X Close

Impeachment is more dangerous than Trump The aftermath of the Capitol 'coup' echoes the post-9/11 era

Releasing demons of which she know not. Credit: Getty


January 15, 2021   5 mins

The most apt parallel for the second impeachment of Donald Trump may not be any other of the three previous presidential impeachments, including his own just over a year ago. It may instead be the PATRIOT Act, which was passed in the heated emotional aftermath of the September 11 attacks, with negligible debate afforded to the long-term implications of what Congress was enacting. Reason and deliberation had given way to a collective desire for security and revenge, and thus the most sweeping curtailment of civil liberties in the modern historical record was approved. Those who departed from the swiftly assembled consensus could expect to be denounced as sympathisers to terrorists.

Likewise, if you deign to raise concerns about the implications of this sudden impeachment sequel — or any of the other extraordinary actions taken in the past week, such as an ongoing corporate censorship purge of unprecedented proportions — you can expect to be accused of defending or supporting the “domestic terrorists” who carried out the mob attack on the Capitol.

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, rationalised rushing through Wednesday’s impeachment resolution at spell-binding speed — by far the fastest impeachment process ever — on the grounds that Trump posed a “clear and present danger” to the country, and needed to be removed immediately. “Imminent threats” of various stripes also have a long history of being cited to justify sweeping emergency action, such as the invasion of Iraq. Often upon further inspection, the purported “threat” turns out to have been not so “imminent”, or in fact to have never existed at all.

But as rushed as the impeachment was, if the purported emergency conditions were truly so dire as Pelosi maintained, she could have theoretically summoned the House to convene the day after the mob attack and impeach Trump right away. Congress convened the very next day after the attack on Pearl Harbor to declare war on Japan, for example. Instead, Pelosi waited a full week, and gave everyone the weekend off in the interim. Trump, alleged to be in the process of orchestrating a violent “coup”, was allowed to remain in office unimpeded with access to the nuclear codes for seven days.

Nonetheless, with a total of two hours of perfunctory debate — and no hearings, fact-finding or meditation on the relevant Constitutional Law considerations — Trump was impeached for the second time. As such, the text of the impeachment article will now be permanently embedded in the fabric of American governance.

One wonders who even had a chance to actually sit down and read it. The article, which charges Trump with “incitement of insurrection”, is far-reaching in its potential implications. “Incitement” is an extremely narrowly circumscribed doctrine in US law, and for good reason: anyone who engages in inflammatory but protected political speech could theoretically be said to have engaged in criminally punishable “incitement” without the shield of the First Amendment. If someone who hears your speech chooses on their volition to engage in violent or criminal conduct, you in almost all circumstances cannot be prosecuted.

This new impeachment changes that equilibrium. The one quote cited from Trump in the article to demonstrate his alleged “inciting” speech was: ‘‘If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.’’ That line — which could have been uttered by Trump in about a thousand different contexts over the past five years — is alleged to have “foreseeably resulted in
 lawless action”.

I witnessed countless instances of political speech expressed by activists, journalists, and others during last summer’s protests and riots which under the same standard could have been deemed to have “foreseeably resulted” in “lawless action”, such as attacks on police or destruction of property. But there was always a presumption that the speech was nonetheless protected under the First Amendment. The new “Trump standard” codified by this impeachment could have drastic implications for the the future, should it be applied more widely throughout US jurisprudence. Impeachable “incitement” is also unlikely ever to include statements by a president “encouraging” violence by way of, say, military force.

Still, Trump’s statements on 6 January  — just like a seemingly infinite number of others over the past five-plus years — could surely be worthy of political rebuke or censure. Indeed, Trump has already been rebuked. He’s been roundly condemned by his own party and administration. His main communications platform, Twitter, has banished him. His high-profile supporters are being systematically nuked from social media writ large. He’s been made to issue several humiliating statements conceding defeat and “disavowing” the MAGA mob which marched in his name. The bozo rioters at the Capitol were undoubtedly inflamed by a barrage of lies and conspiratorial delusions that Trump churned out on an almost hourly basis since losing the election — that’s beyond dispute.

But it was still clear pretty soon after the mob intrusion began last week that the most significant consequences from what occurred would arise not from the intrusion itself, which was dispersed by agents of the state in a matter of hours. Rather, the real consequences would stem from the predictably rash over-reaction. The more extreme the characterisation of last Wednesday’s events, the more emotional ammunition that lawmakers have to demand whatever extreme remedial action they had been ideologically committed to pursuing anyway. This goes well beyond the expedited impeachment, and into the corporate censorship purge which has now radically altered the principles undergirding the open internet.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the most high-profile member of the Left-wing Congressional “#squad”, has claimed that she narrowly escaped assassination at the Capitol and has thus been “traumatised”. Evidently she will be publicly working through this “trauma” on Instagram. It is also her contention that half of the House of Representatives (over 200 people) had been on the verge of mass execution. This style of political rhetoric has already been marshalled by “AOC” and others to demand corporate censorship on a vast scale, and successfully so; last week she tweeted pressure on Apple and Google to expel the alternative social media platform Parler from their app stores, and the corporations quickly obliged.

Amazon, falling like a domino, then completely terminated Parler from its web hosting service — effectively killing the site. As perhaps the country’s most influential Democrat by online following, AOC is someone who these tech corporations have an interest in appeasing, especially as Democrats enter full control of the federal government on 20 January. Her exceedingly dramatic recounting of what transpired during the mob intrusion is a powerful tool in her arsenal.

Curiously, the most putatively “progressive” members of Congress seem to be the most exercised about resurrecting concepts that sound like Woodrow Wilson suppressing dissidents in wartime. Mondaire Jones, a highly touted “progressive” incoming freshman Congressman, took to fulminating on the House floor during the impeachment proceeding about “treason and sedition”.

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney further declared from the floor of the House that Trump had “wilfully incited an armed insurrection”. Which is again another curious characterisation, because while a Capitol Police officer was in fact killed in the melee, the only person against whom armed, deadly force was used against was Ashli Babbitt, a Trump-supporting Afghanistan and Iraq War veteran who was shot dead at point-blank range by an officer.

Any rational observer who has the capacity to detach from the temporary passions of the moment should be able to recognise that the United States government was never at risk of being “overthrown” by the chaotic band of yahoos who stormed the Capitol. All they accomplished was to delay the certification of Joe Biden’s victory by a few hours. They also humiliated the man they apparently thought they were valiantly coming to the defence of; even Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader of the House, took to the floor during the impeachment session to declare that “Antifa” was not to blame for the chaos which unfolded, and blamed Trump as bearing responsibility for the events. Indeed, the full force of state and federal law enforcement power is now being deployed against the intruders, and many — perhaps hundreds — will be going to prison.

Reminiscent of the post 9/11 period, the “crisis” of the past week has been seized upon to execute a pre-existing agenda. Impeachment, purges, the militarisation and lockdown of the Capitol — it’s only the beginning, and it’s all happening with hardly even a peep of criticism or moment for reflection. Given this historical continuity with the events of 2001, it was therefore fitting when Steny Hoyer, the Democratic Majority Leader in the House, went out of his way Wednesday afternoon to herald the valour of Liz Cheney — daughter of the architect of US policy after 9/11, Dick — who was one of the ten Republicans to vote along with Democrats to impeach.


Michael Tracey is a journalist in Jersey City, NJ

mtracey

Join the discussion


Rejoignez des lecteurs partageant les mĂȘmes idĂ©es qui soutiennent notre journalisme en devenant abonnĂ©s payants.

Subscribe

To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

414 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Henry Barth
Henry Barth
3 years ago

Remember the ‘comedian’ Kathy Griffin holding up for the cameras a bloodied severed head of Trump just after he was elected? Or Madonna on TV saying she wanted to blow up the White House? And Maxine Waters exhorting her followers to take to the streets and revolt? I guess that sort of thing is acceptable to the media elite.

Joel Pickup
Joel Pickup
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

Interesting you believe the opinions and actions of comedians and has been pop stars are as relevant as those of the President.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Interesting that you ignore calls for violence – and for some reason, skate right past those calls from elected members of Congress – while unable to show where Trump’s words precipitated the Capitol event.

The principle of free speech does not include different guidelines for politicians, celebrities, and common folks. But, yes; when someone with name recognition is actively calling for violence, it might worthy of discussion.

Joel Pickup
Joel Pickup
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Yes, I did skate right past the Maxine Waters comment, because the media *did* make a big deal about that. A simple google search would show that.

And surely you can see the absurdity of saying “what about what Madonna said” on a discussion about the leader of the free world’s rhetoric and actions leading up to a deadly riot at America’s seat of power.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

And calm down mate no one’s talking about limiting free speech.
That explains big tech doing the bidding of the Dem party in going after opponents. And it explains AOC’s notion of a commission to ‘rein in’ the media.

It’s not just Waters. It was also the House Speaker. It was also the incoming VP, who also championed a bail fund for arrested protesters. No one suggested that any of these three be stripped of office. No one even suggested a meaningless censure.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Raising money for jailbirds is not the same thing as pushing for a revolt.

