Should companies be allowed to disassociate themselves from other companies like Parler?

What if Trump had said the below? Surely it's just as bad!

Let's make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. If you see any Democrat in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them.

 

You mean right after he said "cheer on our brave senators"? How many times has the word "strong" been used in speeches for protests where a speaker mentions "be strong"? Hmm? Both regular protests and those that happened to turn into a riot? MLK used it in his I know that. I heard it several times for the BLM protests AND riots.

Not exactly strong ground to stand on there. (no pun intended btw)

Yes I do. I think that the riot just gave them a convenient reason. Look how the whole thing was spun. "insurrection", "traitors"...both those words were heavily used to describe what happened by leftist media and Dem politicians. Additionally they have portrayed it as if everyone that went there was a part of the riot. But how many of those people that have been arrested are actually charged with anything remotely like that? How many even rioted out of the thousands that were there? How many even brought guns, something that was going to be needed if you were actually planning an insurrection. The Dems used it as an excuse. That is all.

One more thing, if that was an insurrection then all the other riots that target government buildings are insurrectionist also. Something that has happened alot this past year. How many of those were considered insurrection by the left?

Who's that?

And yes, the President has to be incapacitated or unable to carry out their duty if you want to go strictly by what the amendment says. Either way it ends up being the same.

One single article that they had NO discussion on. None. No evidence was shown. No cross examination of any witnesses. Nothing. Yeah, they could have written it in one day no doubt. If just one person wrote it and no one had a single objection to what was written. I never said that it couldn't be written down in even less than a day. Trumps first impeachment articles could be written in less than a day. It still took them weeks to actually impeach.

 

You do know that Chris is challenging both of us right? Both your view and my view. He's not defending Trump. It's called being objective. Something very rare in today's toxic political atmosphere. I for one applaud him for it.

 

it was all over the media here, them telling the guards Trump invited them, then them attacking Pence of course because of Trump's words

and then we have many of the people caught saying this

 

this attack was specifically to overturn the election, that is what makes it an attempted coup, and it was incited by the losing party that was in power

he could have been impeached for the GA call, but I do not think it would have happened with the storming of the capital

 

that was a television series, I get it now, the world watched that series on their tv and now thinks that is how our system works and has questions, makes sense now

 

that is bad, but not as bad as storming the Capital to overturn an election at the direction of the losing President, Trying to get his VP to declare him the winner and override the peoples votes, that is what happens in dictatorships

if that was allowed, Biden could have just declared Hilary the winner in 2016

 

Good job for answering that hypothetical, but the comparison is not between what Trump said, or might have said, and the riots.

You quoted Trump as saying, “you will never take back our country with weakness, you have to be strong." Now is that worse than than the below?

Let's make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. If you see any Democrat in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them.

 

Well it appears that the Democrats certainly watched that series and thought that a President must be able to be removed for making bad decisions!

 

Okay, so they did NOT in fact say anything along the lines of, "had he not of invited them there, they would not of been there." (Your words.)

 

Well I'M not saying that the word "strong" was a problem, but in the dems' warped minds it was a deadly call for violence.

So you think that they would have impeached even if 1, Trump didn't give that speech and 2, there was no riot? It just seems that they would have done it weeks ago. The events of that day at the Capitol seem to me to be the critical 'turning point' in the mind of the dems which triggered the impeachment, and without it, I don't see them impeaching. I could be wrong.

Absolutely NONE, but we're better than the left aren't we? Shouldn't we say that BOTH were insurrection?

David Palmer is the President of the United States in series 2 and 3 of the television series 24. The REAL first black President! In series 2 he was removed from office by the cabinet after the 25th Amendment was invoked. However, he was physically perfect, not a thing wrong with him. It was based on what was considered to be his poor mental state following certain decisions made in response to a nuke detonating on US soil.

Does it mean strictly physically incapacitated? The dems obviously have a much looser definition than that, much closer to the fictional cabinet which removed Palmer!

Why, what's the other way?

