Is this a real Trump quote?

[bluedog225]

Curious if this is a real Trump quote before the attack on the Capitol. I have not heard it mentioned. Seems like it would be relevant to a charge of incitement.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.

Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trum...ry?id=75110558

[Paul Pless]

eh? that you sleek?

[gypsie]

Sounds too coherant.

[WX]

Trump's speech.
https://youtu.be/c8ORZ_iwO3w

[Canoeyawl]

He also said this!

"I am honest, and I just again, I want to thank you"

[David G]

Sounds a lot like something he said AFTER the mob had invaded the Capitol.

Here's what he said before --

https://reason.com/2021/01/06/here-i...d-the-capitol/

[Jimmy W]

[C. Ross]

You’ve got the whole transcript.

He said a lot of other inflammatory things too. You might have read them.

And this, of course.

I had to beat Stacey Abrams and I had to beat Oprah, used to be a friend of mine. You know, I was on her last show, her last week. She picked the five outstanding people. I don't think she thinks that anymore.

Once I ran for president, I didn't notice too many calls coming in from Oprah. Believe it or not, she used to like me. But, I was one of the five outstanding people and I had to campaign against Michelle Obama and Barack Hussein Obama, against Stacey.

[Jimmy W]

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts...ript-january-6

18:16

Hunt around, you can probably find more to take out of context.

[leikec]

"We love you, you're very special." -- Donald Trump, in a message directed to the rioters and terrorists who were storming the Capitol as he was speaking.

Own it, Tom.

Jeff C

[icyb]

I'm sorry I couldn't read it all you understand. So I speed read it looking for the word fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight fight .I thought CNN was exaggerating in there video they weren't. The man is insane.

[RFNK]

You men should be more careful! Listening to Trump causes brain damage! Reading actual transcripts is likely to be even more serious - something tomy, like the effects of country music in Mars Attacks

[Keith Wilson]

Short answer, yes. By 'stand strong for integrity of our elections.' he means 'throw out the results of the election so I stay president'.

[C. Ross]

To the original post, do you see that quote as exculpatory?

Is it to be understood as something that a normal President would say?

If that’s the best defense Trump has, he’s in deep trouble.

[Hugh Conway]

Dig your hole deeper Trump trash.

[oznabrag]

You’ve got the whole transcript.

He said a lot of other inflammatory things too. You might have read them.

And this, of course.

I had to beat Stacey Abrams and I had to beat Oprah, used to be a friend of mine. You know, I was on her last show, her last week. She picked the five outstanding people. I don't think she thinks that anymore.

Thanks for that little tidbit of schadenfreude.

The fact that Abrams is in his map is delicious.

He probably has nightmares about her.

I hope so.

[L.W. Baxter]

To the original post, do you see that quote as exculpatory?

Is it to be understood as something that a normal President would say?

If that’s the best defense Trump has, he’s in deep trouble.

amen and awomen. the goalposts of acceptable behavior have been moved out of the stadium.

[bluedog225]

Yeah, our public officials need to be careful about what they say. If they bring a knife, we bring a gun. Is such a man fit for public office?

Calling for peaceful protests is directly contradictory to claims of incitement to violence. So yes, it matters.

As David’s article correctly pointed out, the responsibility for violence lies with those who commit violent acts.

[David G]

Yeah, our public officials need to be careful what they say. If they bring a knife, we bring a gun. Is such a man fit for public office?

Calling for peaceful protests is directly contradictory to claims of incitement to violence. So yes, it matters.

As David’s article correctly pointed out, the responsibility for violence lies with those who commit violent acts.

I don't think you read the article I provided fully or correctly. It does not say that responsibility for violence lies SOLELY with those who personally commit it. It also lies with those who incite it.

[Keith Wilson]

As David’s article correctly pointed out, the responsibility for violence lies with those who commit violent acts.

This is true. Some of it also lies with those who provide their reasons. Ever since the election, Mr Trump has been lying continuously about how it was fraudulent, and how he actually won in a landslide - without the slightest shred of evidence, but that never stopped him before. He's pretty good at maintaining plausible deniability, but when you've spent months convincing your followers that a terrible crime has been perpetrated on American democracy, and stirring them up with thinly-veiled incitements to violence, what the hell do you expect?

[Hugh Conway]

This is true. Some of it also lies with those who provide their reasons. Ever since the election, Mr Trump has been lying continuously about how it was fraudulent, and how he actually won in a landslide - without the slightest shred of evidence, but that never stopped him before. He's pretty good at maintaining plausible deniability, but when you've spent months convincing your followers that a terrible crime has been perpetrated on American democracy, and stirring them up with thinly-veiled incitements to violence, what the hell do you expect?

he expected success, not failure.

