'Forget Unity' if Impeachment Trial
By: Brian Trusdell
How democrats handle whether there is a senate trial or not is the single biggest precondition to determine whether or not there will be any unity, healing, or peace in this country in the near term. Navarro is right in all he said. If democrats truly want it they will move on and the impeachment will be dropped. Scorched 🥵 earth 🌎 opposition is the alternative.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Democrats can “forget about unity” if they continue to push for an impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate of former President Donald Trump, ex-White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said Wednesday.
“That’s gone, that’s off the table,” the 71-year-old Navarro, a Democrat turned Republican economist, said on the “War Room” podcast on Wednesday. “This will be a 50–50 country. The gap between us will be a chasm. There will be nothing but friction.”
If Biden is unable, or unwilling, to persuade Congressional Democrats “from backing down from trying to gut Donald J. Trump, forget about unity,” Navarro added.
Despite Biden’s weeks long call for “unity,” the Democratically controlled House of Representatives impeached Trump on Jan. 13 claiming that he incited an “insurrection” a week earlier by encouraging his supporters at a rally to march “peacefully” to the U.S. Capitol. Several hundred people breached the Capitol building while the Congress was debating certification of the Electoral College vote.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who has yet to send the article of impeachment to the Senate, said Thursday that putting Trump on trial was an act of unity.
“The fact is, the president of the United States committed an act of incitement of insurrection,” Pelosi said . “I don't think it's very unifying to say, 'Oh, let's just forget it and move on.' That's not how you unify.”
Navarro suggested that placing Trump on trial would elevate his status even further and become an even larger figure than he already is.
“Donald J. Trump got on this plane today and went home to Florida,” Navarro said, referring to a photo of Air Force One. “And if you’re going to hound him any further, you’re just going to make him more of an issue and a bigger issue, and you will regret it. So, let’s see what happens in the next 48 hours.”
Agreeing with “War Room” host Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser, Navarro said he was advising Democrats that they shouldn’t place Trump on trial, that doing so would only benefit the former president politically.
“I’m just saying that’s what they should do, if they had any sense,” he said.
Tags
Who is online
70 visitors
The Trumpists have riddled the country with nothing but divisiveness. We don't expect any "unity" with those extremists.
Furthermore, there can be no "unity" unless there is accountability.
Navarro is an loud-mouthed ignoramus.
Die hard Trump supporters and/or sycophants clearly have no respect or regard for due process or function, from the election results to the DC insurrection to Trump's second impeachment. Their actions, threats and whining only shows them to be short sighted un-American traitors more interested in their own agendas and biases rather than America as a whole.
But...but...weren't we always told that the Republican Party was The Party of Law and Order?
Or would-be insurrectionists. Don't expect it, and don't seek it.
That faction has forsaken the United States of America.
Yet again, you give 'regurgitate in reverse' NON-answer.
To what exactly do you refer by 'those that follow 1619?' If you refer to the so-called Project 1619, the World Socialist Web Site reputed that continually from the start. It interviewed prestigious professional historians and published these. It hosted at least one on-line event lasting several hours where Project 1619 was eviscerated. The WSWS also demonstrated why the project -- now thankfully defunct -- was thoroughly reactionary.
The International Committee of the Fourth International contends that 1776 and 1860 constitute two separate but related revolutions. In brief, it replies to Project 1619 by indicating that it was an attempt to create a fictitious narrative of race as the primary narrative behind which it would cover the true story where the dominant and organizing principle is social class. I suppose that hands you an Hobson's Choice between a Marxian and a Democratic Party perspective. Thankfully, as a subjective idealist, you can create a different reality simply by imagining it is true.
With a sidearm pointed at your head, I doubt you could name one solitary work either of those men wrote. It's not exactly 'reverse regurgitation,' but is sufficiently close to 'non-answer' to be classified as such.
Could you please repeat that in plain English? (Because the way you just stated it makes no sense whatsoever).
Secular? YES!!!
Well, at least they have the brains that there is no such thing as a "god"-- that's merely a primitive superstition-- a Pagan Myth!
Good thing Navarro has been marginalized even further off the scales of credibility.
Navarro changed his mind 6 times on party affiliation.
Navarro championed the failed Trade War with China.
As the Defense Production Act coordinator, Navarro was overruled by the House oversight committee when they canceled a Navarro contract for 42,900 ventilators that were over paid by $500 million.