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

You really are missing the point. Apart from anything else, it is sending a signal that will encourage the rioters. You can do what you like and there will be no consequences.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

Good – about time someone pointed that out!
It does not matter which side you are – if you cannot understand why Trump’s stirring of the simpletons’ mob creates a “clear and present danger” of precedent, you are being partial enough to deserve being ignored in constructive discussion.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Everyone has the right to speak in a free democracy, and before the left progressive censor cancel cult arrived , good and bad speech in the free market of ideas usually met a just fate.Free speech served the democracies who observed it well, to become places all in the world wanted to be.The totalitarian tyrannies that imposed their thought monopolies o humanity…many have failed and fallen, and the human traffic is escape from them to free democracies of the more stable, prosperous…and free west.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

Don, imagine that I would stir up a psychopatic neighbour of yours with bald lies, convincing him that you are the sole cause of his personal misery and that by right he should break into your house and hang you from a noose. Would you defend my actions under the guise of “freedom of speech”? How about I complain that you are trying to “cancel” my opinion? I am sorry if this comes across as harsh, but it is a direct and fair comparison to your argument above. Think about it for a moment – Trump stirring simpletons to commit crimes has no relation whatsoever with freedom of expression in any shape or form.

Don Lightband
Don Lightband
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

So are you are trying to say that the yahoos somehow did not act of their own volition??

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Lightband

So you are trying to focus on something other than the question asked, which was about “freedom of expression”?

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Andre, you are making the sounds and rationales of the liberal left progressives , who have incited and condoned violent insurrectionist revoloution mobs with scores killed and estimated 2 billion dollars in damage, as well as in incite hate , persecution , censorship, ,impoverishment to any and all noncompliant dissenting citizens.As usual, you and the left are far more verifiably guilty of your accusations than your targets.
In your hypothetical example, both the individual who incited violence and the one who committed it are subject to existing criminal.law and due process …no need for a free democracy to have you appoint yourself monitor ,police, judge , jury and executioner in your hypothesis
Suppresing free speech is the act of totalitarian tyrannies.

Pete Kreff
Pete Kreff
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

and that by right he should break into your house and hang you from a noose

You would probably find yourself facing a charge of incitement. If you had only told the guy that his neighbour was the cause of all his problems, you wouldn’t.

The problem with your scenario is that Trump didn’t actually tell his fans to hang anyone. He told them to walk to the Capitol and make a lot of noise. Awkwardly for you, he even told them to do it peacefully, twice I think.

How are you going to find Trump guilty of incitement when he specifically instructed the demonstrators to be peaceful? I’m sure you and lots of other people are convinced that Trump didn’t really mean that – but how are you going to prove it?

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Nobody who brought a noose to the Capitol tried to hang anyone from it, just like none of the BLM/Antifa or assorted leftist anti-Trump activists who set up a guillotine at one of their protests tried to actually behead anyone. In both causes the objects were being used as symbols, albeit very tasteless ones, but maybe that was the point.

Adrian Maxwell
Adrian Maxwell
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

But you do not have the right to shout ‘Fire’ in a crowded theatre. This is the simple and inviolable principle that bears on the words and actions of Trump and Hawley.

Tom Krehbiel
Tom Krehbiel
3 years ago
Reply to  Adrian Maxwell

I believe that the actual quote from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. is to “falsely yell fire”. Now, of course it would be better to quietly point out such a conflagration to police or staff so they can assist people out before the danger of lost human life. But a proper and necessary allowance for human frailty must be nurtured if we’re not to become a police state. Some people will inevitably panic when they see a fire. That’s just the way it is.

Now, whatever you think of the above, how are Trump and Hawley’s words and actions so much worse than those of Waters, Pelosi, and Harris, or of a number of blue state governors and big city mayors?

Susan Campbell
Susan Campbell
3 years ago
Reply to  Adrian Maxwell

Actually that is not true. You need to do some research.
https://www.google.com/amp/

Stephen Follows
Stephen Follows
3 years ago
Reply to  Adrian Maxwell

You certainly do if there is one.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Again, genuine request; point me to the speeches or other means by which he incited the riot. Preferably something as glaring obvious as the speeches and actions of the Democrats inspiring up the preceding four years of rioting, looting, burning and killing.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

Let me help you with the English: “We are going to the capitol”. ” If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore”. “We will stop the steal”. Out of sheer fanaticism you may try to “interpret” these phrases as innocent or peaceful, but such interpretation does not really matter. What counts is that Trump lost the election (and this is beyond dispute), his words above will get him impeached and delusional “interpretations” cannot change the facts. But feel free to believe whatever you wish – as long as you respect the law, you’re free to believe in Trump’s victory, Santa Claus or whatever else that rocks your boat.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

This seems fairly mild, and requiring of far more reading between the lines, than the vicious incitement by the Dems over the last (4) year(s), but you, too, are free to read into it what you want.
And I have made no comment, as far as I can remember, on whether he won or lost the election; your attribution to me of sentiments I have not expressed weakens your arguments.

Pete Kreff
Pete Kreff
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

But feel free to believe whatever you wish – as long as you respect the law

My concern is also that the law is respected. But that means Trump doesn’t get convicted of incitement, because he did not instruct or encourage anyone to break the law and he specifically told the demonstrators to go “peacefully” to the Capitol.

To get someone convicted of a crime, there needs to be solid proof: in this case you need words spoken by Trump that cannot reasonably be interpreted in any other way than inciting lawless behaviour.

If you want Trump’s words to be enough to get him locked up, you need vaguer laws and broader restrictions, the kind that exist in tyrannies like the Soviet Union or China, where a wide range of actions can be interpreted as criminal or antisocial or anti-state in order to silence any opposition.

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

“Go to the Capitol” (a public place all Americans have the right to go to); ” fight like hell” (something politicians tell their supporters all the time), “the election was stolen” (something Hillary still moans about)…and if you were to apply the same standards to speech that frequently came out of the mouths of Democrats this past year, you would have to convict them for incitement too. Don’t get me wrong; I wish Trump had tempered his speech more. But standards need to be applied equally.

Pete Kreff
Pete Kreff
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

It does not matter which side you are – if you cannot understand why Trump’s stirring of the simpletons’ mob creates a “clear and present danger” of precedent, you are being partial enough to deserve being ignored in constructive discussion.

But if “clear and present danger” were all that was required, without any reference to “imminent lawless behaviour”, you could prosecute anyone who calls for a demonstration or protest where violence is likely to break out – like the BLM demonstrations or Occupy demonstrations, anti-Trump marches and even the civil rights marches from the 1960s.

As I understand it, the “clear and present danger” refers specifically to the danger of “imminent lawless behaviour” that is incited. Saying “the election was stolen” is not incitement – it might be reckless and unstatesmanlike and irresponsible and inflammatory, but that is not the same as incitement.

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Give me a break; the left with its MSM allies had been “stirring the simpleton’s [sic] mob” , fanning the flames of disorder and instability for nine months before that, with no repercussions. I don’t know where people get this idea that the US Capitol is any more sacred or worthy of protection than any other federal building. Or did the lives of terrorized federal employees in Portland matter less than those of Members of Congress in D.C.? Riots of any kind are disgusting, but brazen and rank hypocrisy is equally disgusting.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

As a matter of interest, can you point me to the speech(es) in which he incited these actions please? This is a genuine request; I have been unable to find any and would like to see the evidence upon which this charge is based.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

J A, did you notice thatTrump was speaking English?

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

As I have asked, politely and genuinely, where will I find the speech(es)? It will be so damning that it must be all over the internet but I am unable to find it, which might be solely due to my incompetence so, please, post a reference.Your non-response detracts from your plausibility.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

Sorry J A, you are not unable to locate Trump’s phrases (“fight like hell”, etc.) which are all over the press for the whole planet to read. What you are trying is to “interpret” Trump’s vile words as something other than an incitement to the violence that followed. And if you refuse to acknowledge the connection, it is pointless for me to point it out. Good night.

Tom Krehbiel
Tom Krehbiel
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

“Fight like hell” is NOT an incitement to violence. You can “fight” (“like hell” or otherwise) by speaking in public, writing letters or emails (as here on Unherd), attending rallies, marching peaceably, even chanting in rhythm. And I’m pretty sure you’d recognize that fact if it was someone you liked who said or wrote the phrase.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Krehbiel

Tom, as I wrote in response to J A ‘s similar “argument” in another thread, I am glad that your playing-down of Trump’s stirring up of the mob is inconsequential. The people who will decide Trump’s fate are not married to the illusions you guys keep “arguing”. But go ahead “fighting like hell” as you wish, provided you don’t break the law. Trump did, and will now pay for it. Regardless of whatever interpretation you may have of the facts.

Pete Kreff
Pete Kreff
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Krehbiel

I’m afraid Andre Lower is suffering from a bad case of wishful thinking.

I’ve read all his posts on this thread, and he seems not to realise that any conviction of Trump depends on incontrovertible proof.

