Imagine that in 2016 Hillary Clinton announced there was an election fraud and she won. She went to courts 60 times to show the evidence of the fraud and 60 times she lost. Her gullible supporters donated $250 million for the fund to legally challenge the election outcome, but instead of using all this money for new investigations and legal fights she decided kept the money and to organize rallies. On Jan 6 she organized a rally asking her supporters PEACFULLY to go to the Congress to convince vice president to declare her a winner. Her supporters violently broke into the Capitol screaming 'hang vice president'. From the safe place she watched how her supporters wreck a havoc on Capitol. For 3 hours people begged Hillary to ask to rioters to leave the capitol, but only after she noticed that her supporters didn’t put their hands on vice president she asked them to leave. And the big question: is Hillary guilty of inciting to riots?
I doubt many of the people screaming this is fine for the past two years will participate I vote yes, guilty
Incidentally Trump went to court only three times. He won one suit and the other two were never heard. The other 57 or so suits were dismissed mostly for lack of standing.
So why he didn't? His faithfuls donated $250 millions for legal expenses to find the truth about the election fraud. Maybe Trump knew he lost fair and square? And what do you about this maginane story - is Hillary guilty?
Just as guilty as Trump. And even though this is not the situation that played out with Hillary Clinton, her and her allies continued insistence that the 2016 election was stolen from them has partially contributed to the current election fraud fantasies. Trump made a lot more noise, but we can't forget that some Democrats sang this same idiotic braindead song after Trump was elected in 2016. In my mind, both are equally as guilty of peddling bullshit even if Trump took it a few steps further than the Democrats did(for which he should be responsible for).
No. Even Hillary is innocent until proven guilty. If you don't tell people to go commit a crime, or at least in some objective way incentivize them or threaten them into doing it, then you're not responsible for their crimes. Trying to hold individuals responsible for the actions of groups is nothing more than an assault on free speech, an attempt to scare people into not speaking controversially for fear they could be tied to a crime of some extremist. We are not a collective. Individuals exercise their own will over themselves. We're not setting the ridiculous precedent that groups are a hive mind controlled by an overlord. If some people want to just do what they think someone else wants them to, then fine, they can be held accountable for the actions they think they're taking on behalf of others. But that's their choice.
Here's the rub. Hillary did question the legitimacy of the outcome of her election. She still does. To this day. She is responsible for one of the grandest lies in national history, paid for and used foreign national intelligence to try to build a case against her tormentor, spent millions and millions of marketing of that conspiracy theory, and to this day has still not been held accountable for any of those crimes. If you aren't sure or clear of what those crimes are, sorry, I'm not going to create an arbitrary list for you. The sad truth is, that while the OP might have been ironic, the truth of the matter is that Hillary did these things. And the destruction of her personal temper tantrum hasn't yet subsided. And while yes, you do get to be innocent until convicted, we must always then apply the same to everyone. So, it servers about zero purpose to speculate in the manner of the OP about allegations that haven't ever actually seen the light of a courtroom. nor will they. And the bastardization of congress democrats have employed with their J6 BS is perhaps one of the worst examples of abuse of power we are likely to see.
Hillary is guilty of many things. She also questioned the results of her election. It wasn't Trump's invention.
No, of course she would not be guilty of inciting to riot. But I would go after her hammer and tongs because I don't like her.
