Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
The stated intention of most I have seen interviewed was to prevent the congress from formally validating the election results as they stand, which show Biden to have won. Furthermore, they claim, the election was actually won by Trump. Now where did they get the idea that Trump had won the election?
Trump had lied repeatedly since the election, stating that he in fact won the election, and he continued to lie forcefully in the speech on January 6. By forcefully, I mean that he is leaving no room for ambiguity. In the past, when Trump made up stuff on the spot, he often qualified what he was saying with 'I believe' or 'some people say', but that is not the case here (in particular, claims made in the first 7 minutes): https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts...ript-january-6
There is no doubt about the fact of who won the election, no more more doubt than the results in 2016 or 2012 or 2008 or 2004--and certainly not nearly the doubt as in 2000. Trump is lying. If you disagree with this statement (and please don't come back a non-sequitur like, 'oh, but Obama lied about being able to keep your doctor'), please state so along with evidence. Also, I am not talking about being able to find 10 or 20 fraudulent votes, or even a couple hundred. That happens every election and people get punished for it. I am talking about tens of thousands of votes in multiple states which could actually mean that Trump won the election, as he claims.
So, again assuming you agree that Trump was lying, the question is whether these lies could be construed to have incited the violence on January 6. Put another way, do you think that if Trump conceded the election in mid-November or even mid-December, when it was clear that he had lost, would the Capitol had been attacked on January 6?
Certainly, he is not alone responsible for the attacks, but he is responsible none the less.
Comment