Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 16 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      hard to make this stuff up.

      ON VIDEO YESTERDAY

      Question: “I want to know why what happened in Minamar (sic)can’t happen here?”

      FLYNN: “No reason, I mean, it should happen here. No reason. That’s right.”

      ON PARLER TODAY

      FLYNN: “Let me be VERY CLEAR – There is NO reason whatsoever for any coup in America, and I do not and have not at any time called for any action of that sort,” the message said.

      YESTERDAY: “I mean, it should happen here.”

      today: “There is NO reason whatsoever for any coup in America, and I do not and have not at any time called for any action of that sort”

      thankfully though, he has Sydney Powell on his side

      “Lawyer Sidney Powell, who has represented Flynn in the past, said Monday that he had in no way encouraged “any act of violence or any military insurrection.” She claimed the media had “grossly distorted” Flynn’s comments. She did not explain why Flynn had answered the question the way he did.”

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      any of you Trumpers got anything on this?



      @JBear



      @Spartan



      @Kermit56



      @Runole

      @LargeMarge

      @KKKCHRON

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1041

      Nope.

      Any reason why I should?

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      Nope.

      Any reason why I should?

      hmmm

      he’s your guy?

      he’s the guy of your guy?

      Its a message board?

      you’re not afraid?

      :-)

      which version do you buy? the words are right there

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1041

      Nope.

      Any reason why I should?

      hmmm

      he’s your guy?

      he’s the guy of your guy?

      Its a message board?

      you’re not afraid?

      :-)

      which version do you buy? the words are right there

      He’s my guy. Riiiiiiight.

      Currently I have no interest in what General Flynn has to say. As far as I know he has no influence outside of the QAnon circle, which is, to reiterate, of no interest to me.

      If and when he comes up with something interesting and relevant I’ll let you know.

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 3858

      Spartan, I’ll agree people are not responsible for disgraced General Flynn, who is profiting off the generosity of the QAnoners he so willingly embraces.

      What should be of concern to you and every American is that Trump allegedly thinks he will be back in office in August. This report is by the NYTimes. OK if its not accurate, then its not accurate. But if it is accurate that can only happen with an armed insurrection. So does Trump support an armed insurrection to re-install himself back into the White House? Its not a matter of if it will happen. Of course it won’t.

      The question is whether Trump would support it if it did happen. Would Trump support an armed insurrection on his behalf? What do you think?

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1041

      What should be of concern to you and every American is that Trump allegedly thinks he will be back in office in August. This report is by the NYTimes.

      Oh, if the NYT says so …

      Sorry to be flippant because you are one of the more reasonable folks on this board (in the opposition camp :) ), but it really doesn’t matter what Trump thinks. He cannot be “re-instated” and he won’t be “re-instated”. Even if a few thousand QAnon descend on Washington I am pretty confident they will be outnumbered by the Police and National Guard a million to one. Likewise, even if you consider January 6th as an “armed insurrection” despite the lack of so much as a single “arm”, I am pretty sure the security in and around the Govt buildings, Congress in particular will be tighter than a ducks arse this time around. But, let’s just say for argument sake they do manage to take control of the Capitol building. Then what? You think the Military and going to say, OK, you got us now? Or are they going to say not just no, but hell will freeze over before we obey any order you give?

      Politics aside, let’s look at this from a logical perspective and realize it ain’t going to happen.

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      Politics aside, let’s look at this from a logical perspective and realize it ain’t going to happen.

      Hard to be this obtuse post Jan-6

      Somehow you managed to pull it off though 😂

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      Oh, if the NYT says so …

      Not the NYT. It’s the NYT reporting on the reporting of Byron York at the Examiner. Trump-friendly as she points out

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6214

      Spartan, you don’t think that weapons were carried during Jan 6th?

      Washington DC is strict on guns but there are plenty of other forms of weapons, armor, et al…

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      Spartan, you don’t think that weapons were carried during Jan 6th?

      Washington DC is strict on guns but there are plenty of other forms of weapons, armor, et al…

      Imagine feeling good about adopting a Ron Johnson argument (“no arms”)

      That kind of insane attempt to distinguish is just a credibility shattering deflection. It’s what you complain of with LargeMarge – ignoring the actual issue by deflecting with done tangential (read:dishonest) non-issue. Designed to take the oxygen away from the actual fire.