7882 fremic
7882 fremic
3 years ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Instead of ‘fight like hell’ he should have said ‘protest peacefully’ as the TDS MSM is able to make anything mean anything they wish. (and as we know Peaceful Protesting can mean anything up to and including killing, looting, arson, vandalism, and violence)

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

I was interested in finding out what proof the left liberal Democrats were presenting to support their accusation of incitement of violent mob insurrection against their political rival President Trump.It seems to centered on the line,”If you not going to fight like hell, you are not going to have a country anymore.” Rhetoric like this and far more pointedly violent mob inciting and insurrectionist has launched many actual left mobs violence, destruction , assaults, deaths in the multitude of left riots all last year during the pandemic. I do not think that line would be proof of the charge, but we are living in a world where the left is falsely accusing dissenters of things are more guilty of to silence and persecute them.
When Jan 21 comes and passes , the Democrats obsessive spiteful hate of hurrying the lynching and humiliation of Trump and Democrat Pelosi wide eyed fear mongering we have to get him out before he nukes will be seen as more false defamatory alarms and they will have failed to remove him as he finishes his term, their rush to impeachment failed , and their reason for haste unnecessary and false.
Americans and the world will see a unjustly persecuted Trump,and the delayed impeachment long after the horse left the barn will.be seen as hateful spite and a moot point ,even if it does pass to guilty , which it may not.
Really looks like the newly governing liberal Democrats mostly shot themselves in the foot on this one, their first act in.power.

7882 fremic
7882 fremic
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

IT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID, BUT WHAT HE WAS THINKING. Speech is free, it is wrong thought which is punishable. Dorsey and Zukerberg and Pilosi and all the MSM understand this, why can’t you?

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  7882 fremic

Ah! I understand now. I think I love Big Brother!
Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Alex point is that there plenty of left wing voices that have incited violence and gives specific examples and evidence , yet the left are currently silencing, deplatforming , destroying and impoverishing only their political rivals with this hypocritical , virtue signaling accusation.
Even when given verifiable evidence of incitement to violence , woke censor trollsclike yourself evade that truth with irrelevant segues.
Your posts prove the left is guilty of everything they falsely accuse and smear their targets with to silence dissent.

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

“Deadly riot”? Lol, after all the deaths in the riots of last summer…exactly one person was definitely and deliberately killed, and that was an unarmed protester, by police. And since when did “America’s seat of power” acquire the sacredness of the Forbidden City? Most of the people who entered the US Capitol were allowed in by security. A minority of them engaged in wanton violence and vandalism, and were rightly arrested and charged for it. Strangely, though, they set nothing on fire (maybe burning down buildings something only the left like to do when they riot). Also interesting that a major participant and instigator in the riot, who has since been arrested, was a former well-known BLM member and agitator. Did Trump’s “rhetoric and actions” incite him, too? Police got all the intruders out of the building within an hour or two. I’m not disagreeing it was a riot, but as riots go, it was a pretty tame one.

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Maxine Waters and the VP elect also said far more specific speech that encouraged violence. The actors have a high profile opportunity that regular citizens don’t have and endorsed more specific violence against the President of the US. So yes, they are grouped in there.

Dorothy Slater
Dorothy Slater
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

I fear that opinions of pop stars – and late night “comedians” are very relevant. Since the first day of Trump’s election, the likes of Stephen Colbert, etc who have huge audiences amongst the bi-coastal elites have done nothing but make fun of Trump and his supporters in the most demeaning of ways. They didn’t even need writers – just riff off the daily headlines. Talk about incitement –they are masters of the art.

It got so bad that I gave up years ago and longed for the return of the best – and a-political nighttime host – Johnny Carson.

devonny00
devonny00
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Slater

Johnny Carson was wonderful, and the kind of comedians who provide us with entertainment are arguably a necessary part of our lives. But there always have been those comedians who are social and political satirists and comedians who provide us with perspectives that are often taboo in some way. Charlie Chaplin and Lenny Bruce immediately come to mind as well as George Carlin. Showing the other side of “truth” is not incitement. It is wisdom.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  devonny00

I quite agree, but the days of the comedian who makes fun of anyone and everything without bias, have given way to comedians who have only one stance and appear blind to anything which runs counter to their narrative, no matter how ‘funny’ that thing may be. No-one has laughed at Kamala, Nancy or AOC, or Joe, regardless of how ludicrous they have been – and, my god, have they been ludicrous. You do not need script, a straight recitation of some of their behaviour would have anyone in stitches – if it were not so deeply worrying!

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  devonny00

George Carlin hated All Governments ,Banks,politicians See his ”politicians” If youtube hasn’t removed it..Thanks to Woke ”Comedians” in uk programmes purporting to be ”Funny” are risible ..especially iTV,BBC

Tom Krehbiel
Tom Krehbiel
3 years ago
Reply to  Robin Lambert

Mark Russell and Mort Sahl are/were other even-handed satirists. (I believe that both are still alive, but haven’t from either in quite some time, hence the “are/were”.) Incidentally, Sahl’s career is an indication that Left or liberal hypocrisy about speech is not an entirely new thing. He rose to fame making jokes about President Eisenhower and Veep Nixon during the 1950s. But, when the Democrat John F. Kennedy was elected to succeed Ike as POTUS, he found that the nightclubs and other venues that had previously engaged him became far fewer in number. He remarked in a later interview with Playboy Magazine that such people were very dangerous. I’d have to agree, and say sadly that little has changed in 60 years.

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Andrew Baldwin
Andrew Baldwin
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Yeah, you would have a point if Trump made a video where he displayed something purporting to be the bloody severed head of Creepy Joe Biden or Crazy Nancy Pelosi. He didn’t, so you really don’t have a point to make.

Joe Bolser
Joe Bolser
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Of course. The points about Madonna and Kathy Griffin is preposterous and laughable whataboutery.

Imagine trying to make a parallel between something an entertainer says to get a weak laugh and Trump telling the Proud Boys – a wannabe Freikorps – to ‘Stand by’? FFS.

They really are a bunch of pathetic, self-piteous, whiny losers. Just like their President! They deserve one another.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Pickup

Unfortunately, in these times, that sort of people are the first stop of a large proportion of the population when it comes to looking for information or, rather, advice on how and what to think.

Dorothy Webb
Dorothy Webb
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

Wasn’t there a coven of witches that put a curse on Trump when he won the 2016 election? And didn’t the so-called “Democrats” start work on an attempt to bring about his fall right away? They failed again and again and I believe that whatever they try now Donald Trump will become a popular hero among people who have resisted the brainwashing attempts of the Main Stream Media hyenas.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Webb

He lost the midt-terms election and 2020 by 7m votes!
So who exactly are the people?
the 74M that voted Trump or the 81M that voted Biden?

Pete Kreff
Pete Kreff
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

I think they’re all people, don’t you?

Don Lightband
Don Lightband
3 years ago
Reply to  Pete Kreff

But it’s a damn good question – which is “THE” people? You know, the by, for, and of chaps?

Paul Marks
Paul Marks
3 years ago
Reply to  Pete Kreff

The vast numbers of fake votes for Mr Biden were not people. Some people did indeed vote for Mr Biden – but nothing like the numbers claimed.

Martin Butler
Martin Butler
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Marks

Blimey Unherd is toxic, 12 upticks to 3 the other way to a statement without a shred of evidence. Trump is the most antiAmerican president to date – no respect for the rule of law, (don’t actually think he understands what the rule of law is – he has the attention of a toddler ) or respect for all court decisions. Thank God polls in the U.K. say that not one U.K. constituency would have voted for Trump. Every single on would support Biden. Bet that’s the same for every European country.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Martin Butler

These will be the polls that consistently get our elections and so forth wrong, I presume.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

The polls called the US election relatively well. Or they also part of the conspiracy

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

“Thank God polls in the U.K. say that not one U.K. constituency would have voted for Trump. “………
is the comment by Martin Butler that I am replying to – nothing to do with any US polls.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

Okay then. The UK polls called the last GE correctly

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

Actually, they did, didn’t they? Well, if you guess something often enough you are bound to have the odd success; still would not trust them to tell me the time, much like the BBC etc from whom a large number of those who will have been polled will have received their relentless anti-Trump indoctrination. Those of us who take the time to look beyond the legacy media and the Beeb may have a more nuanced view of the situation. Don’t get me wrong, I am not sure Trump would be a guest at my all time dinner party (although it could be interesting), but the Orange-man bad hysteria over here is almost as bad as it is with a section of the American public. And, on the most generous view of Joe, I fail to see why anyone would vote for someone who has done nothing in forty plus years. That he has any support from the black community is staggering considering the damage he has been complicit in visiting on their communities; remember, Kamala Harris had a lot against him until offered a place on the ticket, when all that was conveniently swept under the carpet.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

The UK also have a ‘Boris man bad’ narrative. And it’s been very successful.

Polling in the UK is quite good. There is always a margin of error

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

OK, but I still think the understanding of the average UK citizen of what is happening in America is highly distorted by the BBBc and the legacy media. The hypocrisy of the media (and the Democrats in general) is breathtaking.

Mark Epps
Mark Epps
3 years ago
Reply to  Martin Butler

I love most of the content on Unherd, but I agree most of the comments here have a disappointing lack of focus on the main issue. An incumbent president, facing defeat at the polls, built a false narrative of a stolen election, and his actions in pursuit of remaining in power led to a riot. This should be what people keep in mind when they comment about whether or not they like Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden or the Democrat agenda.

