So let me get this straight

[EarlG]

Everybody says "fight," so therefore Trump shouldn't be held accountable.

Except, in every single other case that somebody said "fight," A VIOLENT MOB DIDN'T ATTACK THE CAPITOL BUILDING AND ATTEMPT TO OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT.

Why, it almost seems that there might be something exceptional about Trump's actions.

Is the defense trying to do the prosecution's job for them?

[Nevilledog]

1. Nobody says "fight" as well as Trump

[lillypaddle]

2. Well of course

He has the best words. He has the most beautiful words. Everybody knows that.

[AnotherMother4Peace]

8. Schoen has labeled it "robust speech", so it's OK - never mind that it's purpose was to incite.

[Oldem]

14. I've got some robust words for Schoen:

just two of them, beginning with an "f."

[TwilightZone]

3. To me, the most damning thing of all is that when Trump told them to stop and go home...

they stopped and went home.

That's about as clear as proof gets that he was in full control of them. Even if he wasn't giving them specific orders, they were clearly following his lead.

[Caliman73]

22. Definitely.

Several contemporaneous acknowledgements on the scene that Trump said enough is enough and they did what they went there to do. Like when a victim of sexual assault tells friends right after the attack, even if they don't report right away, there are witnesses as the the state of mind of the survivor in that moment.

These guys were proud of what they did. They were carrying out the intentions of their "commander in chief" and "being patriots" like "1776". That sentiment was being promoted by several Republican politicians throughout the attack. It had been fed to them for months.

Their argument that it wasn't their intent, is not in good faith. They are lying and they know it. Politicians understand the effects of their words. That is why they have speech writers and staff who try to make sure that the words are precise. Now, we know that Trump is a narcissistic fool, who thinks that he can do better than any professional speech writer. That is why it was always so easy to tell when he was reading prepared remarks versus riffing. Still, Trump has been skating at the edge of the law for his entire life. His dad was a crook, who dealt with mafia and other criminal elements in New York real estate development. Trump followed in those footsteps, a crook just like his dad (except less competent). He at least picked up on the language of the mob to avoid direct implication. "Hey, I need you guys to do a thing for me. Go pay Joe a visit and explain some things to him." When Joe turns up missing, or dead, you didn't tell anyone to kill or abduct him.

[TwilightZone]

33. Completely agree.

What struck me watching it unfold live was how so many of them acted as though there was simply nothing wrong with what they were doing. Some of them knew better, of course, but I think some - perhaps many - legitimately believed that they were authorized to do whatever they wanted by the only authority figure they recognize, Trump.

Seems ridiculous to the rational, but as has been noted frequently over the past five years, his following has most if not all of the hallmarks of a cult. Trump sent us here and said this is what he instructed us to do. It has to be OK.

Won't fly in court, of course, but it's been a very common theme from those arrested thus far.

[flibbitygiblets]

30. Also when numerous Republicans said (to T***p) "you're the only one who can stop them"

They all knew what we all knew, which is this was Trump's mob. They were there doing his bidding.

[TwilightZone]

35. It still kind of blows my mind that it was like flipping a switch.

Trump says we should go home, so let's go home.

I agree. They all knew. In fact, it seems that they knew almost better than anyone.

[llmart]

39. That's fairly standard behavior in any cult.

Make no mistake about it - this is a true cult. Jim Jones and Kool Aid drinking come to mind.

[TwilightZone]

40. Agreed.

[sop]

4. I'm still waiting for videos showing Nancy bellowing, "Knock the hell out of them!"

[SergeStorms]

5. But in the end....

when DJT is acquitted, and we all know he will be acquitted, the media talking heads will tell us what a brilliant defense of Donald Trump was performed by these skilled Defense Attorneys.

[EarlG]

6. True, at least, the talking heads on Fox, OAN, and NewsMax will

But they were going to do that anyway. The good news is that whatever "news cycle war" they think they're fighting isn't going to change the fact that Trump will go down in the history books as a twice-impeached insurrectionist who tried to overthrow the government after losing a fair election, and a majority of Republican Senators will go down in history as his enablers.

All impeached presidents have been acquitted, but history still considers them tarnished figures. OJ Simpson won't be remembered as the guy who famously didn't kill his wife. I believe Trump's place in history is secure, no matter what the next few days brings.

[SergeStorms]

10. True that.

This is such a miscarriage of justice though. Trumpublicans have turned this into a sad joke, and the punchline won't be delivered until the next time some fascist muttonhead decides he wants to be a dictator.

