[DuncanDoenitz]

Trump is going to win bigly against CBS very soon and then the rest of these shitbag political commentators, posing as journalists, will STFU.

Comedy Gold, LMMFAO, Can't make this shit up, etc. 

Just thought I'd add some more meaningful stuff to this debate.  (is that stuff just on a loop btw?). 

[Tom Bishop]

A reasonable person wouldn't think that the presence of a gallows in front of the Capitol meant that it was permissible to storm the building as part of an angry mob and to smash windows and break down doors while screaming for the blood of the politicians you hate in an attempt to stop the certification of an election, just like a reasonable person wouldn't think that a couple of cops not actively fighting dozens of angry protesters or even opening one or two doors for them meant that it was permissible to storm the building as part of an angry mob and to smash windows and break down doors while screaming for the blood of the politicians you hate in an attempt to stop the certification of an election. Even if I agreed that any of this was indicative of complicity on the part of the authorities (which apparently doesn't include Trump), all that would mean is that further blame should be extended towards the authorities. The protesters' actions would in no way be justified or excused by this. They violently tried to stop the certification of an election in an attempt to keep their preferred president in power. Nobody tricked, forced, or coerced them into doing that. The most you could argue is that someone "let" them do it. If a cop puts a loaded gun on a table in front of you, you are still 100% morally and legally guilty of murder if you then grab that gun and use it to kill someone. The cop will face their own consequences for what they've done, but that will have no bearing on the consequences you'll face. That's all this setup argument comes out to. You're insisting that someone put a gun on the table in front of the protesters and therefore it's not the protesters' fault that they then grabbed the gun and shot someone with it.

It's not that simple. The capitol police were welcoming the protestors into the building. From this, the average person may believe that they are allowed to enter. There were grandmothers caught up in the arrests, who say that they were just following the crowd and touring the building under the apparent approval and oversight of the capitol police.

See: https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol-police-officers-suspended-after-pro-trump-riots-2021-1

[Lord Dave]

It isn't trolling according to LD, when a president who has answered over 1500 questions from the press in 57 days, is somehow against freedom of the press.

And that is questions he has personally answered, not even counting the number of press briefings given by his administration!

LMMFAO!!!

MORE COMEDY GOLD!!!

You can't make this shit up!!!

wait... Do you think answering questions means you're all for freedom of the press? 

[Action80]

In a comparison between answering questions from the press and not answering questions from the press, 9 out of 10 working dads agree that answering questions from the press exhibits more freedom of the press than does not answering questions from the press.

[markjo]

It isn't trolling according to LD, when a president who has answered over 1500 questions from the press in 57 days, is somehow against freedom of the press.

And that is questions he has personally answered, not even counting the number of press briefings given by his administration!

LMMFAO!!!

MORE COMEDY GOLD!!!

You can't make this shit up!!!

Freedom of the press isn’t about how many questions Trump answers.  It’s about which members of the press are allowed to ask which questions and what they get to say about the answers.

[Lord Dave]

In a comparison between answering questions from the press and not answering questions from the press, 9 out of 10 working dads agree that answering questions from the press exhibits more freedom of the press than does not answering questions from the press.

As a working Dad, I'm going to tell you... no.  As markjo put, freedom of the press means the ability for the press to ask questions freely and print material freely, not how many questions Trump answers.  If he answers a million questions about how great he is, how great his policy is, and all from just one network... that's not freedom of the press.

[garygreen]

The capitol police were welcoming the protestors into the building. From this, the average person may believe that they are allowed to enter.

several jan 6 defendants made such arguments in their defense. the average people who made up the juries that convicted them did not give a shit.

protip: even if a cop is like "hey i don't care if you break the law, in fact i will even help you break the law" then guess what — you are still breaking the law. that an individual cop is scared/corrupt/bored/whatever does not change the fact that you are breaking the law.

lol this is just like the "mah stolen election" nonsense y'all still peddle. these arguments were made. in court. and were rejected. by judges and juries alike. because they're just plain wrong on the facts and wrong on the law. stop swallowing everything you read on epcocktimes or whatever.

[TommyLee]

How humiliating would it be ti have Trump's vote for himself be disgarded?

It would be really embarrassing, especially since he talks a lot about fair elections.