Scott Norman Rosenthal
Scott Norman Rosenthal
3 years ago
Reply to  Martin Butler

This article doesn’t dispute what you’re saying about Trump, with which I concur. It’s about aspects of the situation which are accurately described.

Scott Norman Rosenthal
Scott Norman Rosenthal
3 years ago
Reply to  Pete Kreff

I do.

Paul Marks
Paul Marks
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

No one seriously believed that Joseph Biden, who struggled to get a dozen people to his events, got 81 million votes. Do not be silly Mr Smith.

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

How many of the 81M were, as the Irish would say “dead at the time”?

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

You know about those things because those things were coved by MSM.
Maxime Waters is stupid but she is a congresswoman not the President of USA.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Maxine Walter is a liberal Democrat political leader on proven record of inciting violence, and is currently rushing to try to impeach a political rival and President of something she is guilty of.

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Splitting hairs a bit, there. She’s still a political leader, a LAWMAKER, and as obligated by her position and her oath to uphold law and order as the President is. She instead used her position and influence to encourage her followers to break the law. And so what if the media covered it? The media obsessively covered everything Trump did or said for four years, too. Lack of coverage is not the point; the point is how much criticism and backlash she received from the MSM, which was very little.

Colin Macdonald
Colin Macdonald
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

Elvis Costello once told a journalist he wanted “Michael Howard’s head on a platter with an apple in it’s mouth”. Wonder how this would go down if some hero of the right said the same thing about Biden.

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago

You would hear the squealing from outer space, I should think. Or imagine if someone on the right pulled a stunt like Kathy Griffin’s, holding up a severed head of the President like a member of ISIS. Such antics are disgusting no matter which side does them.

7882 fremic
7882 fremic
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

Fantastic picture of the Pilosi standing on a massive dais flanked by two huge Fasces on each side of her! How utterly perfectly it shows her true self and purpose. Only thing wrong is the American Flag directly behind her, which should be changed for a flag with a black, raised, fist.

Stephen Follows
Stephen Follows
3 years ago
Reply to  Henry Barth

Not to mention a British comedian who shall remain nameless urging people on national ratio to attack Nigel Farage with acid.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago

America has been, as somebody once described, in the grip of a low level civil war for sometime, and actions such as this are so obviously purely and cynically politically motivated.

Only a fool would claim that this piece of political theatre will pour oil on the troubled waters of the toxic climate that persists in the US at the moment.

Few would condone the storming of the Capitol that day but, equally, one wonders who would condone the ironically named Democrats’ near insatiable, interminable, all consuming efforts to remove the previously elected president of the United States over the last five years by any spurious means possible rather than, god forbid, actually do their job and put forward any genuine, considered political alternative to his political agenda over that time.

Nick Wright
Nick Wright
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

“rather than, god forbid, actually do their job and put forward any
genuine, considered political alternative to his political agenda over
that time.”
The Democrats have done so unceasingly. However their proposals have generally been blocked by the Republican-held Senate.

Terry Needham
Terry Needham
3 years ago
Reply to  Nick Wright

“…the Republican-held Senate.”
Which was elected.
I can view the attack on Trump as being catastrophically stupid without being a Trump supporter. I am neutral and cannot imagine voting for either the Democrats or the Republicans – When civil war beckons then don’t expect sweet reason to come to the fore.

S Trodare
S Trodare
3 years ago
Reply to  Nick Wright

Really?

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago
Reply to  Nick Wright

Not too big on keeping up with current events, are we, Nick?

Mark Walker
Mark Walker
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

Not low level civil war. But a full scale CULTURAL war.
United States of America is in reality three regions or blocks of States. The Regions are:
1 – East Coast is liberal and radical.
2 – West Coast is liberal and debt laden.
3 – Central States are very conservative.
1+2 believe CNN, NY Times; Washington Post;
3 believes Fox News.
Will the 3 regions agree on the cultural future?
No chance IMHO.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Walker

3) Look at Texas map. Cities (where things happen) are democrat – rural areas are Republican. It also applies to North Carolina or Georgia.

devonny00
devonny00
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Walker

Well said. It is not only the geographic blocks that divide the US. It is the reality that groups of people have been made invisible and have little to no voice, regardless of where they may live. Much of what it going on has to do with the disenfranchisement felt by blue collar workers and service workers, and the low level hum of racial hatred against black people, those perceived as minorities, and the virtual nonexistence in discourse of American Indians. As long as government is not focused on all the people, there will always be an undercurrent of dissatisfaction fueling the kinds of things we are seeing now.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  devonny00

I have said before, America’s Trump was Britains Brexit; a cry from the heart of those masses neglected and despised by the people who were supposed to be looking after their interests. I find the parallels between the Brexit process and the polarisation it has caused (or brought out into the open) and the Trump saga quite remarkable.

Red Reynard
Red Reynard
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

I’m with you for the first part, JT. However, there the parallels end; the polarisation in the UK over Brexit is a typically understated irritated piss-taking. Whereas the level of visceral hatred between the two wings in the US is palpably frightening – even from 3,600 miles away.

If it teaches us, in the UK, anything; it is that we must resist the advance of American style polarising politics with every means we have. There are many things to be admired out of American culture, but their politics isn’t one of them.

All the best.

Eugene Norman
Eugene Norman
3 years ago
Reply to  Red Reynard

Yes. To do that we need to not adopt their polarising critical race theories. There has been some movement on that. We need to not adopt their extreme libertarianism or jump onboard their their neo conservative wars.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Red Reynard

Thank you. I agree entirely that the temperature of the debate here is much lower than in the US (thank god). In fact, I nearly made that point in my original comment. I’m reminded of Victoria Wood who, apropos of something she had commented on said “there will be a riot….all over England (or it may have been Solihull) people will be going …” at which point she shrugged her shoulders, rolled her eyes and sighed. Very funny (one of the comedians I wish there were more of now!) We tolerate a hell of a lot before we take to the streets, but if the present situation continues, I do wonder if even we will eventually be driven to it. I am 72 but would be prepared to join in if it became the only option. However, as with the Capitol event, open rebellion could be just what ‘they’ intend in order to facilitate even more crackdowns on our freedoms. We are in one hell of a dilemma.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Walker

However Democrat young Yuppies have Left San Francisco ,New York (800,000 i know some will be Republican_) for Republican States..

angelosnyktos
angelosnyktos
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Walker

Not all central states are conservative. Illinois has always been liberal; Chicago is the nation’s third largest city and very similar to New York.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  angelosnyktos

Liberal left Chicago also has one of the highest murder rates in the country.

Mark Walker
Mark Walker
3 years ago
Reply to  angelosnyktos

Agreed Chicago is liberal and its large population wins the State. However rural Illinois is conservative in its cultural views. Similar voting pattern/views as NY NY and New York State.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

They are illiberal Liberals.. Trump wanted Less Taxes for Blue collar workers,;,cheap energy.. Senile Biden &his sheep have Accepted Paris Protocol,already Energy prices are rising from 4 years of below inflation rises!

Walter Brigham
Walter Brigham
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

Very well put.

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
3 years ago

A good calm read – I’ve been waiting many days for this.

Having seen the first hour of the Capitol disturbance, it became obvious that no calm or impartial coverage would follow on any U.K. MSM channel, and they would be just re-running excitable US coverage uncritically, without analysis – and without end.

Yet another reason not to trust or watch BBC News …

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Ian Barton

None of the “news” outlets carried the peaceful protest that was taking place the majority of the day, nor the videos of Trump supporters trying to stop the ones trying to break in.
After the impeachment the fbi admits they have arrested an Antifa member and that this was a planned event thus Trump not the one who instigated the breach of the capital. Are they going to overturn this disgusting rush to impeachment?

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

It’s not clear if the impeachment can be reversed. Irrational emotional responses coupled with actual hatred produced the impeachment; regret may come after the next election. We expect representative leaders to be measured in their deliberations. Treating impeachment so casually will have long term consequences. Pelosi herself may represent more of a threat to democracy than Trump.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

The entire leadership of the Democratic party represents a threat to freedom of speech and the freedom to vote for and support a political candidate they do not approve of. There are those who want a list of Trump supporters and enablers to be compiled so that punitive action can be taken against them; this includes the 70million plus who voted for him. They are prepared to punish half the electorate for having the temerity to have an opinion contrary to theirs and act upon it. They make MCarthy look sane. (Given how the left have marched through the institutions of the West to the point where we are today, I am beginning to wonder if Mcarthy did not have the right idea, even if it was badly executed)

Andrew Martin
Andrew Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

It was Pelosi herself that called Trump a racist when he shutdown flights from China in late January in an attempt belatedly to stop the virus. Clearly she has no foresight.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

No need Impeaching an outgoing president is illegal in the Constitution,I know Democrats like changing Voting procedures in Swing states ..