On 01/06/21 he was not only telling Lindsay graham, Niki Haley and Mitt Romney to shut up, he was still clinging to the fantasy that Trump won the election.
Navarro has a mind?
Biden's call for unity does not mean he's calling for a suspension of the law. The criminal investigations of Trump will continue and the trial in the Senate will go forward regardless of Trump or his cronies threats that doing such might rile up the beehive of vile piece of shit Trump supporters like those seditionists who attacked the capital. We do not negotiate with terrorists, domestic or otherwise. If they choose to "rise up" then they should be prepared to be put down.
Biden is calling for unity from all law abiding peaceful democracy loving Americans who can accept facts, accept the free and fair election results and work with him towards fixing the myriad of problems America is facing. Starting out by giving in to seditionists and criminals is not how we fix things and unify. We shouldn't give a fuck about how large the crowd of domestic terrorists Trump leads is, that should not dictate how we move forward in this country, bowing down to them will only empower them. If they refuse to take responsibility and repent for their lies and attack on democracy then they should be cut out root and branch and thrown in the dust bin of history, America does not need them nor want them.
Real Americans will recognize the need for and heed the call for unity. Mr. Biden has his work cut out for him. But there is no magical overnight fix.
Your "side" has already made terms and also made it clear it's not really interested in unity. Quite un-American too!
The House can withdraw the articles of impeachment and avoid the whole mess. But that would divide the Democratic Party. In order for Nancy Pelosi to punish Trump, Pelosi must behave like Trump. This has become a political vendetta; it's not about the country any longer.
Democrats have transformed Trump into a yardstick that will be used to measure Democrats' behavior. What would Trump do? How is Pelosi's behavior any different than what Trump would do?
How is following through with her constitutional duties, the only constitutional remedy for a criminal President, be behaving like the former criminal-in-chief? Pelosi is doing her job and doing the will of the majority which is to impeach a lawless out of control President who incited an insurrection. To simply bow to the domestic terrorists to calm down the rabid right would be an abdication of her duties and be counter to what truly patriotic Americans and America stands for. Liberty and justice for all. She is merely seeking justice as she should, she should never back down simply because right wing extremists have threatened her and Democrats claiming they won't unify if she doesn't acquiesce to their demands. The truth is they will never "unify" no matter what she does because most of these rabid right wing dumb fuck conspiracy theorists believe Democrats are baby eating Satan worshipers. Until they are cured of their delusions, either through education or incarceration, they will never accept any outreached hand or call for unity coming from rational Americans so doing so is nothing but an exercise in futility.
The Dem dummies DO NOT have a national mandate to "punish" Trump". In fact, I voters expected a bit more from the left wing nitwits than to befoul the atmosphere with all these partisan theatrics.
The Senate WILL NOT vote to convict Trump of this phony charge...they simply don't have the votes, the process in this circumstance is unconstitutional, and the majority of Americans do not support them. The voters would rather the Dem dummies work on real issues like Covid relief and unemployment...instead of opening the flood gates of illegal immigration and making stupid policy about trans females.
The left wingers have a choice...keeping harping on this issue and permanently lose thousands of midterm votes...or shutting up and moving on with the business of the people. The Democrat "leaders" are not acting or speaking sanely or rationally. They same could be said for some on this site.
We will not give in to the threats from Banana Republicans. The work on Covid and unemployment is already under way, unlike the foam at the mouth rabid right Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. By letting Trump and the domestic terrorists he's inspired off the hook for their sedition we would be empowering them and essentially giving the right a green light for further insurrection every time they don't get their way or lose a free and fair election. If the right does not denounce the conspiracy theories, denounce Qanon, denounce the white supremacists and right wing militia groups the continued friction and whatever results from it is on them.
Donald Trump is not the President; Joe Biden is the President. As a private citizen, Donald Trump can be prosecuted just as the others involved in the attack on the Capitol Building are being prosecuted.
Nancy Pelosi is engaged in a political vendetta; the same sort of political vendettas Trump engaged in as President. Nancy Pelosi is doing what President Trump would do.
That sounds like something President Trump would say. If Democrats wanted Trump to remain in office then Democrats should have voted for him. Democrats behaving like Trump is a sorry substitute for the real deal.
Your opinion, but debateable.
