.1.10    4 months ago
Then there is dog whistles:

Why is it the left are the ones that hear these dog whistles?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.16  Tacos!  replied to  bugsy @2.1.15    4 months ago

I don't think it's impossible that dog whistles are a thing, sometimes. However, I feel like it is way overused. People want to hear something negative in the speech of a political enemy, so they hear it whether it's really there or not.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
2.1.17  Bob Nelson  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.12    4 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  bugsy @2.1.15    4 months ago
Why is it the left are the ones that hear these dog whistles?

Perhaps some are trained to respond that way when they hear imaginary whistles.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.19  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.9    4 months ago
Yes, I know. Apparently, you either weren't aware of its content or chose to disregard it.

How was that apparent? Please be specific. 

My response was to correct your oversight. You have now acknowledged its existence, but refuse to face the implications of the facts you ignored.

Pure fabrication. Despite all of your pearl clutching, my response required NO MENTION of Trump's speech.

Oh and BTFW, instead of whining, why not answer my question? 

So save the juvenile pretense that you corrected me or that I ignored ANYTHING Tacos!. 

You literally quoted the line where he told people to be peaceful and you simultaneously claim he's not saying it. That's kind of insane.

You are literally hearing what you want to hear. Again, Trump never TOLD them to be peaceful. Why repeat the same bullshit after it has been refuted? . 

Simply citing debate jargon - with nothing else to support it but a snide personal remark - is an empty argument.

That wasn't an argument, it was a statement of fact. 

It's totally appropriate to point out other people using the same language because you have presented Trump's use of the words "fight like hell" as somehow unique, significant, and clearly indicative of a call to be actually violent. But again, you want to disregard facts that refute your narrative.

Actually, you are the one disregarding facts, the first of which is that I 'presented' more than 'fight like hell' and NEVER said those words were unique. The TOTALITY of Trump's speech were a call to be actually violent. The PROOF of that is that he did NOTHING about it. 

Another thing that made his intent clear to me was that altercations with Capitol Police started during the last 15 minutes of Trump's speech. NO ONE went to him and whispered in his ear that there was an issue at the Capitol. Trump just kept on riling up the crowd. Then he danced to YMCA [OH the fucking irony].

So Trump goes backstage and it seems that NO ONE mentions to him that some of his minions are outside the Capitol 'fighting like hell' with LEO's. 

Hey Boss, maybe you should get back on stage and calm every one down. 

Fuck NO, get me to a big screen and a Happy meal...

FREE SPEECH! 

Pffft...

I'm out. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.20  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.13    4 months ago

jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
2.1.21  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @2.1.6    4 months ago

Then from the safety of the WH, while Pence was inside the Capitol under siege, Trump tweeted that "Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution"

If that is about Pence refusing to certify to ECV, what part of PENCE DOES NOT HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO does Trump not get/

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.22  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @2.1.15    4 months ago

Why are you asking me to speak for the left? 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.23  Dulay  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.1.21    4 months ago

Well since Trump says that 'I have Article 2, I can do whatever I want', he thinks it trickles down to Pence...

 
 
 
Trotsky's Spectre
Freshman Quiet
2.2  Trotsky's Spectre  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2    4 months ago

I wonder what happened to convince him to do even that ... I've got this odd feeling about this ... I can't shake it ... Here's the best I've got so far ...

A half dozen secret service people, Pence, a shrink, a physician with an elephant-sized hypodermic sedative, and a priest trained in exorcisms enter the oval orifice.

The Doctor and the Priest move into position ...The Doctor takes aim ... the priest begins an incantation ... the shrink stands ready to assist ...

Someone holds up a few feet of rope with a hangman's noose ...

Another voice says, '... we don't burn people at the stake anymore ... so you must recant ...'

The priest douses the guy with a bucket of holy water ...

 
 
 
JBB
PhD Principal
3  JBB    4 months ago

Our President is a no good lying traitor to America!

LOCK HIM UP!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @3    4 months ago

He sees he is being impeached, so he wants to create an alternative narrative. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4  Trout Giggles    4 months ago

I almost miss his 400 daily tweets

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
4.1  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @4    4 months ago

too bad you can't run a country that way ...

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
5  r.t..b...    4 months ago

A somber note to cap off a dark and depressing week...there are now more armed military personnel guarding our US Capitol than are currently deployed in Afghanistan.

Removing any doubt that domestic terrorists and their enablers, fueled by the incessant lies and misinformation, are the greatest threat to our democracy. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
6  Bob Nelson    4 months ago

Are we sure that Trump is even aware of this press release?

It's unsigned, coming from the "Office of the Press Secretary".

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
7  Thrawn 31    4 months ago
Trump Pleads For Love ,Peace, And Understanding

Fuck him. He was all about hate and division for years but now that his presidency has gone down in flames and he is facing serious legal problems starting at 12:01 on Jan 20th, now he wants to try to act like the peacemaker? You can lick my sack Donald Trump. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


37 visitors