[honk]

It's not that simple. The capitol police were welcoming the protestors into the building. From this, the average person may believe that they are allowed to enter. There were grandmothers caught up in the arrests, who say that they were just following the crowd and touring the building under the apparent approval and oversight of the capitol police.

Uh huh. So these harmless tourists just happened to be in Washington. They just happened to be near the Capitol. They just happened to be devoted Trump fans, like everyone else who had entered the Capitol. This just happened to be on the day that Congress was set to certify Trump's loss to Biden, the same day that Trump himself had focused on and asked his supporters to be in Washington for. This just happened to be directly following a speech from Trump in which he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol to protest Congress certifying his loss. Our luckless heroes had the bad fortune to have never checked the news or apparently even spoken to anyone who had checked the news all day. And when they entered the Capitol, they simply didn't notice the obvious signs of damage and disarray surrounding them, the fact that they were accompanied by an angry mob of Trump fans screaming about how they wanted to kill anyone standing in Trump's way, or the fact that there were no staff on this supposed tour collecting tickets, checking IDs, or guiding people through the building.

You would have to be extremely gullible to buy this story. But for the sake of argument, fine, let's accept that some of these protesters were hapless bystanders. You're still arguing from the perspective of trying to prove exceptions to the rule, rather than trying to overturn the principal facts of what we all saw that day. I don't need to thoroughly demonize each and every protester. What people are correctly focusing on as the worst elements of that day are the protesters battering down doors and smashing windows, forcing their way into the building, and screaming to kill politicians, all in an attempt to overturn an election and keep the president they liked in office. That's not going away no matter how many "exceptions" you can find about this one particular cop looking the other way or this one protester not really doing anything bad. Trump fed his supporters lies about how he had been cheated and was illegally being forced out of office. They believed him. He encouraged them to protest at the Capitol on the day of the certification of his loss. They did so, things got violent, and Trump's complacent reaction strongly indicates that he hoped that would happen. That's all that happened here. The only person who tricked or manipulated the protesters into doing what they did was Trump himself.

See: https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol-police-officers-suspended-after-pro-trump-riots-2021-1

This supports the idea that those cops who did look the other way or even helped the protesters out did so of their volition, not because of any conspiracy coming from the top to make Trump supporters look bad. If these cops had been following orders when they did what they did, do you think they'd be quietly accepting being made scapegoats like this? They'd go right to the media and blow the whistle on the whole thing. In fact, we'd definitely be seeing cops coming forward with the truth even if they weren't being blamed for what they did. If you were a cop and you realized that your higher-ups just used you as a prop in a dangerous, partisan political stunt and an elaborate hoax on the American people, wouldn't you want to blow the whistle? I certainly would.

[Action80]

Sadaam: "Let us not forget the FBI Trump supporters present at the Capitol on J6!"

MORE COMEDY GOLD!!!

LMMFAO!!!

You can't make this shit up!!!

[Action80]

the average people who made up the juries that convicted them did not give a shit.

How many were convicted by a jury, Copernicus?

[Action80]

Freedom of the press isn’t about how many questions Trump answers.  It’s about which members of the press are allowed to ask which questions and what they get to say about the answers.Every President must answer every question from every news agency ALL THE TIME!!!

In a comparison between answering questions from the press and not answering questions from the press, 9 out of 10 working dads agree that answering questions from the press exhibits more freedom of the press than does not answering questions from the press.

As a working Dad, I'm going to tell you... no.  As markjo put, freedom of the press means the ability for the press to ask questions freely and print material freely, not how many questions Trump answers.  If he answers a million questions about how great he is, how great his policy is, and all from just one network... that's not freedom of the press.I AGREE WITH SPACEMAN SPIFF!!! Trump has routinely answered questions from only ONE NEWS AGENCY!!!

FTFY BOTH!!!

NNTTM!!!

MORE COMEDY GOLD!!!

LMMFAO!!!

You can't make this shit up!!!

[Pete Svarrior]

A80, please tone it down a little. Try to respond to people's arguments, rather than just calling them ridiculous or putting words in their mouths. If you feel they don't deserve a more thoughtful response, you can always choose not to give them one

[Tom Bishop]

The capitol police were welcoming the protestors into the building. From this, the average person may believe that they are allowed to enter.

several jan 6 defendants made such arguments in their defense. the average people who made up the juries that convicted them did not give a shit.

