Trump supports Jan 6

Author: RemyBrown

Posts

Hot
Total: 40
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,388
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
Nobody believes that.
Maybe you just dont talk to many people.
Maybe you're just not listening
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,388
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
The people had a referendum on Jan 6 last election
I thought they voted for Trump because they wanted to lower the price of eggs? Or was it about immigration? Or wasn't it about wokeism? Sense like whatever narrative is convenient in the moment, that's what it was.

Back on earth one, we recognize that the overwhelming majority oppose pardons for the J6 convicts, but people prioritized other things.

They chose to side with the victims instead of the tyrants. 
So the people who beat up police officers are the victims, and the people who prosecuted them are tyrants? Yeah, that sounds about right in MAGAville.

That 5 when you asked for 1 instance.
I asked for one for a reason. I'm not interested in your Chatgpt recital, I'm not interested in your flood of BS comparisons. Cite one comparable example that you are prepared to stand by. Not interested in your little game where you list multiple examples so that when one gets knocked down you just run to the next one.

And regardless of whether you have any legitimate examples (as if any example of a prosecutor purposefully failing to prosecute a BLM rioter could ever be comparable to a presidential pardon), let's also not pretend that two wrongs make a right. 
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 372
Posts: 11,537
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Double_R
Maybe you're just not listening
I rarely listen to people in real life, because they mostly talk nonsense which I am not interested in absorbing.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,388
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
No one thinks that. You are, as usual, inventing your own opposition because you have no rational defense of your horrid position.
That's what the conclusion of your beliefs are.
No, that's what the conclusion of your own imagination amounts to. Everything you wrote in your response demonstrates as I have repeatedly pointed out to you that you are arguing with yourself. Pay attention.

So your claim is 1500 people physically beat up cops that day?
No, my claim is that the 1500 people he pardoned includes the violent offenders. And regardless of how many of them were violent, the fact is that this was a decision Trump made. A fully aware, fully conscious decision... to pardon people who beat up police officers for doing their jobs.

If you were intellectually honest you would not be celebrating this, but unfortunately you're not.

So limit the pardon to them, but he didn't. I wonder why.
What did they do? Show up to a protest? There are videos of cops letting people into the capital so they went into a building that was literally unlocked for them?
There were literally thousands of them, they didn't all do the same thing which is why they didn't all get the same outcome.

This is logic 101 and you are failing it's most basic test. If you want to present a rational argument provide data or examples of individuals who were unfairly prosecuted and then we can begin to have a discussion.



Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,388
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
I rarely listen to people in real life, because they mostly talk nonsense which I am not interested in absorbing.
Then you have no business criticizing them.

And not for nothing, it's kind of an odd choice for someone not interested in what others have to say to spend their time on a debate site responding to people you disagree with.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 372
Posts: 11,537
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Double_R
Then you have no business criticizing them.
Thats a contradictory statement. I dont need to listen to everything someone says in order to criticize him.

It's kind of an odd choice for someone not interested in what others have to say to spend their time on a debate site responding to people you disagree with.
People here are smarter than people in real life. If you want to become smarter, you are going to talk to smart people, not to stupid people, obviously.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,459
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
we recognize that the overwhelming majority oppose pardons for the J6 convicts
Source? For all 1500?

So the people who beat up police officers are the victims,
Did 1500 people beat up police officers on Jan 6? If not, you can stop pretending.

to pardon people who beat up police officers for doing their jobs.
How many years in prison should you get for throwing a rock at a police officer?
How many years is just right for trespassing? Illegal aliens are treated better.

Cite one comparable example that you are prepared to stand by.
I stand by all 5. Now tell me how many years is appropriate for police assault, and we can immediately throw all those people in jail for that exact amount of time. We can even appoint a special prosecutor to do it. Otherwise, stop pretending.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,459
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
After Biden's bullshit the last 2 weeks, there are only a handful of Americans left that think the Justice Dept was not politically weaponized.

This is the remedy when you do that. Elect new people to clean out the trash in the DOJ and hope for the best. Maybe don't try to weaponize the DOJ next time and issue preemptive pardons for your family and pals. Then you wouldn't have to sob in the corner thinking about the cheeto-man 24/7.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 6,290
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
A fully aware, fully conscious decision... to pardon people who beat up police officers for doing their jobs.
Most did not attack officers, but other than that did you know that the average sentence for assault on an officer is a little less than 2 years?

This is logic 101 and you are failing it's most basic test. If you want to present a rational argument provide data or examples of individuals who were unfairly prosecuted and then we can begin to have a discussion.
Not falling for that because I will start listing them and then you will lie and say those are the exceptions to the rule.

Did you know that in the last 2 years you have made over 50 threads and that only 2 of those threads has nothing to do with Trump?
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,459
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WyIted
Did you know that in the last 2 years you have made over 50 threads and that only 2 of those threads has nothing to do with Trump?

Maybe because he admits he and his tight social group know sparse facts about Trump and genuinely wish to be enlightened?