You know you have 10 minutes to proof read and make corrections for missing words, misspelled words and just plainly bad grammar.
conjecture/opinion
In your opinion, they do not have the votes yet. Today's news that the Trump campaign funneled $2.7 million to the rally organizers and the permits were signed by 8 Trump campaign workers may change some minds as to Trumps innocence or intelligence.
then why are so many Republicans allowing it to happen? Once started, the process should be finished.
Not according to recent polls. Since 01/06 support has grown to 55% to convict and that is going up because of GoP support
Agreed, fixing Trump damage should be a priority.
Ok, aren't you overreacting a wee bit?
I prefer you keep calling them voters
'permanently' ??? really???
ok
Sure they are Greg, you are just tone deaf because they aren't lying to you 24/7 like the last 5 years.
Wow, a little meta for good measure?
With Trumpist fascists, it's not at all.
No body is behaving like trump except Ted Cruz, he is the "sorry substitute".
Americans are not interested in what's "ok" for Trumpist fascist, or if they double down, or triple down, on their fascist beliefs. Americans will continue to be unyielding in their resistance and strict opposition to the Trumpist fascist forces' sedition and treasonous efforts to subvert our country.
The Trump cultist's worshipful obedience to their master or his "annointed" successor lays to rest the pretence that they subscribe to any other religion.
Soon as ... 6 months? A year?
It looks like you really did mean that 'enemy of the state' remark.
And perhaps you should explain that repeated 'no-pre-conditions' remark.
Does that mean that you get a so-called 'right' to continue building an insurrectionist movement while using the threat of civil war to blackmail the United States to accept your terms? Would you agree to that? I seriously doubt that.
You are creating a perception that you have already renounced allegiance to and in your political orientation, left these United States of America.
Cruz' opposition to election certification aligns politically with those who stormed the Capitol. You claim to decry 'violence;' but we see no tangible reason for which we ought to take you at your word. This is particularly so when you support a man who opposed certification. From your every pore, you ooze insurrection, rebellion and sedition.
Now you can ignore this while seething these words -- and yes, they were meant to sting -- OR you can make come compelling argument to support your claim of meaningful separation/distinction from and/or non-alignment with the US fascist, insurrectionist movement.
If there are any compelling reasons -- as opposed to mere denials/affirmations -- for which we ought to accept your claim to be a United States citizen in any meaningful sense, now is your time to state them. Because 'no "pre-conditions"' in the sense of 'let us continue coup plotting' won't cut it. So explain yourself on that. Does 'no pre-conditions' mean the fascist, insurrectionist movement gets to keep plotting, OR does it mean something else? If so, what?
Also, you can explain that word, 'soon' as I first requested.
Think you can wait that long? Oh I seriously doubt that!
I suspect that as a self-identifying 'enemy of the state' 'simply because of what [you] believe,' you'll be rooting for the next assault on the Capitol when it happens.
If politics is not not religion, which is the kingdom of God -- politics or religion?
John Calvin had it that the human heart is a perpetual idol factory.
Your insurrectionist politics rests on a clear, epistemic basis.
I'll take that as your declaration of support for state religion of selective political piety.
After hearing for years that the US
was,
is now,
and ever shall be
world without end,
A-men
a Christian nation and never will be secular/Muslim/etc., it's pretty ripe to hear that there is an ontologically substantive, principled distinction between politics and religion. Either there is a strict separation of church/mosque/temple/etc. and state, or there is not.
Moreover, and in terms of an erstwhile tendency to electoral fanaticism, I'm comfortable seeing both parties of Kapital as religion. They both purport to have soteriological import. They both have an eschatology. They both offer ways to see the world and respond to it. If this isn't religion, perhaps your local ecclesia isn't either.
[Deleted]
Well done, Gsquared. Methinks you've caught the essence of what Christagelical Evanjihadists sadly became ...
Withdrawing impeachment would just be catering to bullies and insurgents. Let Trump be convicted or exonerated based on the merits of the impeachment process, as is how the system is supposed to work.
It's not gonna work Gordy...all it does is to continue to show how petty and vindictive and out of touch the true believes of left wing dogma truly are.
He's gone...get over it. You seem to be intelligent enough to understand this, [deleted]
That's very much how Donald Trump would frame the issue in stark terms without any compromising ambivalence.
Withdrawing the articles of impeachment would divide the Democratic Party. That sort of compromising approach would threaten Nancy Pelosi's authority as Speaker, too. Democrats are on the path of impeachment for the good of the party; the good of the country be damned.