Actually the first person who resisted the plea agreements and testified at a trial was acquitted with the argument that it was reasonable to believe that the officers allowed them into the building:

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/07/1091392445/jan-6-riot-acquittal

McFadden said it was reasonable for Martin to believe that outnumbered police officers allowed him and others to enter the Capitol through the Rotunda doors on Jan. 6, 2021. The judge also said Martin's actions were "about as minimal and non-serious" as anyone who was at the Capitol that day.

...The judge said Martin appeared to be a "silent observer of the actions of others." McFadden didn't find any evidence that Martin intended to disrupt Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's electoral victory.

Dozens of Capitol riot defendants have pleaded guilty and been sentenced, but Martin is the first to testify at a trial. His acquittal could embolden others to gamble on a bench trial, although McFadden so far is the only judge to preside over one and decide a case.

[AATW]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy7x382je03o

It’s good that Trump and Musk know what they’re doing. Oh

[Lord Dave]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy7x382je03o

It’s good that Trump and Musk know what they’re doing. Oh

So instead of having them return to working, the government is going to pay them to sit at home and do nothing....

[garygreen]

Actually the first person who resisted the plea agreements and testified at a trial was acquitted with the argument that it was reasonable to believe that the officers allowed them into the building:

you almost got that right, kinda.

he wasn't the first to "resist" a plea agreement, he was simply the first one to testify in his own defense. the same defense was used in two prior bench trials overseen by mcfadden, and he rejected it. those defendants were convicted. in martin's case, his acquittal is based on the fact that martin just sort of wandered around a bit and then left.

jan 6 defendants were overwhelmingly convicted by judges and juries alike. outside of like two edge cases like martin's, no one gave two shits about the "but the cops said i could totally do a sedition!!!!!!!" arguments. for what should be pretty obvious reasons.

[markjo]

Freedom of the press isn’t about how many questions Trump answers.  It’s about which members of the press are allowed to ask which questions and what they get to say about the answers.Every President must answer every question from every news agency ALL THE TIME!!!

*sigh* Again, freedom of the press has nothing to do with how many questions Trump does or doesn't answer.  If you don't like my definition, try this one:

Freedom of the press is the protected right to freely publish communications and expressions of opinions through various forms of media . Freedom of the press limits the government’s control or censorship over the media, except in the most severe national security risk potential. The right is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech , or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Trump's constant attacks on the media are not conducive to a free press;
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/15/trump-media-attacks
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/07/business/media/trump-musk-attack-journalists.html

[Tom Bishop]

Uh huh. So these harmless tourists just happened to be in Washington. They just happened to be near the Capitol. They just happened to be devoted Trump fans, like everyone else who had entered the Capitol. This just happened to be on the day that Congress was set to certify Trump's loss to Biden, the same day that Trump himself had focused on and asked his supporters to be in Washington for. This just happened to be directly following a speech from Trump in which he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol to protest Congress certifying his loss.

Correct. Trump told them to march peacefully, and that is what the majority of them did. It is a minority of people who acted with violence.

In this video from Daily Caller titled "Trump Supporters Stop Two Men From Smashing Windows At The Capitol" we see someone trying to break a window and people in the crowd screaming to "Get him out of here" and "We don't break s***". The man was pulled away. At the 36 second mark we see another man to break the window, and he was also pulled away, with the crowd screaming "Stop!" and "Whoever is breaking s*** is not with us" and "F*** Antifa" and "You don't have the right to use violence".

You would have to be extremely gullible to buy this story. But for the sake of argument, fine, let's accept that some of these protesters were hapless bystanders. You're still arguing from the perspective of trying to prove exceptions to the rule, rather than trying to overturn the principal facts of what we all saw that day.

It's not the exception to the rule, it is the rule. Like in the video above, in most of the videos it's only a few people doing something bad, while the vast majority are innocent bystanders. They are individuals who may disagree with the actions observed, hence the verbal disapproval.

[Action80]

All the media are entirely free to publish (pick your favorite form...radio, print, broadcast TV, internet forum, blog, Youtube video, etc.) whatever the living hell they want to about Trump: what he does, what he says, what he writes, what he eats, when he shits, how he shits, etc, and they have been 24/7, eight goddamn days a week.

You can read all about it, hear all about it, see all about it, everywhere and all the time.

Trump loves the fucking media attention, all the time, good or bad.

Posting that Trump is anti-press is just plain, pure, goddamn ridiculous, and an outright fucking lie.