[Demsrule86]

26. I agree with that...as time goes by, he will be viewed in an increasingly negative way.

History will not be kind.

[llmart]

41. You are absolutely right about that.

He may go down in the history books exactly as you say but what worries me is that once again, this will embolden him and his supporters. This means we have not heard the end of him. In fact, tonight on ABC News Jonathan Karl said, when asked what he thinks will happen after the almost certain acquittal, "We'll see an appearance almost immediately by Trump and he will be crowing about his acquittal and riling up his supporters once again." I am most definitely paraphrasing that because I don't want to bother finding the exact answer, but it left me getting depressed once again. I thought after the inauguration we'd see the last of this nonsense. I highly doubt we have.

[world wide wally]

7. There is the literal and the figurative.

Not one of those expressions by Democrats ended up in literal fighting.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

9. They're claiming Trump's incitements were free speech.

Someone should've told Charles Manson! LOL!

Manson never killed anyone himself, but incited others to do so!
https://allthatsinteresting.com/who-did-charles-manson-kill

[Leith]

11. I was looking for a thread to express that exact point

Another point I wanted to bring forward: the lawyer whined that the orange monster's words were taken out of context. Immediately afterword, he showed a compilation of video clips with Democrats saying the word "fight." None of the clips was more than 5 seconds in length and all were taken out of context.

Other posters speculated that the lawyers would bring up First Amendment rights. They were absolutely right. They were also right to remind us that the 1A does not protect inciting violence.

So far, the defense has been skating on the edge of lying, veering over the wrong side of that line a couple times. Their argument is sophomoric.

[brush]

12. It's sophomoric. Over and over with the word "fight".

They had to come up with some video content to try to compete with the Dem managers' brilliant presentation...I guess it's the best they could do.

[Fla Dem]

13. Except no-one else was President of the US, (whose words matter)

and had been screaming for 2 months the election was stolen from him.

[bluelill]

15. He'd been screaming for four YEARS the election would be stolen from him!

[LymphocyteLover]

16. and it wasn't just about 'fight" -- it was the terms of the battle for the country etc

not to mention Rudy saying "trial by combat" etc

[Escurumbele]

17. They have no case, so they have to twist things, it is their only hope.

They know the guy is guilty as hell, and they are also using videos of violence during some of the BLM marches where the violence was triggered by white supremacists but they want to make it look like it is the other side doing it.

[nolabear]

18. And they TOTALLY ignored what he did before and during the riots.

Not to mention “Calvary.” 🤦🏼‍♀️

[magicarpet]

20. Calvary,.. Schoen is saying trDump meant in the biblical terms not as war cavalry.

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2021, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

The biblical - Calvary - Schoen is saying trDump meant in his speech.

*~*~*~*~

Calvary, or Golgotha (Koinē Greek: Γολγοθᾶ[ς] Golgothâ[s], traditionally interpreted as reflecting Syriac: ܓܓܘܠܬܐ‎ gāgūlṯā, as it were Hebrew gulgōleṯ "skull" (גולגולת ; Arabic: جلجثة‎ , was, according to the canonical Gospels, a site immediately outside Jerusalem's walls where Jesus was crucified.

[Caliman73]

29. So they are conflating Calvary with cavalry.

I mean, from Trump, that could be expected. He does have "the best words you know". Seems like a stretch to mix up a mythical place where supposedly Christ was crucified, with mounted military support typically used to overwhelm enemy ground forces.

[demigoddess]

31. just can't spell

and don't know the difference

[Maru Kitteh]

44. From the guy who called his wife "Melanie."

Totally believable. Yup.

[marble falls]

19. Maybe if he had paid them.

[moondust]

21. Context is everything.

Somebody put together a montage of the multiple times Trump encouraged violence dating back at least to the 2015-16 campaign. Pretending to be a "tough guy" is how he sucked a lot of "tough guys" into his cult.

I'm sure high school cheerleaders everywhere will now change "Go, fight, win!" to "Go, win!" to avoid inciting violence.

[ConstanceCee]

23. In Addition

In Addition, these "fight" words were not delivered to an enormous crowd of screaming, angry people, with weapons and dressed in body armor and helmets and hateful t-shirts.

[dalton99a]

24. Kick

[Demsrule86]

25. +1000

[KY_EnviroGuy]

27. Earl, I think one of the big "tells" in this story is that tRump didn't march with them...

as he said he would (I believe twice in his speech). He left all the dirty work to others.


Meanwhile, he hid in his safe bunker.......