Alex Mitchell
Alex Mitchell
3 years ago

The hypocrisy is jarring. The rhetoric in some outlets has been as if a highly trained private army was callously marching through the building slaughtering politicians with high powered assault weapons. But there are videos out there of the ‘mob’ keeping behind the ropes like they were on a guided tour. Compared to the ‘justified and mostly peaceful’ protests last year. Biden stated he was going to try to heal divisions within the US but before he’s even in power the Dems are stoking the fire with hyperbole. As I stated on another thread, someone needs to be the bigger person here to make.some progress. Trump failed in that over the last few weeks. Biden is not doing any better.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

As I stated on another thread, someone needs to be the bigger person here to make.some progress. Trump failed in that over the last few weeks. Biden is not doing any better.

You are correct – but what price should the Republican members of Congress and Senate pay for supporting Trump’s claims that the “election was stolen”. I would pardon trump if Cruz, Hawley and Co resign from Congress/Senate.
Otherwise you are asking the Democrats to be the bigger party (that is what you are asking!) while Republicans party – institutionally – supports and elects nutjobs.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

The first rule of handling customer complaints is to acknowledge that the complaint exists not just deny it.

Allowing an impartial investigation into Trump’s claims of vote rigging might have pacified things.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago

US Elections are not customer complain.
Trump has lost 61 courts cases (Federal and state) because of lack of evidence!

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
3 years ago
Reply to  kennedyabk

???

Arnold Grutt
Arnold Grutt
3 years ago
Reply to  Judy Johnson

Morse code?

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

US Elections are not customer complain.
And yet the Democrats still have not, in their hearts, conceded the 2016 election!

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

“lack of evidence” – Nonsense. Evidence has not been heard. Cases were dismissed on procedural grounds without witnesses being called. The evidence remains nebulous at best but investigations are likely to continue for years. At issue is what to do if organized widespread fraud is revealed?

Colin Macdonald
Colin Macdonald
3 years ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

I can believe the Swamp considered their cause so noble that they would steal an election to stop Trump. You’ll need more than a few bits of grainy video footage to convince me that they did. It’s a country of 330million, you can probably prove aliens stole the election if you look hard enough.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago

The first rule of handling customer complaints is to acknowledge that the complaint exists not just deny it.

Thank you! This was what I said right from the start with Brexit, when the concerns of ordinary people were not even denied by the political class, but simply dismissed as the voicing of xenophobic racism.

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Absolutely! It is time to purge all wrong thinking persons from government and society…bring on the mono-culture, and it’s “great revolution”.

S Trodare
S Trodare
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

The evidence is considerable that there was computer fraud carried out in the 2020 Presidential election (it could even be seen on TV recordings) it was massively over and above the usual endemic degree of voter fraud present in USA elections.

The Dems complained about fraud in 2016 election when Trump won, now it does not exist because they won.

Truth will not prevail in the present febrile atmosphere of a corrupt system, so there remains little point in debating it, until voters demand change, which may end up in revolution and/or the breakup of the Americian Federal State system, creating a much more dangerous world.

Republics do not last indefinitely,they eventually fail due to corruption, history stands in evidence of that.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  S Trodare

And yet Trump lost 61 courts cases because of lack of evidence. Claiming here fraud is not the same thing as proving it in court!

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

What if the election was stolen? Why should congressmen be punished for representation of their constituents? Where is freedom of speech?

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

But it wasn’t stolen. Trump had 61 court cases REJECTED for the lack of evidence.
Members of congress have the right to free speech they also have the RESPONSIBILITY to manage the affairs’ of the state.

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

No, the courts didn’t hear the cases. I listened to the 4 hours of evidence presented to Georgia judiciary subcommittee- overwhelming, but nothing done. No one wanted to be responsible for overturning the election as they were afraid of the civil unrest. They took the path of least resistance. Every one deserves their day in court. If you have nothing to his, then prove it.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

In a separate state case in Montgomery County, Pa., a judge asked Trump lawyer Jonathan S. Goldstein whether he was alleging fraud. “Your honor, accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step,” Goldstein said. “And it is rare that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the Board of the [Democratic National Committee] or anybody else involved in this a liar. Everybody is coming to this with good faith.” The judge pressed Goldstein to answer the specific question: “Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?” To which Goldstein replied: “To my knowledge at present, no.”

devonny00
devonny00
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

It is easy to call fraud when it supports your candidate. But what about the many years of voter suppression in the South and some other places where black people and poor people have been prevented from voting? This has been an ongoing problem that has never been fully resolved. The incompetence and dangerous actions by the outgoing president need to be the focus, along with finding and holding accountable those who enabled, encouraged and helped him because they are still sitting in their seats undermining the system of government.

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

S Trodare
S Trodare
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

How do you know it was not stolen? There were 2 kinds of fraud, paper fraud and computer fraud. The main fraud was via voting machines which were decommissioned immediately after the vote to destroy evidence. Only a few
remained, when they were examined by independent analysts it was confirmed that
the voting numbers had been manipulated. The outstanding point made was that
votes were taken off Trump and added to Biden. In a closed system it would not
be possible to subtract votes from any candidate only to add them. In addition
the machines were capable of being connected to the internet and therefore open to hacking both domestically and possibly through foreign interference, for real this time; no wonder many voters feel they have been disenfranchised.

The final problem was created by SCOTUS refusing to take the case, had they done so
the decision win or lose would have been
final and some of the disharmony might have been avoided.

Miguelito
Miguelito
3 years ago
Reply to  S Trodare

Confirmed by who, where? The head of Homeland security said there wasn’t fraud and that there was a paper trail on 95% of the votes. Bill Barr said there wasn’t significant fraud. The Republican governor and Republican head of elections in Georgia said there was no fraud. All the judges, including Trump appointed ones said there was no evidence of fraud presented.
Only…. only Mr. Trump said there was fraud and he was famous as a liar before he did a cameo as a liar in Home Alone 2.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  S Trodare

Globalists ONLY claim elections/ Referendums/referenda are Stolen if they dont like the result…..Only good to come out of SARS2 is the growing mistrust of News media,Worldwide.in UK BBC,ch4,ch5,ITV,Sky ….ineptitude of MPs who are qualified,classics scholars,or barristers but Cannot handle logistics..

Alex Mitchell
Alex Mitchell
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

There’s an assumption there that all the fault is on the republican side, which I would dispute. But yes, if you want to take it forward someone has to get away with something for the greater good. There are plenty who would argue, for example, that the IRA never got their just desserts in Northern Ireland, but the long term improvement made it worth it. Breaking the cycle includes breaking the blame/revenge part of it. Hard as that may be. I worry that the US politicians don’t have the maturity.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Forcing democratically elected Republicans to resign with a smear by association is an attack on democracy and those Americans voters democratic legal choices…and part of the the now obvious Purge of political opponents.. historically the act of totalitarian tyrannies.

Colin Macdonald
Colin Macdonald
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

Maybe if they’d burned down the Capitol CNN would have called it a “Mostly peaceful protest”

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago

BBC did here in Summer (Mostly peaceful) with Blm injuring 27 police and defacing statues..

David Probert
David Probert
3 years ago

Trump was never really dangerous – Pelosi and those who backher are.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
3 years ago

Not to excuse Trump’s overheated rhetoric and inappropriate remarks, the bigger threat to the US system of government is Speaker Pelosi, who by her childish and arrogant conduct has heated things up and set an appalling example. Tearing up the President’s State of the Union speech in full public view whilst standing behind him says everything there is to say about this petulant politician and her contempt for American democracy. It is she who should be impeached.

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Exactly.
I had thought I had seen the nadir of a Speaker in the form of the revolting John Bercow, but Pelosi ‘takes the biscuit’ by far.

How on Earth did someone with such obvious character defects ever float to the surface of the US Administration?

The late Nikita Khrushchev when asked a similar question is reputed to have replied, “In this life gold sinks and s**t floats”.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

That raises a very interesting point of comparison.

From a position of ignorance, but is the US speaker required to be impartial and effectively ‘partyless’ do you know?

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

No is the short answer.
If they happen to be from opposite ‘party’ to the President, they are in effect Leader of the Opposition, as ‘we’ would say.

It is however a Constitutional requirement that they suffer as much plastic surgery and Botox as is humanly possible. On this count alone the present incumbent should be awarded a gold medal forthwith.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

Alas, unlike Ms Pelosi, I suspect John Bercow was long deemed beyond repair from even the keenest, most talented surgeon’s knife.

Annette Kralendijk
Annette Kralendijk
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

Pelosi was too.

Andrew Martin
Andrew Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

She could actually be a stand in for the Addams Family.

Jaunty Alooetta
Jaunty Alooetta
3 years ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

You’re seriously comparing Pelosi tearing up a speech to a president insisting at rally after rally and tweet after tweet that the election was rigged, all with zero evidence?

That’s like saying, Sure, Stalin was a bit rum, but the guy who fixed his car was an absolute monster.

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago

Jaunty Alooetta
Jaunty Alooetta
3 years ago
Reply to  kennedyabk

Hey, I know: why not get some of that “evidence” together and file a suit? It’s sure to go your way in court…

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago

kennedyabk
kennedyabk
3 years ago

Jonny Chinchen
Jonny Chinchen
3 years ago

Quit the “where’s the evidence” BS. There were thousands of affidavits and video footage of strange goings on in the counting rooms.
What happened is the courts decided against hearing that evidence and forming a judgement based on it.
Why?
Well, depending on your point of view, either the evidence was too weak to prosecute, or the courts didn’t have the guts to take on such a momentous thing as overturning an election result, however fraudulently reached.
There was, and is, “evidence” and it was taken through the appropriate legal channels.
Pelosi and AOC are a more clear and present danger to American democracy than Trump. Their ridiculous exaggerations, assertions and the hypocrisy about his “incitements” make their own similar statements seem even worse, given the context. How are they allowed on social media?