Joe Biden will have to twist himself into a pretzel to avoid becoming involved. If Biden supports impeachment then he gives up bipartisanship. If Biden opposes impeachment then he divides the Democratic Party. Donald Trump is the rock and Nancy Pelosi is the hard place.
Whether Trump's words incited insurrection and is serious enough to warrant trial and conviction is for the Senate to decide, not you. So we have to wait for the impeachment proceedings to play out. But the fact that you admit you prefer "scorched earth" only proves you're not really interested or serious in unity or due process. Only in your own partisan BS!
The same can be said for the right wing. But I'm not bringing left/right into it. Just because he's now gone doesn't make him exempt from impeachment proceedings and judgement.
All of that is doubtful. Ideally, Biden should maintain distance from impeachment proceedings and focus on other priorities.
At this point, I think it would be more appropriate to have the Attorney General investigate the matter. If accountability or punishment is the goal, a Senate trial does not accomplish that now.
Petty and vindictive was the way the last President fired people and appointed cronies and plainly unqualified people
to dozens of position at the DoD, Pentagon, NSA and others
AFTER he clearly knew he had lost the election.
In your opinion...
Almost everything in DC involves some amount of political theater, well, remembering Trey Gowdy and Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy over the past 12 years, a lot of theater.
There ya go with that partisan hatred excuses everything BS again Christian.
Maybe, and odds are that will happen, so why set your hair on fire so soon?
Baseless charges? Don't forget the 10 GOP votes for impeachment. Chance are each Senator up for reelection in 2020 will be primaried, regardless of party or vote.
There is a Constitutional guideline for impeachment and trial. If the impeachment process extends as far as a trial, then the Senate must hear the case and make the decision to acquit or convict, with the Chief Justice presiding over matters.
All of what is doubtful? The problems that impeachment creates for Joe Biden are also problems for Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.
Winning elections also carry consequences. The power dynamic has changed because Democrats are no longer the opposition (or resistance). As I stated a month ago, Democrats winning both Georgia Senate races would be the worst possible outcome for Democrats.
Pelosi's kneejerk opposition politics to impeach Trump has created a can of worms for the Democratic Party. Impeaching Trump may have been politically useful when Democrats were the opposition party. Pelosi may think she can divide the Republican Party with impeachment but that doesn't prove useful because Democrats are in control of government now. Dividing the Republican Party only creates a number of opposition factions; a herd of cats that Republican leadership can't corral. A divided Republican Party establishes competition for control of the party and Joe Biden becomes the unifying factor.
A conviction or acquittal of Trump in the Senate doesn't provide Democrats any political advantage for governing. A conviction divides the Republican Party and makes Joe Biden the political means for unifying Republicans. An acquittal bolsters Republican resolve to oppose the Democrats' agenda as a pathway to regain power in Congress.
Impeachment might provide red meat for the party base but it's too early in Biden's term to have a lasting impact. Democrats are expected to govern and not oppose or resist. That's the consequences of winning elections.
Withdrawing impeachment is doubtful. How such an action would affect the Democrats (or the Republicans for that matter) is speculative. But the issue isn't about winning elections. It's about impeachment proceedings. So all we can do is wait and see.
How exactly are impeachment proceedings unconstitutional when it is being conducted according to the Constitution?
Now that I look at it, I actually don't think there's anything in the Constitution that says they have to hear the case. I imagine Congress probably has rules they have created that may say something like that, but the Constitution just says that
That kind of language usually means they have a choice. They may not have to bother with it. In any event, it doesn't change my opinion that it's a waste of time and better handled by the AG. The sole justification for going through with it would be to disqualify him from holding office again, and that seems more like a political move than one focused on justice.
Man I wish I knew more about constitutional law. Are you sure here? I mean, when Nixon left office one of the first actions by President Ford was to issue a pardon for Nixon for everything including related to Watergate. If Nixon was pardoned could the House then impeach him? As I understand it, a president cannot pardon away an impeachment but can a pre-emptive pardon prevent the impeachment from even occurring?
I don't know the answer. Back on the 7th I felt the best approach for the good of the country would have been for the leadership in Congress to get together with Pence and Trump to come up with a deal where Trump would resign in exchange for Pence to pardon him. But once the House impeached Trump, that option was gone. Now there are other options but the pardon option is forever gone.
