> His options at that point were pretty much limited to prison in the US or seeking protection from the Russian government
You're just justifying his decision, not refuting that he made it.
379 karma · joined August 14, 2023
You're just justifying his decision, not refuting that he made it.
You could argue Snowden never intended to become an asset of the Russian government but you can't argue that he didn't eventually become one.
And the Mueller report was specifically scoped down to not include anything outside of the 2016 presidential election. I don't know why you keep going back to that.
> wanted to stay in Moscow if he had a choice
None of this has to do with his decision to seek protection from the Russian government, which is a formal arrangement with their security services, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
With every interview he gives, he's the gift that keeps on giving.
That's not how it works. There is no coordinated messaging campaign across agencies against adversarial nations.
It might seem that way based on media reports, but there isn't.
Why would they? It was a deeply embarrassing event for them.
What we know is he went to China, then Russia.
Honest question, what more needs to be said?
“I don’t kid. Let me just tell you. Let me make it clear”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/23/trump-joking-slowin...
"The violence on my side is only in response to the violence on your side." This is how such an unambiguous act of political violence makes sense in his head, in the context of it being a defensive action.
Of course it's absurd. But in order to stay aligned with your pre-existing worldview, you sometimes have to say and believe absurdities.
We are just watching him work through it in public.
He was in the process of being tried in multiple cases in multiple jurisdictions regarding his attempts to compromise an American election, each time with overwhelming, nearly comical evidence against him.
Saying he's innocent until proven guilty not only ignores the reality that the cases against him, even based on what is publicly available evidence, were airtight, but also the fact that these cases only went away because he won re-election and made them go away.
That's not justice.
Tribal alignment. If the tribe had moved on from Trump and he had lost the election, your relatives would still be grounded in these conversations and reality.
Trump is still the leader of their party and cultural movement, They have zero incentive to acknowledge the truth if it conflicts with these loyalties. If anything, such an action would be dangerous and risk their standing within their tribe, So the loyalty test then becomes denying what's clear and obvious to prove you are still a loyal member.
You've already admitted twice you did not read any of the evidence. You literally have no idea what the case is. You outsource your thinking and argumentation to a sitting Republican senator, as if their opinion on the matter counts for anything.
You created an account four days ago in order to post a series of justifications as to why the politically motivated violence of January 6th wasn't that bad, or was really just in response to other violence and therefore cannot be condemned, etc. etc.
If this is your hobby, I suggest you find a new one.
Who gives a shit? You're trying to say that because they were pardoned, they didn't do anything wrong. They were convicted of crimes in a court of law.
> You sought to pin political violence from 'your side' onto the opposition.
I don't even know what you're attempting to reference here. Your repeated attempts to excuse real political violence on January 6th is disgusting and dangerous.
So you can carry on trying to change the subject and confuse the matter. It won't accomplish anything.
> 77 million people would like to have a word with you.
Yes as i said in the beginning of this conversation Americans made a grave mistake returning a man to power who has no intention of ever leaving peacefully. as you pointed out January 6th could have been a lot worse, I pray the Republic survives whatever attempt is coming in 2028.
Although I'm sure you're preparing all of your excuses for why whatever happens won't be that bad.
You either pardon a person declared guilty by a judge and jury or a person who pled guilty themselves.
> Pardons can be a tool to overcome miscarriage of justice. And that's exactly what happened there.
I don't like this game and I'm not going to play it. Political violence spirals, and anyone who seeks to excuse it because it's their side, and their side can't be the violent ones, is childish at best and malevolent at worst.
> Nowhere at all am I justifying political violence
no you're just saying there was a bunch of grandmas and they were let in by the police and yes people die but it wasn't their fault and the guy organized the whole thing couldn't have possibly foreseen it becoming violent and then when it did he was in the white house so it's not like he could have pulled out his phone at any time and tweeted for them to go home to stop the whole thing.
I get that you need this to make sense in your head, but just understand not a single person is convinced by your babbling.
The special counsel publicly said he had enough evidence to convince a jury that a premeditated, coordinated attempt to coup the U.S. government had occurred.
> partisan-appointed lawyer
There isn't an inch of proof that Biden interfered with either the DOJ or the special counsel. You assume that because Trump is doing this, Biden must have as well. This is the mentality of Trump himself, he thinks about how to commit crimes and get away with it so he assumes that's how everyone else behaves too. You can't actually imagine a world where people have principles and don't always act with self-interest.
It goes back to the first word and the first response I made to you, cynical. Not a word you're saying is accurate, but you don't care. Because you're just assuming the other side would lie the same way you do, if pressed.
> There is no evidence trump intended a violent insurrection
that's the thing about being responsible for violent events at a certain point your intention does not remove your culpability. Whether or not Trump meant to use his supporters to attack the Capitol is irrelevant. It happened. Also, when the riot turned violent, Trump had several hours to stop it. He chose to watch it all on television at the White House instead.
Guilty as sin.
> "Your side" literally shot at Trump
The shooter in question was a registered Republican.
> And at the end of the day..
So I prove you wrong, you move on like it never happened, rinse, repeat. This is a boring game. I don't feel like playing.
"The police were giving them a tour." I'm sorry, what did you expect them to do? Go home? Not try to keep an eye on what was happening?
> You do know they were subsequently pardoned?
Accepting a pardon is a formal admission of guilt. You literally cannot pardon an innocent person. That's the whole point.
And again, justifying or excusing political violence guarantees that more will come, which is why I'm particularly angered by what you're doing.
The attack on the Capitol wasn't meant to overthrow the government itself. It was meant to stop the certification, which it did, so that the rest of the plan could take place.
Under no circumstances take my word for it all of this is freely available.
> the BLM comparison
Hey look, you did it again.
> provide context for what the country was going thru at the time
No, it's a shameless whataboutism trying to justify your side's riot with a clear political goal with the other side's riots that were more a spontaneous reaction to a horrific crime.
Both were riots but the circumstances and purpose of each could not be further apart.
> and J6 was partly a counter protest.
I know. You need that to be true. But it's not.
> he won many of those cases on appeal
No, he didn't. He lost every single major court case (E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case, civil fraud case, Georgia Election Interference Case, Falsified Business Records), except for one appeal that kept him on the ballot in Maine despite his coup attempt.
https://news.syr.edu/2024/09/10/donald-trump-has-survived-th...
> won the election after which his opponents closed those cases
Yes like I said.
> He avoided prison by overcoming the legal system.
I think we're done here. You're just really interested in remaking reality so that your worldview still makes sense.
Political violence, once it starts, is almost impossible to stop. So when I see people excuse it, I get especially angry.