Honest question for Trump supporters

[Dill]

(09-15-2023, 08:10 PM)LSUfaninTN Wrote: I’m not denying that it was “unprecedented” though there were MANY things that were unprecedented, most of which worked against Trump in a shady ass way. My point was that the claim that “siccing an assault on the Capitol” is bogus, and we need to be factual here. “Do the right thing” is nowhere near the same as him saying “pretend you’re BLM and mindlessly break a bunch of sh*t for no reason.” The Jan 6 protesters did that on their own. There was a small handful of weak minded fools who were easily provoked that day. Trump wanted a protest, and it went so much further than the election being “stolen.” Of course he said it after it was breached. Why would he say it before? Do you have proof that he truly expected a riot and not a protest? I sure didn’t expect one. Plus, if he had said it from the get go, you’d likely still blame him anyway. The election was blatantly rigged. How are you OK with this? Stolen? I do know that he truly does believe the election was stolen. What’s your problem with him saying “massive voter fraud”? You do know there were more voting machine malfunctions in this election than in history, particularly in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona, where he lost by a combined total of 40,000 votes, right? This combined with the Democrats being avidly against voter ID laws (wtf?), all the sh*t they pulled during his presidency and the election, and the fact that they 100% colluded with Twitter and the FBI to shut down a political opponent are reason to be suspicious, and you’re either naive or have Trump Derangement Syndrome if you think otherwise. If you’re OK with the collusion, then you’re just as guilty of promoting the things you claim to be against. Period. Do I think it was “stolen”? I don’t have proof, so I have to say no. But I believe the suspicion is 100% justified on his part and the protesters’ part. Moot point because anyone who’s OK with the Dem collusion is a sad excuse of a human being. I really can’t believe there are people who turn a blind eye to that. Banana republic.

Is it a crime to call an election illegitimate? I don’t know. Is Hillary in prison for calling the 2016 election illegitimate? Is anyone in prison for anchoring a campaign-sinking story that was legitimate the entire time? What I’m tired of is the double standards, every f*cking week. The Republicans get punished and brutalized in the media for doing the exact sh*t that the Democrats get away with, and Republicans get called conspiracy theorists, bigots, “tin foil hats” unless they put up with it. If we could hold both sides equally accountable, I wouldn’t have a problem with any of this. But we don’t. I’m not singling you out per se, but anyone who’s OK with that double standard should be ashamed of themselves.

Regarding the underlined--I doubt Trump wanted a riot. That doesn't mean he is not responsible, since it was his lie that whipped them to a lynch mob frenzy and launched them at the Capitol.  Over 700 people have been convicted of breaching it. That's not a "handful."  

However, the issue is not whether Trump "intended" for his mob to breach the Capitol. 

The issue is whether he was orchestrating an effort to overturn the election. The proof is in the fake elector plot, the pressure on Pence to throw the certification, and the calling of the crowd to pressure Pence. All coordinated to coincide. NO ONE is saying Trump's goal was a riot. Trump's goal was to throw the election to the House with a fake electoral issue.  

What I don't hear you responding to is the coordination of the mob with the fake electors and the deliberate pressure on Pence to do the wrong thing, to commit an illegal act. 

You keep claiming the election was "blatantly rigged."  How? Where? The only people who can possibly determine such have spoken--unanimously. The only evidence of "rigging" comes from the crackpot theories of Giuliani and Powell--Italian satellites and Chinese paper. Recounts are meaningless if the only evidence you will accept is what agrees with what you already want to believe. If Trump really believes the election was stolen, it means he has lost the capacity to distinguish reality from fiction; who can tell if he is mad or a liar? The absurd charge that the FBI and Twitter somehow rigged the election has been summarily dealt with by Hollo. It is reverse verification spun up to create false equivalence.

Where is your capacity for comparison and evaluation if you reduce Trump's assault on the election to simply "calling" the election illegitimate,

Then crying "Hilary did too," so there is this terrible double standard that you are so tired of, that Dems "get away with."

Poof! the refusal to concede, the spreading of the fraud lie, the forgery of certification, the mob sent to the Capitol--all that disappears in this
double standard. Trump is only indicted for SAYING the election was illegitimate. So unfair cuz Hilary did too. "Why isn't the Dem media talking about what Hilary said that one time rather than always going on about how Trump actually tried to steal the election and people died?" Well I'M OK with that "double standard."

Ignoring what Trump did, for which we have plenty of visual and documented evidence and dozens of conspirators from seven states--with their names on documents--while claiming "blatant rigging" for which we do NOT have evidence, somehow leads you to conclude that those who are following "blatant evidence" are the ones turning a "blind eye." 

"Banana republic" is what we have if Trump can attempt to overturn a valid election, and then run again with impunity.