That is superficial reasoning. Just because Nixon was not impeached due to his resignation does not mean that he could not have been impeached and convicted per the CotUS.
The CotUS does not preclude a Senate conviction of Trump. The constitutionality of this event is undecided and there is no precedent. My reading of the CotUS suggests that impeachment (and conviction) are used to remove a rogue president from power. So to me, impeachment/conviction was not intended as a way to punish or attack but as a remedy to replace a bad apple.
The constitutional question is now on the table. It will be addressed, no doubt. Until then, the answer is 'we do not know'. You, in particular, do not know yet you present as though you were an authority.
Strawman. The question is whether Trump can be convicted. Removal from office is not the question.
You do not know if the CotUS allows for conviction after a PotUS leaves office.
I have seen that Idea floated before that Justice Roberts can decline to preside , thus letting the president of the senate , VP Harris preside. that is FALSE.
art 1 sec 3 of the Constitution , states that the chief justice does NOT have that choice, it states he WILL, nor is there a mention that the senate president can replace said justice in presiding over proceedings.
It says the Chief Justice will preside when the President is tried. Donald Trump is a private citizen. I don't think the Senate has to invite the Chief Justice to provide, and he's not bound by the Constitution to do so.
Kind of a catch 22 there really .
though trump is now a private citizen , the alleged crime took place during a time when he was president and could claim presidential immunity from prosecution in a normal court of law .
this could be why even though it has never been done and is not mentioned in the constitution , they are moving forward with impeachment to avoid presidential immunity from prosecution during the time of the alleged crime.
if it were simply a matter of making it so trump can never run for public office again , a simple referendum and vote to include both houses of congress is all thats really needed, it equates to a censure and expultion from government office, and that route needs a simple majority to pass unlike the 67 voted in the senate to convict , which i doubt can be met..
certain convictions can , such as treason , insurrection, sedition, if found guilty of any of those one is ineligible to hold any public office . One would need a presidential pardon after conviction on any of those charges to run for office again.
I do not think trump is stupid enough to run for public office again . the speaker of the house even though they have articles of impeachment that have been voted on and passed , can file them in a drawer and hold on to them there is no time limit for them to be trransmitted to the senate for action.
the impeachment will stand , even without a trial , and IF trump runs and wins , they can be dusted off at a later date and taken up then, No statute of limitations on impeachments , that is a fairly large risk for very little gain IMHO.
besides i didnt vote for him either time he ran , i dont see myself voting for him in any future run for office either.
And here is another thought , a president while in office can not be prosecuted in the courts , i will give that as granted , its often called presidential immunity from prosecution using the judicial system, the only mechanism to charge a sitting president is through impeachment .
I understand also that once a president is no longer president and a private citizen , they CAN be charged and prosecuted for such crimes even if they took place while they were a sitting president, No immunity from prosecution once one is a private citizen for crimes commited .
Shall we wait and see if charges of insurrection and sedition are brought in the judicial system, where there is actual jail time as well as financial loss and being barred from ever holding public office again? verses a congressional impeachment action where the only penalty is loss of pension and ability to run for public office, congress cant put him in jail or execute him if he is found guilty , but the judicial system can.
Something to think about .
If impeachment goes before a Senate trial, then the Chief Justice will have to preside.
Yes-- and that's exactly what he wants! (It been his stance ever since we can remember-- although strangely enough he apparently thinks he is fooling us.)
Ah-- The Straw Man Cometh!
ROFLMAO!
That comment is sheer gibberish.
Would it be possible for you to re-state it in a way that makes sense?
Love your Metaphors!
(Or was that actually a Simile?)
Trump bragged about being a law and order president. Now the law will be coming for him.
What goes around comes around!
We have seen this a lot over the last several years, especially from the far left end of the party: Too many people trying to boost their own esteem by continuing to fight fights that are already largely won. What's the primary purpose of impeachment? To get someone out of office.
The problem is the people already took care of that. There is no need for Congress to waste its time on a problem that has already been solved.
But by golly when they're done, they will be all too happy to path themselves on the back, and go around telling everyone about the brave stand they took for justice and the American people. "Thank Goodness and Thank Democratic Leadership" we'll be expected to say. "Those courageous representatives in Congress finally ended our long dark nightmare."
And we'll all just ignore the fact that he's already been voted out of office three months previous.