Kathy Prendergast
Kathy Prendergast
3 years ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Pelosi is a rank hypocrite; I don’t know how anyone can still respect her or take her seriously after the hair salon fiasco. Even after she was caught out she refused to just fess up and take ownership of it, instead playing the victim. Why do these people think they’re entitled, unlike their lowly minions, to break their own rules, just to get their damn hair done?

Joseph Berger
Joseph Berger
3 years ago

To summarize, for purely political purposes the democrats have hysterically over-reacted to a rioting that was mild in comparison to the destruction, looting, thuggery, thieveing, destruction of police cars, invasion of state capitols, that went on for weeks and months last summer – during the time of the pandemic.

No, I don’t think President Trump will risk his reputation – what is left of it – to run again in 2024,
and more important, I think the Republicans have some excellent younger more moderate candidates who might very well run in 2024.

If, as we expect, the biden administration will essentially be the 3rd obama administration, then in 2022 the democrats may lose control of both houses, or if the time frame for them to totally screw up domestic policy and foreign policy is too short, then by 2024 without a doubt – when Harris will be their presidential candidate and the unbelievable stacy abrams VP candidate – then they will lose very heavily.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago

Well, let’s see: since the impeachment, a known BLM guy has been arrested for his involvement in the Capitol fracas; so has the son of a Brooklyn judge, both of them Dems; and, separate news reports in print and broadcast include timelines that show things going wrong before Trump spoke.

The impeachment was personal, the opposition’s last act at piling on while also trying to send a message to the rest of us. Meantime, AOC is talking about a commission to “rein in” the media, whatever that means.

David Bell
David Bell
3 years ago

I wonder if this process will be used against those politicians who support BML and Antifa protests?

The Democrats will live to regret what they have done. They have taken their revenge on Trump (and that is what it is) but the method of doing so has opened themselves to the same treatment!

kecronin1
kecronin1
3 years ago

Thank you for writing thoughtful journalism. I thought it had been all but extinct. I watched Trump’s speech. Nothing but slick marketing that we haven’t seen before, but it did not incite violence. It was obvious that the attack was pre-planned. By whom, I don’t know, but they looked like caricatures from a movie. That Pelosi jumped on the impeach bandwagon while our state is disintegrating before my eyes demonstrates what a reprehensible figure she is. Weeks ago I saw AOC giving skin care tips. In disbelief, I thought, ‘what would Anne Richards and Barbara Jordan – heroes when I was a kid – think of this?” Good God. That AOC gives nonsense that her life was in danger is as believable as the Netflix documentary giving rise to her fame. The only good thing coming out of all this is hopefully we stop looking to Washington for moral guidance as there is none. We need to vote in responsible local officials. Fortunately in LA, Janice Hand and Kathryn Barger are finally getting the attention they deserve. These women, one democrat and one republican, remember whom they serve.

Tony Hay
Tony Hay
3 years ago
Reply to  kecronin1

You make an interesting point when you say: “It was obvious that the attack was pre-planned. By whom, I don’t know …”. Trump’s call for the rioters to cease and go home looked pre-recorded – released during twilight hours but apparently filmed in full daylight. I agree with the author of this article that Trump’s words, taken out of context, were not incitement. But, given the context, I think he knowingly incited the mob violence that followed.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Hay

But, given the context, I think he knowingly incited the mob violence that followed.
How did he do that? I keep seeing that claim and it is no more than article of faith from people who either hate the man to start with or believe every word that comes from a media that also hates him. CNN and others are reporting that the incident looks to have been pre-planned, which is curious because CNN is among his staunchest haters. Yesterday, a BLM activist was arrested for his role in the fracas. You cannot say Trump’s words were taken out of context but blame him for the event anyway.

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Hay

Absolutely not- most people at this rally had attended of trump rally’s which were all peaceful patriotic events. His speech was the same as his other speeches

Joel Birkeland
Joel Birkeland
3 years ago

Consider that Trump is not impeached. He will likely run in 2024, he won’t have a chance at the Republican nomination, so he will run as a third party candidate, guaranteeing a Democratic Presidential victory. For this reason, and several others, the Republican party stands to gain the most from a Trump impeachment.
Nancy Pelosi is not stupid. She knew she had to push impeachment through, but I suspect she knows there’s a very good chance it won’t come to a Senate trial. It’s so much better for the Democrats to have a bogeyman like Trump to drag out to energize their troops.
Like Eric Hoffer said in The True Believer (paraphrasing here) “You can have a mass movement without God, but you can’t have one without The Devil.”

Simon Burch
Simon Burch
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Birkeland

‘Consider that Trump is not impeached. He will likely run in 2024, he won’t have a chance at the Republican nomination, so he will run as a third party candidate, guaranteeing a Democratic Presidential victory. For this reason, and several others, the Republican party stands to gain the most from a Trump impeachment.’

Spot-on. I’m amazed that the numerous Trump-impeachment cheerleaders can’t see this.

Max Beran
Max Beran
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Burch

Totally confused – how does guaranteeing a Democratic victory mean that the Republican party stands to gain the most from a Trump impeachment?

Simon Burch
Simon Burch
3 years ago
Reply to  Max Beran

That’s not the point. The Republicans stand to gain the most from a Trump impeachment because it could help them win next time. The argument is as follows:

If Trump is NOT impeached, he could run for President again. The Republican Party almost certainly could not accept him as their candidate at the next election; they would field an alternative candidate. However, given the size of his following, Trump might well stand again as an independent – and thus split the Republican vote.

With the right-wing vote split, the Democrats would almost certainly win.

If Trump IS impeached, he can’t run again, there is no risk of him splitting the Republican vote at the next election, and so the Republicans would have a vastly improved chance of winning.

Stuart Mill
Stuart Mill
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Birkeland

> he won’t have a chance at the Republican nomination
that’s what everyone said in 2015.

Nick Wright
Nick Wright
3 years ago
Reply to  Stuart Mill

The chance of Trump being anointed again by the Republican Party, after the damage he has already inflicted on it, is about the same as the chance of the Ancient Mariner scraping the dead albatross off the deck and draping it around his own neck.

Mark Walker
Mark Walker
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Birkeland

Nancy Pelosi has not planned for the Trump Supporters(75 million votes) reaction to the House Motion. Stupid in my view, as it will solidify their resolve to back the next Republican Presidential Candidate supported by Trump.

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Joel Birkeland

I don’t think Trump will run again- he can do much more without the constraints of the out of control government

7882 fremic
7882 fremic
3 years ago

I was just watching an episode of ‘El Chapo’ on Netflix, the one where the President of Mexico office is stolen by vote buying, harvesting, and intimidation, and thus a pro-Narco party takes control from the one which was anti Cartel. From beginning to end, less the shooting parts, it could read as an allegorical dramatization of the recent election in USA. The Dems are obviously the party of ‘pro’, and instead of cartel it is the six horsemen, Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and Google, and the MSM, the global monopolies/oligarchs families.

The end was encouraging though, after using the El Chapo forces to win the shady election – the new President decides Chapo has outlived his usefulness so sets out to capture and extradite him. I guess this is where the Squad had the 6 cancel Trump and his side, manipulate the algorithms, and bury the ‘wrong’ stories and shovel out the right stories, till victorious, then will turn on them, and break such a dangerous tool, less it later be used on themselves.

So, yes, the Democrats are proving themselves much more dangerous than Trump ever could have been, but also that they will likely be equally dangerous to friend and foe alike, the Swamp always being what it is, the scorpion cannot help being a scorpion.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  7882 fremic

The Dems are obviously the party of ‘pro’, and instead of cartel it is the six horsemen, Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and Google, and the MSM, the global monopolies/oligarchs families.

Historically it was the Republican party that relied on the rich people and corporations. Plenty of billionaires (Adelson, Schwartzman, Griffin) have donated money to Trump.
He lost because more Americans hate him than adore him.
Just like he lost the popular vote in 2016 and the mid-terms in 2018. He also lost the 2 seats in Georgia for senate.

Dianne Bean
Dianne Bean
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

He had 12 million more votes than his first election. More than any sitting president. He lost because of corruption.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

No, he lost because more people wanted him out.
He has lost 61 court cases

On Thursday, Fox News host Tucker Carlson lambasted Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell for claiming without evidence that glitches in electronic voting machines had improperly favored Biden. “She never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another,” Carlson said. “Not one.”

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
3 years ago
Reply to  Dianne Bean

In terms of factors that might affect an election, 2020 was not found wanting.

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago

A fair minded and accurate article, for once. One of the people already arrested for the so-called Storming of the Capitol – which was really a Stroll Around the Capitol – is a far leftist. Or, essentially, a fifth columnist within the Trump supporters. And there were probably others like him.

