So...if I say peacefully at the beginning of a speech, then I'm pretty much off the hook for everything that doesn't jive with "peacefully" afterwards? He started with peacefully and closed with fight like hell or lose your fucking country. Sure seems like your trying to make that one line carry the entire load that was the rest of the speech and I think it is fair to say that people would clearly disagree with that assertion and you'd have a hard time really proving they were wrong.
No, you can look at the comments of Alan Dershowitz or a dozen other legal scholars and former U.S. attorneys and high-level national judges: Trump only said to "fight" in the sense of vigorous protest for your cause, the same way hundreds of other political leaders have done in speeches in that exact same Washington mall over the last 20 years.
"PEACEFULLY and patriotically let your voices be heard". And again, the worst violence was orchestrated by John Sullivan and his group of BLM infiltrators.
To review, the "five people killed" on Jan 6th were
1) Ashli Babbitt, an UNARMED Trump supporter who was shot dead by a police officer, not killed by Trump supporters,
2) officer Brian Sicknick who as I linked yesterday, no video shows him ever hit with an extinguisher and not clearly injured by any Trump supporter, what even WP acknowledges the case for murder of Sicknick is "falling apart",
3) a guy in his 50's who died of a stroke,
4) a guy in his 50's who died of a heart attack, and
5) a girl in her 30's who collapsed with health problems and died while receiving CPR, unable to revive her.
So... None of those 5 are proven violence by any Trump protester, and the only actual "killing" was by a Capitol police officer, NOT by any Trump supporter.
It's all a lying Democrat narrative.
Trump did not call for violence. Trump did not incite violence. The violence was planned (as verified by NYPD, FBI and DHS) a month before the protests on Jan 6th.
And nothing in Trump's Jan 6th speech incited violence. This is all just a Democrat sham, to impeach Trump as a political weapon to destroy him politically, *NOT* because Trump did anything wrong.
And afterwards you look at his actions. It wasn’t somebody that was horrified at what happened after they sent that crowd to the Capitol. The link I posted above details what we know. I would really like him under oath detailing his actions after he sent his “special “ people to the capitol
That's just complete made-up garbage and subjective tea-leaf reading, of what you WISH was there, rather than what is ACTUALLY there. You have no interest in truth or facts, it's all about whatever advances your Democrat-Bolshevik party, whatever lying narrative allows that to happen.
That link you posted is to a factless partisan editorial, by a Harvard lawyer who has been scheming to find a way to impeach Trump on any contrived pretense since Jan 2017 when Trump was inaugurated.