It's hard to imagine a more toxic and divisive exercise. What a waste of time.
Why not? Trump did and he managed to intimidate 140 some House reps and Senators to try to overturn a legal election.
He paid for a rally on the same day, a rally that was set up by his own campaign on November 23.
Let the Kabuki play out. This will lead to moments where a future POTUS might be made ( or broken ).
That's not a reason for mature adults. Trump's shitty behavior (nor anyone else's) doesn't control the choices I make.
I understand it's just theater for some, but I take it a little more seriously than that.
Too many people want to just pile of for its own sake. That's what gangs and bullies do. Justice for wrongdoing is properly sought in an actual court of law. But you don't hear much talk of that now, and I suspect it's because these people know or fear in their hearts that they could never get a real conviction.
They are now talking about Trump trying to corrupt the Acting AG and other DOJ Lawyers to force the GA issue and nullify that election.
I think I want to know how bad it really was as opposed to piling on.
He fired too many people on the way out replacing them with incapable people, Pentagon, DoJ, DoD
and the previous US attorney for northern GA whose replacement he tried to manipulate into nullifying the election.
If he was as Mad as the Hatter, I , for one mature adult, would like to know.
You can do that without an impeachment. Congress can investigate, and so can the Attorney General. And then if a crime was committed, you can prosecute.
As we we saw last year, impeachment - with it's almost total lack of rules for evidence, and an equal disregard for what constitutes a crime - is a great vehicle for sensationalizing and scandalizing words and actions that might bother some, but don't rise to the level of criminal behavior. A much fairer and more mature process is available to us. Let actual investigators at the DOJ perform an actual investigation instead of another partisan exercise in muckraking.
Yet, no one has ever taken that route, they either impeach or pardon
and there isn't a consensus on a pardon.
I assume you are referring to those die-hard Republicans who still refuse to accept that the Election was totally fair--- and are still trying to change the results?
No its not!!!
The Democrats are already assembling for the Senate trial. Here's a photo of them..
here's a picture of the stop the steal rally in DC yesterday
Yawn! That wasn't very original. Can't you come up with something better and more accurate than that?
Trump supporters beating a cop to death... Better? Happy now?
The Democrats are already assembling for the Senate trial. Here's a photo of them.
Yawn! That wasn't very original. Can't you come up with something better and more accurate than that?
That picture that I posted was very accurate. You obviously can't even come up with an original comeback. Not surprising coming from a leftie.
How rich - the guy who incessantly posts about how he plans on being as divisive as possible under every circumstance until Republicans are back in control, is promising there will not be unity if Trump is put on trial in the senate. ROFL - obviously you and your ilk are already committed to being as big of an asshole as you can possibly be either way, so what impact would this article have on anything?? LOCK HIM UP!!!!
That fact seems to not register.
that's going to be a tough cut and paste response to find...
It also shows they do not respect the Constitution or the constitutional process. Some just whine because they didn't get their way, like a child throwing a tantrum.
For comparison...
The right wing tried to impeach Obama for all kinds of things and have suggested impeaching President Biden less than 40 hours after taking office...for winning the election.
But trump tries to overthrow the US government and they cry about impeaching his criminal ass?
That's too stupid to make up. Lock trump up and throw away the key.
Do show exactly where he tried to overthrow the government. Give evidence from a reliable unbiased site.
Oh that's easy.. Those particular trump supporters are too stupid to come up with the idea on their own. But I digress...
But I am sure it's just a big coincidence that this insurrection took place on the very day that the EC was to be certified in an election that trump LOST.
Besides, every time something happens when a Dem is in office, they get the blame for everything...but Trump? Never.
I guess screaming election fraud, hoax, lies, stealing elections...all said by trump himself, never had any effect on ANY of his supporters? You SURE about that? Did you forget about the, "Liberate Wisconsin" tweets, and not long after, proud boys hatched a plan to abduct Whitmer and take over the government in Wisconsin? Let me guess, trump had nothing to do with that either?
Let's face facts, trump loves violence and has promoted it since he took office..
Or this....
Or even this..
You have a nice day!
Let's put it another way.
What are the odds that trump supporters would have tried to overthrow the government...without trump?
0.
Don't do it-- its a TRAP!!!!
Big mistake!
If you keep doing that your mind will turn to mush!
And you'll end up sounding like these nincompoop Trump cultists!