To start things off, I want to remind people that I'm NOT a Trump supporter any more than I am a Biden supporter.
With that in mind, my frustration with the true enemy, the incompetence of mainstream media, grows by the day.
As pretty much the whole world knows, some Trumpers stormed a government building, a woman got shot, died, and so forth.
In response, the only narrative I can find is that Trump should be immediately removed from office, impeached, arrested for high treason.
But I don't see the connection. Where is it?
One person replied to me saying he directly told the protestors to storm the capitol building. This would be bad, if I could find it. Unfortunately, this is where Google is extremely useless. Whenever a large news event happens, any attempt at searching for anything remotely related becomes impossible. When I searched whether or not it's legal for a president to call for protests, I just get general news and live footage.
So far, I have not found any such quote where he directly tells people to storm the government building.
What I DID find, however, were repeated calls to be peaceful, no violence, and go home 'with peace and love', Law & Order.
So, the president condemns the violence, therefore he has committed high treason and should be impeached and removed immediately?
I mean, I could be a misunderstanding, even lawyers and officials are following this narrative. But it sounds like blind panic to me.
Can a president be directly blamed for his followers acting out?
Sure, he has fed them lies and rallied them up, but he has also so far respected the constitution and I don't see any reason to suspect he wouldn't leave office as intended on the due day. Him being suspicious, skeptical and having tantrums about it, is not illegal in a country where free speech is the primary narrative.
The only crime of speech is to incite violence. Where has he incited violence? I can't find it.
I know it seems super cringey to refer to Martin Luther King Jr when talking about Trump and his supporters, but I think in this case it's quite relevant:
But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity
King here talks of the unheard. In his case, in his generation, the unheard were black people, with the white people being mostly willfully ignorant. I agree with King entirely here. Riots don't just happen because there are a bunch of thugs who want to hurt people.
Every riot has a reason, whether you agree with it or not. I disagree strongly with the BLM riots, for example, but I understand that they believe they are being unheard. I don't actually think this is true, given that literally the largest companies in the world are backing them, mayors across the world are launching cringey fireworks of BLM fists in support, and so on. Hardly seems unheard to me.
But flip to the white folk of MAGA people - from what I can find, virtually NO claims of fraud have actually gone to court. It could be the case that every claim is total nonsense. In the leaked audio that has been yet another call to impeach trump, his side literally says, if the votes are correct and legit, then that's fine - but how can we know when you refuse to show us the data?'
They have openly stated there and then that they are open to the idea that the claims are wrong, but they cannot know. Close to 50% of all Americans polled said they believe the election was stolen - including a minority of democrats. That's a lot of people.
So you'd think it makes sense that such a huge conversation would be heard in court. But nope. Most, if not all, were thrown out 'on procedural grounds'. That's not to say they lacked evidence or was based on disinformation or anything else. It was things like 'your proposal wasn't long enough' or 'you did it too slowly' or 'this didn't happen in your state so it's none of your business'.
So now the people may never know the outcome for sure - they have become unheard in this situation. Trump condemns the violence, while at the same time condemns the intolerable conditions in today's society - in the context of voter fraud and suppression of court action.
And so when the unheard voices riot, shoot, damage, and scare, are we to condemn Trump as if he was a literal leader on the front line giving them directions? Do we, therefore, ban all religions for having followings, some of which turn violent and genocidal?
Do we arrest Biden because his supporters in BLM violently protested for years, and in the case of Portland, 100 straight days. Others committing actual treason by creating illegal autonomous zones designed to secede from the country as their own state, where deadly violence has lead to dozens and dozens of murders? I mean, Biden condemned their violence, so is he responsible and should be impeached as soon as he takes office?
I know my tone is one-sided, but my intention here is a legitimate question. If Trump is found to directly incite violence somewhere, that changes everything, and he should probably be removed, though I don't see really what difference it makes with just 12 days left.
So, can somebody show me this evidence? I mean, if lawyers and government officials agree on this, there must be some kind of evidence right?