[bluedog225]

Without a shred of evidence? Do you know what evidence is? Are you claiming that there is no evidence of fraud? None. Not a shred. And a distraction from the subject of incitement.

Calling for peaceful protest is not incitement to violence. Full stop.

[Hugh Conway]

Without a shred of evidence? Do you know what evidence is? Are you claiming that there is no evidence of fraud? None. Not a shred. And a distraction from the subject of incitement.

Calling for peaceful protest is not incitement to violence. Full stop.

lemme guess Russia today gave you these talking points? Zero hedge? Another brain rotting conspiracy mongering “news” site looking to destroy the us?

Trump cheered this. Don’t be a fool or a tool. And realize where you are siding. You are siding with sedition, against the us and the constitution.

[David G]

Tom - are you seriously suggesting that tRump did NOT incite that incident?

[Hugh Conway]

Of course the objections of liberals only wed our independent critical thinking conservatives tighter to their narrative.

[bluedog225]

To be clear, calling for peaceful protest is not incitement to violence.

For that matter, saying there was election fraud is not incitement to violence.

It’s just not.

He needs to go, sure. And good. But laws matter, words matter, and truth matters.

We are all diminished if we misapply concepts, and the law.

The people who committed violent acts, charge them. In fact, charge them using the felony murder rule.

[Old Dryfoot]

Without a shred of evidence? Do you know what evidence is? Are you claiming that there is no evidence of fraud? None. Not a shred. And a distraction from the subject of incitement.

Calling for peaceful protest is not incitement to violence. Full stop.

Show us the evidence!
No fooking claims of, no bullsh*t, hard fooking evidence.

[Old Dryfoot]

. . .truth matters.

You have some nerve.

[bluedog225]

Do I? If you called for a peaceful protest and were charged with incitement of violence, would you feel that was appropriate?

[bluedog225]

You haven't listened to his entire speech, have you?

Listen to his entire speech, knowing that he was gleeful watching the takeover unfold.

Can you really believe that he was not told what elements were traveling to Washington that day?

Which words of the speech override his call for peaceful protest?

Watching with whatever emotion cannot form the basis for incitement.

I don’t know what he was told. Neither do you.

[oznabrag]

Do I? If you called for a peaceful protest and were charged with incitement of violence, would you feel that was appropriate?

You haven't listened to his entire speech, have you?

Dear God.

[Keith Wilson]

Right. He called for 'peaceful protest' (wink, nod). As I said, he's pretty good at preserving deniability. The whole reason those folks stormed the capitol is that Trump lied to them for months about the election, Trump called for the rally on the 6th, Trump did everything short of saying 'storm the capital and hang Mike Pence'. If you honestly believe that his intent was for 'peaceful protest', I have this bridge you might be interested in purchasing . . .

[Hugh Conway]

I don’t think he honestly believes in any of this. But he’s not going to admit he’s wrong.

[Kevin T]

Without a shred of evidence? Do you know what evidence is? Are you claiming that there is no evidence of fraud? None. Not a shred. And a distraction from the subject of incitement.

Calling for peaceful protest is not incitement to violence. Full stop.

I don't think that anyone "here" is saying that there was no evidence of fraud. However, 60 plus federal and district court judges (many Trump appointees, not that it should matter who appointed them) said there was no fraud and threw out all the cases save for 1 which I think that was upheld on some small procedural issue.

Additionally after multiple recounts in at least 6 states and certification by all 50 Secretary's of State that the election was complete and Electors were officially certified, claims of fraud are an outright lie and Ivy league educated attorneys like Cruz and Hawley knew as much but chose to lie in furtherance of their own craven ambitions.

And lastly, no one at the 1/6/21 *rump rally was claiming for peaceful protest. Guilliani's "trial by combat", *rump's "march up to that Capitol and fight for your rights", Don Jr's "we're coming for you and we'll be in your backyard."

[Kevin T]

Do I? If you called for a peaceful protest and were charged with incitement of violence, would you feel that was appropriate?

What part of "Come to DC on January 6, it's going to be wild" is a call for peaceful protest?

And why would anyone need to come to DC if 50 states and 60 courts certified the election? The election and the rightful winner had already been established. The Mango Mussolini knew exactly what he was doing by scheduling such a rally on what is, up until last Wednesday, usually nothing more than a rote ceremonial task in the Congress.

Violence was the objective and 'Murder was the case.'