      “I don’t want to hear over and over that people like me sacked the Capitol … so let me say that it wasn’t really an ARMED insurrection because …. no guns ….(lamp) …so we can fight about what the word ‘arms’ means rather then whether me and my peeps are fascists”

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6214

      It’s also (simply) a parroted talking point

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1041

      Spartan, you don’t think that weapons were carried during Jan 6th?

      Washington DC is strict on guns but there are plenty of other forms of weapons, armor, et al…

      https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

      But a review of the federal charges against the alleged rioters shows that they did come armed, and with a variety of weapons: stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs.

      Dunno about you, but I don’t recall the last insurrection/revolution that succeeded where the protagonists armed themselves with fire extinguishers.

      Violence there was. A riot there was. But an attempt to overthrow the Govt with fire extinguishers? Strikes me as a bit of a stretch don’t you think?

      Even if you reference the baseball bats, what do you think of the chances of success of overthrowing the Govt? You know with the cops and National Guard being armed with guns and stuff? Bit of a lopsided revolution perhaps?

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6214

      Sounds like the safe zone strategy worked to me!

      Had they allowed firearms, who knows… certainly none of us…

      But it stands to reason it would have been much worse

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6214

      § 22–4502.01. Gun free zones; enhanced penalty.
      (a) All areas within, 1000 feet of an appropriately identified public or private day care center, elementary school, vocational school, secondary school, college, junior college, or university, or any public swimming pool, playground, video arcade, youth center, or public library, or in and around public housing as defined in section 3(1) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, approved August 22, 1974 (88 Stat. 654; 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(b)), the development or administration of which is assisted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, or in or around housing that is owned, operated, or financially assisted by the District of Columbia Housing Authority, or an event sponsored by any of the above entities shall be declared a gun free zone. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “appropriately identified” means that there is a sign that identifies the building or area as a gun free zone.

      (b) Any person illegally carrying a gun within a gun free zone shall be punished by a fine up to twice that otherwise authorized to be imposed, by a term of imprisonment up to twice that otherwise authorized to be imposed, or both.

      (c) The provisions of this section shall not apply to a person legally licensed to carry a firearm in the District of Columbia who lives or works within 1000 feet of a gun free zone or to members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps of the United States; the National Guard or Organized Reserves when on duty; the Post Office Department or its employees when on duty; marshals, sheriffs, prison, or jail wardens, or their deputies; policemen or other duly-appointed law enforcement officers; officers or employees of the United States duly authorized to carry such weapons; banking institutions; public carriers who are engaged in the business of transporting mail, money, securities, or other valuables; and licensed wholesale or retail dealers.

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      This is why these convos are almost never constructive lol

      gun owning Trumpers says it’s not an “armed” insurrection because no guns (as if guns are the only “arms”)

      The same gun owners who raise this defense NOW have probably previously mocked the idea of gun free zones and yet in this instance their misplaced “no arms” defense only exists because their “brothers in arms” who stormed the “open carry” Michigan Capitol with ARs …somehow mostly decided to leave guns behind for the insurrection in DC … because of a gun law.

      Lmao. To the gun owning Trumper adherence to a law they said was dumb and ineffective … is now a defense for storming the Capitol????

      Everything about Trumpism is circular.

      It’s because most (not all) the defenders of Trumpism are seemingly tied to only one overarching principle (defense of Trump as the leader of a white grievance movement), so every other belief or principle is malleable in defense of that single, over-arching issue. Obvious contradictions be damned lol

      The same approach is seen in gun control discussions. The actual belief is “I want my guns” so the defenders of limited gun laws mostly provide circular, canned, intellectually conflicting defenses

      Same thing on race. Zero willingness (for most, not all) to actually discuss the underlying issue, so circular, canned and conflicting deflections are ready (eg reverse discrimination, no systemic racism, meet my black friend, CRT is an attack on white people… who are, alone, innately racist(?))

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2601

      Same thing on race. Zero willingness (for most, not all) to actually discuss the underlying issue, so circular, canned and conflicting deflections are ready (eg reverse discrimination, no systemic racism, meet my black friend, CRT is an attack on white people… who are, alone, innately racist(?)

      Buggsy always willing to help emphasize the point

Viewing 16 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.