[MyMission]

28. Physical versus intellectual/cerebral fighting

I was going to say passive versus active, but to fight or combat something requires action.

Fighting injustice, crime, corruption is cerebral. The actions are demonstrations (not riots), legislation (not insurrection), education (not brainwashed cults).

Fighting to over turn election results, after having tried other methods, clearly means violent physical fighting. He was trying to over turn election results! The only way left was for them to fight physically.

We are, or were, opponents, not enemies. Like sports. Sometimes teams become rivals.
But they (GOPQ) have made Dems, blue states, the media, and any who disagree into enemies.

Fighting enemies usually leads to violence and warfare. That's what happened here. Perhaps we'll see a criminal trial, as suggested by his lawyers, if he is acquitted.

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

32. Well you seee - sometimes its OK to yell FIRE!!!!! and sometimes it' NOT. Context is everything nt.

[FailureToCommunicate]

34. In nearly every clip they played, they edited out the very next words "I will fight...FOR YOU!" or

"I will fight...for your rights...as voters!"

Leaving only "fight" "Fight" "FIGHT!"

Kinda lame editing.

etc etc etc.

[BlueIdaho]

36. It is a mistake to take Trump's words out of context

It’s one thing for a cheerleader to cheer “Fight Fight Fight!” At a football game. It’s a whole different kettle of fish to command an armed and angry mob to “Fight Like Hell!”

This fits into a long history of Trump ordering people to punch and beat protestors at his rallies. Which they were more than happy to do BTW...

[BobTheSubgenius]

37. Actually, the GOP mouthpiece I just watched seems to be a step up.

The ones we've been seeing have been abysmal. He's kind of abrasive, but that could be a tactic.

[murielm99]

38. Cheerleaders say, Fight!"

Maybe we should show a few videos of little high school teeny bopper cheerleaders saying, Go, FIGHT, Win!"

[CoryTrevor]

42. much like when Ron Johnson asked why,

if the attack was so predictable, there were no plans put in place to enhance security.

Good question, RJ! Why don't you ask your fuhrer?

[Cha]

43. Adam Schiff tweets trump quote @ 6:01pm..

Link to tweet

[nam78_two]

45. I am going offline for a month

But I logged in one last time to comment on this. I watched the relevant testimony and it was so damn sleazy. As others upthread pointed out, without context it is ridiculous. The Republican arguments are almost robotic-only they are not. They are actually fairly calculating, but arguments like those confuse people who try to honestly make sense of things. We all have some automatic behaviors. But I find arguing with the majority of conservatives (and other generic, sleazy opportunists) akin to wrestling with a large slippery fish.

And the blm protests were largely peaceful:
https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/

AN OVERWHELMINGLY PEACEFUL MOVEMENT
The vast majority of demonstration events associated with the BLM movement are non-violent (see map below). In more than 93% of all demonstrations connected to the movement, demonstrators have not engaged in violence or destructive activity. Peaceful protests are reported in over 2,400 distinct locations around the country. Violent demonstrations,4 meanwhile, have been limited to fewer than 220 locations — under 10% of the areas that experienced peaceful protests. In many urban areas like Portland, Oregon, for example, which has seen sustained unrest since Floyd’s killing, violent demonstrations are largely confined to specific blocks, rather than dispersed throughout the city (CNN, 1 September 2020).

Yet, despite data indicating that demonstrations associated with the BLM movement are overwhelmingly peaceful, one recent poll suggested that 42% of respondents believe “most protesters [associated with the BLM movement] are trying to incite violence or destroy property” (FiveThirtyEight, 5 June 2020).

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

46. As everyone knows, many words, including 'fight,' have multiple meanings/connotations.

Not that difficult a concept, even for RW morons.

The Dems using the word fight in that disingenuous video compilation did not intend for anyone to employ violence.

Clearly, on 6 Jan 2021, Drumpf used the word to mean "use physical voilence," and wanted his minions to fight in a violent physical way. Specifically, to attack* the US Capitol in a coup attempt. (Violating his oath of office, among other problematic issues.) Again, unlike the Dems imploring people to fight.



*another example of multiple-meanings. Someone saying, "Our team must attack this problem" are using attack to mean something very different from what someone who says, "We must attack the enemy barracaded inside that for,t means

[Smackdown2019]

47. Differences others use "fight" when trump used it....

Armed mob with riot gear - "fight" was used..... violence occurs.

Unarmed voters with pens and ballots - "fight" was used.... non-violent change occurs.

[Javaman]

48. The Dems should put together a greater clips montage

Of high school cheer squads yelling fight LOL