I think people who call others "tard" in public discussion put their lack of maturity and intelligence on display for all to see. We see you. That being said she was elected to the house by her base, so there are people who take her seriously even if you don't.
No but you don't understand, she is actually retarded. She might have the IQ of a piece of fruit. I don't own her, nor do real conservatives. I don't own her base either.
When an angry mob gets conflicting messages, it doesn't calm them down. Him saying that doesn't cancel out the other things that I quoted. You don't have to be genius to understand that. It is well known that within the Q community they believe Trump does not say what he really means because his plot to overthrow the Liberals is secret.
There is no conflicting message. There is the objective meaning of Trump's words, then your loose interpretation that is fueled by partisanship and hindsight bias. It's extremely easy to retroactively attribute malice with Trump's words if you already arrive at the conclusion that he is responsible for what happened at the capitol. He clearly said to protest peacefully, and you choose to ignore that.
Trump saying you cannot take back this country with weakness is not a call for violence. When politicians say that you need to "be strong" and "fight" for your rights, does that mean they're calling for their supporters to physically fight/assault dissenters? When Chris Cuomo says "show me where protests are supposed to be peaceful", is he indicating to his CNN viewers that they need to grab a 12 gauge and shove it down a Trump supporter's throat and pull trigger?
OR, does there tend to be a lot of irresponsible rhetoric in politics?
If you want to talk about what's more egregious, I would say Chris Cuomo and AOC's comments regarding "peaceful" protests after mass BLM riots is a bit more inflammatory.
Like I said before -- imagine if Trump said what AOC tweeted about BLM riots after the capitol fiasco. You think that would have been appropriate?
Police brutality and reform is a topic that people should get behind. It is a problem that requires civil disobedience.
"I can only murder, riot, and loot when I agree with the cause". Please. AOC was in the wrong and I vehemently disagree with the idea that the ends justify the means. Perhaps you think differently but for me, no, under no circumstances are riots, looting, ect. okay.
The FBI has done one inquiry and one full blown investigation into white supremacists infiltrating the police stations of America. It is a real problem.
This is overstated. I've heard this before and you are using this to paint all police as a systemically racist system. Study after study has shown no bias in police shootings with respect to whites and POC.
Donald Trump claiming the election is rigged before it even took place is not a good reason for people to use protest as a form of civil disobedience. Maybe this is just a difference of opinion and you are entitled to pick sides, but any informed person can see AOC is on the correct side of history. If people were storming the capital because they dislike Biden, Trump and the electoral college in general, I may change my tune. These aren't patriots. They are ill-informed pawns who follow a man that openly lies and shits on the constitution. If a group supporting Biden did the same thing on the 6th, I would feel the same way. Trump and Biden both are habitual manipulators who shit on the constitution. I have never seen AOC support a protest based on the lies of either of those people.
Yes. You are correct. Trump should not have said the election was rigged without evidence. AOC is precisely on the wrong side of history because no congresswoman should advocate for their agenda through violence, riots, and looting. It's inexcusable.
And I agree with you, Trump and Biden are habitual liars. I don't see Trump as a constitutionalist at all.
I see that you did not address any of my other points on ANTIFA not being a real organization or BLM having no current affiliation with John Sullivan after kicking him out.
Because I would probably agree. Idk, didn't read much into it because obviously there is no evidence that the capitol hill riot was antifa/BLM related.
So it seems you are the one who is cherry picking what gets talked about in your arguments. As you run out of defensible positions, you latch on to false comparisons.
Not quite. If you're going to refute a baseless conspiracy theory that I don't even believe in, are you saying that now I must adopt the position of this conspiracy theory for the hell of it? I picked the weakest point of your argument that I disagreed with and responded.
It is also my firm belief that people who say things like "tard" in public discourse are also the people using racial slurs in private with their friends.
Sorry
But really this isn't that formal and no I don't use racial slurs. Retard isn't even that bad c'mon. I've heard "Trumptard" from the left a lot too so even they say it!
You are entitled to believe that the unlawful re-election of Trump is something that requires civil disobedience and protest. But just know that I am not on your side and I will fight to keep people like you from gaining foothold in this country. I will fight to support justice for ALL Americans who are victims of the corporate banking system and the electoral college. But when that fight is corrupted by people like Trump or Biden supporters, I am against you.
But I don't believe this. I dont think the capitol riots were appropriate. I am just not retroactively going back to Trump's speech and pretend as if he's responsible no more than I would blame Bernie Sanders when his rabid supporter shot the minority whip.