Everybody should watch Jimmy Dore’s latest podcast with Chris Hedges to understand the true evil of the corporate Democrats.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

The bozo rioters at the Capitol were undoubtedly inflamed by a barrage of lies and conspiratorial delusions that Trump churned out on an almost hourly basis since losing the election ” that’s beyond dispute.

How does the above fit your view that the election was stolen?

Everybody should watch Jimmy Dore’s latest podcast with Chris Hedges to understand the true evil of the corporate Democrats.

The evil democrats have pushed across the country for higher minimum wages and delivered (warts and all) Obamacare.
If i was working class (and I am not) I take that evil any day.
Especially since TrumpCare (Better, cheaper with more choice) is not coming anytime soon….

Kelly Mitchell
Kelly Mitchell
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

I know. Trump stole it in 2016, but the noble Dems never would do that.
That’s a “conspiracy theory”

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Leave off of “Obamacare” it was and is a bait and switch scheme that has made insurance more expensive or unavailable to most…evil indeed-“every family will save $2000.00” a lie, “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” a lie.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  stephen f.

Nothing stopped Trump and the republicans to deliver TrumpCare in 2016 or 2017 – where is it?

jvirgin jvirgin
jvirgin jvirgin
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Which planet are you on? We all know McCain voted against it. We also know his wife supported Biden in the election.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

You ‘re deluded.Trump delivered Wage rises for hispanics,Blacks,Blue Collar workers NOT pushing for it,he delivered …

Dorothy Slater
Dorothy Slater
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

I did last night before going to bed and it kept me awake all night. I have no idea how many are in Dore’s audience,but I suspect not as many as those who watch Don Lemon or Rachel Maddow.

vince porter
vince porter
3 years ago

Rioting, trashing businesses, theft, removing decent people from their homes, commandeering whole city blocks, etc. can now be done with impunity when the appropriate progressive agenda is invoked. Ideology speaks louder than actions which used to be criminal. The thugs who stormed the Capitol would have been well served if they had invoked Black Lives Matter which seems to have superceded Civilized Behavior Matters as the ultimate virtue.

J A Thompson
J A Thompson
3 years ago

I have engaged in exchanges with various Americans via youtube in the past couple of weeks as well as looking at a number of videos. I have come to the conclusion that the most prominent members of the Democratic party and their most vociferous supporters are seriously deranged, and I do not use the term lightly. Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Kamala and Joe himself do not live in the real world. The violence being acted out seems to be coming entirely from the ‘left’ (there is some evidence that there were people from Antifa and BLM involved in the Capitol events, though I am not saying that Republicans were not involved at all) and the Democrat leaders on record as inciting and supporting that violence are many.
Many Antifa and BLM rioters who were arrested were bailed, I am informed, using a fund set up by Harris and were later released without charges being pressed.
And yet the media show nothing of that and their supporters will openly tell you that they were peaceful demonstrations and nobody was hurt and get very angry when you show them evidence to the contrary – evidence easily available to them if they were to look.
The blind hypocrisy that I have seen during my attempts to engage with these people has left me breathless.
As a, more minor, example of the insanity, with all that is going on, all the problems facing the US, the Democrats have chosen to introduce a bill outlawing the use of gender specific language in the house, i.e. no use of words like, mother, daughter, son, father – this is what is occupying their minds at this juncture. And then, in a speech on the impeachment, Nancy Pelosi rode a coach and horses through her own bill, using a myriad of gendered terms in her first few sentences.
We are in for some seriously interesting times!

Michael North
Michael North
3 years ago
Reply to  J A Thompson

I have no doubt that there was a great deal of fraud in the recent presidential election, but it would only be marginal in its effect if there were not a vast reservoir of extreme stupidity in the USA.

Andy Yorks
Andy Yorks
3 years ago
Reply to  Michael North

How do you know any fraud ‘would only be marginal in its effect’ ? You have no way of knowing and nor does any one.

What I do know is that the Election was riddled with fraud and there needs to be a forensic audit. There are far too many coincidences for there not to have been some coordination in the fraud. The statistical data does not look plausible and requires a deep and independent investigation. But it seems that Biden is a usurper and Pelosi is a Traitor.

David Jory
David Jory
3 years ago
Reply to  Michael North

A strategic switch of fewer than 43,000 votes in 3 states would have changed the result.
Very little fraud would be needed to achieve that.

Michael North
Michael North
3 years ago
Reply to  David Jory

My point exactly.
It doesn’t take much to turn an intensely stupid minority (just) into a “majority”.

Andy Yorks
Andy Yorks
3 years ago

All the bed wetting that is going on from the Democrats suggests all is not what it seems. Reminds one of the Turkish attempted ‘Coup’ the other year – oh so ‘convenient’ and oh so incompetent when the one thing the Turkish Army is good at is a Coup. Similarly none of this smells right. As the FBI had monitored some of the chat on Facebook & Twitter (Parler were not involved apparently) one is bound to ask why the building was virtually undefended. The hag Pelosi likes to play games, but I would have thought it was stupid beyond belief to allow any sort of incursion of the building lest you give others a few ideas. A small group of well armed terrorists could easily have taken almost the entire House & Senate hostage and murdered the lot of ’em. For Pelosi et all their hate of Trump is such that they show they have sh*t for brains.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago

Not sure, but I think it was Theodore Roosevelt who said something like, ‘the rock of democracy founders when we come to see those who disagree with us simply as ‘the others’.

Despite the half-arsed, lame rhetoric coming thick and fast from Biden’s Democrats about healing and unifying the nation this impeachment can only have the effect of inflaming the already high passions of ‘the others’ many so clearly despise.

It’s not just plain stoopid, it’s bad politics quite frankly.

Simon H
Simon H
3 years ago

“The bozo rioters at the Capitol were undoubtedly inflamed by a barrage of lies and conspiratorial delusions that Trump churned out on an almost hourly basis since losing the election ” that’s beyond dispute.”…?

Is it?

State prosecutors are already processing the vote riggers with the first already convicted, and without exception, all were processing in favour of Biden. Thousands more under investigation.

Biden is effectively PINO. His time will be short and chaotic. Im sorry for him. The blame lies with Pelosi, Clinton, Obama et al..

The US is behaving like a banana Republic. I personally don’t blame Trump.

Jaunty Alooetta
Jaunty Alooetta
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon H

What vote riggers are you talking about?

Jaunty Alooetta
Jaunty Alooetta
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon H

Does he have a name, this convicted vote rigger?

I think you’re just making things up … like Trump.

sasquatch320
sasquatch320
3 years ago

Raquel Rodriguez

greg waggett
greg waggett
3 years ago

100%. Completely agree. One of the few sensible articles around at the moment that have examined the shenanigans on Capitol. The Democrats have shot themselves in both feet.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago

Intolerance , hate, social division, racism( the blatantly racial scapegoating of the fabricated left Critical Race Theory dogma), mob incitement of violent insurectionist revoloution all last year during the pandemic, systemic suppresion of dissent and human rights violation, forced political indocrination of children, students and workers, purging and destroying political rivals…the truthless hypocritical left progressive tyranny is verifiably guilty of everything they falsely accuse , and are the real vandal and threat to democracy, reported in every free democracy in the west they operate in.
Truth and justice will prevail over the truthless tyrannies in our world , but not before they inflict their damages and harms.
Humanity needs to recognize them in time, and liberate themselves from the marxist left progressive tyranny.

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

There’s something truly disgusting and Orwellian about it – that’s so infuriating, that it’s difficult to even put one’s finger on it – to know exactly, what to call it – and yet, it’s used as a CONSTANT, DELIBERATE TACTIC (even though – it also resembles psychological projection, and a psychosis). So – let me put it, this way…

Let’s say – that you cold-bloodedly plan, to murder someone – by firearm – only, you want to get away with it. So – what you do is – you preemptively, before they even thought that there was any hostility between you at all, in either direction – accuse THEM, of plotting to murder YOU – and, THEN, you shoot them – and before the murder has even been reported or investigated, start loudly claiming that it was in “self-defense”…

Michael North
Michael North
3 years ago

As Cardinal Pell said ; “Trump is a bit of a barbarian, but he’s our barbarian”.
Millions of Americans feel the same.
He was the last chance for the United States as it has been known.

.

William Gladstone
William Gladstone
3 years ago

Yes you have worked out that the globalists are Fascist (or if that term offends you totalitarians) who will use any pretext to be authoritarian. Well done, perhaps you and the rest of the left should have worked this out 25 years ago and our liberal democracies would not be totally illiberal and technocratic at this point. but then the left work for and want the revolution despite history showing that every single time it leads to death and destruction.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago

For A start A president cannot be impeached a 2nd time when leaving office
..secondly peolosi & her corrupt cohorts are Terrified trump will Spill the beans on Twitter,Youtube,Facebook anti-trust Laws violations…Pelosi Like Biden has dubious dealings ,how Can she have accumulated $150million + by being speaker ?..Trump should concentrate on Nailing Biden and other corrupt Democrats..

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago
Reply to  Robin Lambert

And, he’s going to. They can “Cancel” him – but they can’t actually literally VANISH him. I just have to suspect that, as short-sighted as they are – they probably haven’t even figured that out, yet.

