Very.
Aaand once again, you're twisting around information to create a claim that was never made in order to create a false narrative. Once again, you have shown that that you're totally incapable of discussing anything in good faith if it doesn't match your opinion. You've done this so many times now that this tactic is extremely transparent.
I don't believe you're so dim that you actually interpret a specific violent act as having been referred to as "mostly peaceful." If you don't, as I suspect, then you're deliberately conflating peaceful protest with violent acts. This is deceitful. This is worse than plain stupidity. I suspect you do this because you don't oppose what the peaceful protesters oppose, and that the majority were protesting peacefully, that violence was rare (albeit very apparent and, sure, "sexy" in terms of ratings), doesn't fit your preferred narrative. Because you can't support what the protesters oppose using rational arguments as you engage in meaningful discussion, you're compelled to use these deceitful tactics. Deceit is all you Trumpkins have.
Only...it doesn't do that.
Since the point was to create a strawman, I think it was dead on. You strawman again in that post... look:
It's easy to prove that this is a strawman. Because I agree with this statement, those things are different, while disagreeing with your conclusion, because this statement doesn't apply to your conclusion. That's because tresspassing and selfies does not appropriately describe the capitol riot.
It was a sarcastic gallows. You commies have no sense of humour. Besides, you support burning down cities, and that's way worse because 7% of leftist black people are doing it.Because they threw up gallows for the kiddos.
Can you show us where the media are saying that Biden won this situation which everyone else can clearly see is unwinnable? Or is it more important to bash the Democrats regardless of context?
Can you show us what it was about this statement that wasn't intended as a warning to the Republican Party of 63 years ago which Ike was addressing at the time, or doesn't apply more to today's Republican Party than to the present administration? Or is it more important to bash the Democrats regardless of context?
Yikes....
It wasn't "a half naked man with a Viking hat" - it was thousands of men, many of them armed with sticks, flag poles, bear spray etc. Turning back that many people is an impossible task without major bloodshed. It is, in fact, similar to what police officers faced during some BLM/antifa protests. The difference, which is of real significance, is that the attack in DC was directed against the seat of American democracy in an attempt to overthrow the lawful working of that democracy.
As you so ably demonstrate.
Ok... um.. I'm trying to be nice here... you have no idea what you're talking about.If you look it up, you will find no charges of seditious conspiracy.
No charges of insurrection.No seditious conspiracy charges emerge in U.S. Capitol riots cases
Nearly five months after hundreds of Donald Trump supporters launched a deadly assault on the U.S. Capitol, prosecutors have not carried out an early threat to charge some participants with seditious conspiracy.www.reuters.com
98 percent of those charged are merely misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct.
Lol no insurrection no intent to do harm at all.
98 percent of them behaved like tourists inside there. Just like I already told you.
Just like I have said regarding truth decay-no matter how many of you hold the OPINION that there was an insurrection the facts of the matter are unarguable and your assertions are merely your opinion, not factual in nature.
www.insider.com
Read the social media posts from just about any of these nutbags and it's easy to see that it was a violent insurrection. Their aim was to use force to put an unelected leader in charge of the country. Even if none of them are ever convicted of seditious conspiracy because of the way the judicial system works, their social media posts are enough to demonstrate what actually happened.
Nope. You seem to be suggesting that 2A is irrelevant if you can't attempt to kill the Vice-President for not unilaterally overturning a democratic election (an action that would class as tyranny).
What do you speak then? Is English your second language? It might explain your frequently disjointed posts where you make nonsensical responses that ignore the comments you've quoted in making them.
Nope. Sending your own words back to you:
If you're consistently using the wrong words, nobody can read your posts as you intend.
Then why act like it's such a big threat? It was more like a bunch of dumb kids on dirt bikes during the middle of rush hour. Google it, kills the evening rush hour traffic when they wreck or randomly catch on fire under a bridge.Well, they're not the smartest people.
Please explain to the group how Congress certifying an election is tyrannical government.
It did happen in the past... Like 7 and a half months ago...
You know what I mean.Guess I speak redneck...