I thought that you were making the argument that it's not likely that it was

Well yes, the first impeachment was a MASTERCLASS in how to impeach compared to the current FARCE! Is there actually going to be an impeachment trial for someone who is no longer in office? If so, then I'm going to have to bring out my "America is a JOKE" statement and I don't like doing that!

 

is that what you Australians think, lol, glad you are so interested in American politics, lol, you are the one that brought up the show, no dem on here

 

yes, they did say basically just that, that Trump invited them

 

So you see why I discount their "reasoning".

Sorry, I had thought you had said if Trump didn't give that speech and the riot still happened. Must have misread that part. Apologies. If the riot hadn't happened then no, the impeachment more than likely wouldn't have happened. The riot was the catalyst after all.

I would not consider either to be insurrection. Insurrection for me means trying to take over the government or separate from the government to create a new government. Not just inconvenience them for a few hours. The Civil War was an insurrection. This most certainly was not.

Never watched it. Knowing that such a show exists/ed now makes me understand why there are so many that think that the 25th Amendment can do such. Why do people think that fictional shows relate to reality? I'll never understand that.

When the 25th Amendment was made it was about a President that was unable to perform their duties due to either physical or mental incapacitation. For instance Ronald Reagan was physically unable to perform his duties the first time there was an assassination's attempt on his life. Due to that his Vice President became President until Reagan was able to perform his duties again. Mental incapacitation would entail the same thing only the President would have to be suffering some mental ailment. Trump suffered neither of those.

Physically or mentally unable to perform their duties. They're both about the same thing just different words used. A President unable to do their duties due to some ailment.

An impeachment article when first being written out (the rough draft, the one that the public never sees) is usually written with the input of many people, other house reps, lawyers etc etc. Not just one or even two people. If just one or two people wrote it then yeah, it could be written in a day or less. If multiple people have a hand in writing it though (as is normally the case) then its going to take longer as they have to mesh it all together and make sure that all their i's are dotted, t's crossed, all appropriate laws referenced and/or notated, parts put in, other parts taken out because its not needed or is repetitive etc etc.

I just don't see them working that fast as a collective.

Better bring it out then. Because I'm sure the Dems are going to go through with it. They're too invested into it now to give it up. If they didn't then there would be hell to pay with their constituents. Especially the ones that are as rabid as they are.

 

Oh absolutely.

So it seems that you're saying if the riot happened without the speech before hand, then they still would have impeached. That's probably fair. It's just that the speech had particular language which they were able to point to, the sort of language that they have used many times before. Let's not forget Maxine Waters encouraging people to "PUSH back" on Republicans! I guess according to the left's standards, she was encouraging people to physically PUSH people!

Well then I don't see how you could think that they had been working on impeachment for weeks. It seems unlikely that they were just assuming that something like the riot would happen.

Well I was only going by the dictionary definition:"a violent uprising against an authority or government."

PLEASE tell me that you had at least HEARD of '24!'

So I guess the key would be a diagnosed mental ailment. As opposed to any mental ailment the left thought Trump had.

I think that you're giving them WAY too much credit by assuming that they DID write it with the input of many people, other house reps, lawyers etc, and not just one or two people!

Wasn't there debate as to whether an impeachment trail for a former President is even constitutional?

 

Which doesn't mean "had he NOT invited them there, they would not of been there." After all, it's not as if they needed Trump's permission to go to a public place.

 

Except, making bad decisions is LITERALLY the reason that they wanted the 25th Amendment to be invoked!

 

listen to the Horned Man's defense lawyer, they were there because of Trump

 

not sure what that has to do with you bringing up the show, that was just a show, not real life, I hope you folks from the au understand that

 

You're taking the word of one of the piece of human waste's lawyers?

 

just saying what the Trump supporters lawyer said

 

The point is that in the show, the 25th Amendment was invoked for the same sort of reason that the dems wanted it invoked!

 

Which is totally and utterly irrelevant. I'm surprised that I need to tell you that.

 

maybe to you it is, why do you consider it irrelevant, because it doesn't support your world view?

 

Because he's a DEFENSE LAWYER!