(They can’t actually Cancel, around 50 percent of the voting population, either – and I doubt that recognition of that fact, has even strayed into their dim little totalitarian minds…)

Christopher Barclay
Christopher Barclay
3 years ago

Curious how the agenda preceded the riot. How many of the ‘insurrectionists’ came armed? Could the security around the building have done better? If the answers are ‘none or few’ and ‘yes’, then the event may have been allowed to take place. The purpose was obvious. To stop Trump from running in 2024. After 9/11 no one who had been ‘asleep on duty’ was subsequently punished. Time will tell whether it is the same in this case.

Paul Marks
Paul Marks
3 years ago

If saying “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard” is a crime – then having nasal hair is a crime.

Donald John Trump is constantly the subject of disinformation and smear campaigns – for example after the confrontation in Virginia in 2017 over the removal of the statue of General Lee the VERY FIRST WORDS that President Trump said were to condemn neo Nazis who tried to hijack the conflict (who are, after all, a threat to his Jewish daughter – the Trump family has always been very close to the Jewish community of New York City, even as far back as the 1950s and 1960s), having condemned the neo Nazis, President Trump then said (quite correctly) that there were good people on both sides of the conflict over the statue. The media EDITED OUT the condemnation of neo Nazis and pretended that President Trump was saying they were “good people”. The media do this all the time – they lie and smear constantly and even some people on this comment thread believe the lies and smears of the media against Donald John Trump.

As for January 6th – it is now clear that Antifa Marxist activists (supporters of Biden/Harris) manipulated events (and manipulated some people) and created the riot. But this will not be reported in the “mainstream media” which will continue to lie and smear. There was a lot of, quite justified, anger over the massive Election Rigging in November (what happened in States such as Pennsylvania was farcical in the crudeness and extent of the election fraud), but the anger was manipulated and pushed in a violent direction NOT by President Trump – but by professional leftist (yes leftist) activists planted in the crowds, some of these people have already been arrested – so it is not a “Conspiracy Theory”.

Terry M
Terry M
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Marks

You are right that Trump has been smeared repeatedly by the media using quotes out of context. And the behavior of the Democrats has been appalling. However, antifa did not create the riot. It was created by the hundreds, maybe thousands, of the most extreme of Trump’s supporters who breached the police lines and stormed the Capitol. Indeed there were a few antifa types – wannabe revolutionaries and riot groupies – in the crowd and they may have helped whip up the crowd. But not very many. The names and backgrounds of those who stormed the Capitol are coming out and most are hyperactive Trump supporters, including police, teachers, local administrators, and others.

An important point is that the breach of the police lines was initiated DURING Trump’s speech. So Trump could hardly be rationally accused of inciting the riot, since cause precedes effect. Nevertheless the Dems are making hay with the help of the sycophantic media. Sad, yes, but also evil and dangerous.

Jaunty Alooetta
Jaunty Alooetta
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Marks

Yes, there was so much election rigging in November that 63 complaints came before courts and 62 were dismissed or abndoned by the lying plaintiffs.

Gre Tel
Gre Tel
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Marks

Nasal and ear hair are as pleasant to see as a dog pupping. You never want to see those things, but, eh, s happens!

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago

The real Crime, was winning the 2016 election, in the first place. St. Hillary Clinton, had already been Appointed.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph McCord

He didn’t win it. It was a fraud.

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

Really? Well, win by fraud, loose by fraud, such is the USA today!

Sadly the USA is looking more like a Banana Republic every day.

‘You’ used to say ” In God we trust.”
Not anymore it seems, and God has moved on to a less ambitious project, saving the Irish Republic from itself.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

I was being sarcastic. Apparently it’s only fraud when Trump loses. When he wins it’s a completely legitimate outcome. The fact that tens of millions of people can make this claim with a straight face is quite something.

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

There was no mail-in balloting in 2016. Real people, actually living in the present, actually voted. The only problem, is that in Fantasyland – you had already Coronated, your Queen – Successor, to America’s First Black Pharaoh. So it couldn’t possibly have been real.

(Even though, in Real World Land {which – some people still at least visit, from time to time} – in most respects, Trump is pretty much just like any ordinary Republican President {except – a bit better – and I guess that’s what makes it, all the worse}.)

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph McCord

Trump is pretty much just like any ordinary Republican President {except – a bit better –

Yes, he has certainly been a raving success, apart from starting a civil war (but no one is perfect).

And don’t insult the Queen, ever.

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

Trump started the “civil war”? Who attempted to negate the election, before it was finished – and has been living in denial of its reality constantly, for the entire four years since? Who called, during the election season, itself – repeatedly, in any number of public performances before, mostly, wealthy Northeastern “liberal” audiences – an entire half, at least, of the U.S. citizenry, a newly-coined noun – “Deplorables”? Was that, Donald Trump?

And – which “Queen”, exactly, do you mean?

(And – you’ll, or else, what?)

Annette Kralendijk
Annette Kralendijk
3 years ago
Reply to  J J

Did Trump start the war? Looks to me like the democrats did with efforts to impeach him before he ever took office. You can’t wipe out the last four years.

The Queen isn’t sacrosanct in the US regardless of what her subjects would like to see. In any case, “Queen” in this case refers to herself, Hillary Rodham Clinton. And it’s not meant as a compliment.

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph McCord

“Coronated”?
Don’t you mean Crowned?
Incidentally Emperor might fit better than Pharaoh don’t you think?

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

The Senile Emperor biden &Empress Harris have ”No Clothes” globalists bilge….

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago
Reply to  Robin Lambert

Yes indeed, wonderful word ‘bilge’ by the way!

Annette Kralendijk
Annette Kralendijk
3 years ago
Reply to  George Lake

Good point. The Clinton canal started the whole fraud pretense with the phony Russian collusion stunt. I guess it’s only fraud when Trump wins.

Andrew Thompson
Andrew Thompson
3 years ago

Remind me again how many homes, businesses and livelihoods were burned to the ground last summer please. This episode was a walk in the park FGS, had Trump retained power then America certainly would have burned; hundreds of deaths, total mayhem would have ensued.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago

Trump is the President of USA. The man has been lying for the last 4 years about stole elections (2016 and 2020). He is not the mayor or Portland or a woke social activist.
It shouldn’t be hard for (even?) you to see the difference!

Nigel Clarke
Nigel Clarke
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

And yet…

“There are none so blind as those who will not see, and none so deaf as those who will not hear”

Terry Needham
Terry Needham
3 years ago
Reply to  Nigel Clarke

He is best blocked.

Nigel Clarke
Nigel Clarke
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry Needham

Haha…free speech except for those we want to block

Fair enough if you want to, but then don’t comment about free speech.

Terry Needham
Terry Needham
3 years ago
Reply to  Nigel Clarke

How am I interfering with his right to free speech – Exactly?
He is at liberty to post here and those, like you, who want to read his fatuous contributions are at liberty to do so – I can’t stop you and wouldn’t even if I could.
I merely advised that other contributors might find this forum more interesting when he is blocked from view. There are days when every other comments is from this hyperactive teenager.

Nigel Clarke
Nigel Clarke
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry Needham

Block Him!

Ah yes, that well known cry of the Free Speech supporter.

Or do you still not see?

Terry Needham
Terry Needham
3 years ago
Reply to  Nigel Clarke

“Or do you still not see?”
No I don’t
Because I cannot force you, or anyone else, to block him.
Do you still not see?

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry Needham

Did I trigger you?

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

It is you that clearly are triggered whenever TRUMP! comes into a discussion.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Nigel Clarke

Sorry Nigel there is no “and yet”.
If it was destructive (and it was) to riot for Lloyd George it is much much worst for the President of USA to spread lies/conspiracies and turn on a mob against the institutions of USA.
We (as I speak as an American) expect more from elected officials – especially from the President of USA.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Except the president did not do what you claim. The New York Times has a nice timeline of the event, showing the perimeter was breeched before Trump spoke. CNN has a piece on how this looks to have been coordinated ahead of time. Unlike past accusations against Trump, the bandwagon cannot use ignorance here. The left’s own media sources are reporting things that do not support the ‘blame Orange McBadman’ theory.

Nigel Clarke
Nigel Clarke
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

You still won’t see…
The riots were an attempt to goad Trump in to some sort of armed reaction, it didn’t occur, but they kept on and on and on…, read some of the comments below and above from the people who live in Portland. Ask them if they think a few hundred unarmed people breaking in to the Capitol disturbed them as much as weeks of rioting, looting, burning, theft and murder.

If you want more from your elected officials…then elect some with backbones…but you won’t.

Iliya Kuryakin
Iliya Kuryakin
3 years ago

The more fundamental problem with the incitement charge is Trump’s words in his speech: “I know everyone will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

Joseph McCord
Joseph McCord
3 years ago
Reply to  Iliya Kuryakin

Well that’s OBVIOUSLY, a call for Revolution!

(Which is only a good thing, if liberals and/or left-wing radicals do it.)

George Lake
George Lake
3 years ago

Interesting to see that the Pelosi creature is flanked by the ‘Fasces’ in the caption photo.

How apposite in view of her deplorable conduct.