heybruce

I'm still waiting for someone to explain exactly how Ukraine failed to comply with the Minsk accords.

Right. If this war is still going on after 20 years I'm sure the western governments will re-consider their support.

The only way this war would have ended in a week is if Ukraine had collapsed completely and had a Russian puppet government installed. Is that the solution you prefer?

"Hostilities likely could have been avoided if Ukraine had fulfilled their commitments under the Minsk 2 agreement." Why don't you identify exactly what parts of the Minsk agreements that Ukraine failed to fulfill? "While Russia is the invader, Ukraine and the western powers also deserve a fair share of the blame for allowing escalation to an armed conflict, which the West is now prolonging by arming Ukraine." This armed conflict began with a multi-front full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia. How were Ukraine and the western powers supposed to de-escalate that?

Putin would certainly agree.

Failure to act, whether it's President George Bush freezing on September 11, 2001 when he was told the country was under attack or President Donald Trump waiting to see how the attack on the Capitol played out before making any action, should disqualify anyone from being President and Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces.

Right. It's all personal and has nothing to do with Trump's ignorance, incompetence, dishonesty, and blatant attempt to overturn a legitimate election attempt.

Why don't you verify your facts before using them in a post? It's not difficult. Four protesters died during the day of the attack, one shot by police while attempting to break into the House chambers, three of medical emergencies that could not be treated because of the mob. One police officer died two days later of injuries sustained during the attack. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/capitol-riot-deaths/

The storming of the Capitol to prevent the ceritification of a legitimate election result caused huge damage to the structure of democratic government. Whether that damage is irreparable depends on what is done to prevent such actions in the future.

I suppose if I wanted to play "whattabout" I could bring up the racially motivated mass shootings during the Trump years and the FBI stating right-wing extremists being the number one terrorist threat facing the nation. But I'll decline your wattaboutism.

The video shown was a compilation made from hundreds if not thousands of hours of video taken that day. I'm sure if there were a video, recording, or text record of Trump telling his followers "Back off! Don't attack the Capitol! Please leave, we don't want any violence!" made while the Capitol was under attack it would have been included. Of course if there were such evidence there would be no need for the investigation.

"President Trump ran the White House like a business." A businessman who revealed trade secrets to the enemy in his first days of office and who abandoned a campaign, the TPP, that would have hobbled our key competitor, China. "He is a master negotiator. The evidence of that was energy independence, equal trade agreements the list is long but rarely spoken about on main stream media outlets." A master negotiator? Where is our new and better Iran nuclear deal? Where has he out-negotiated China as promised? Why couldn't he get Congress to pass a much better healthcare bill than Obamacare as promised? What was negotiated under his term other than an update to NAFTA? The energy independence was in place before Trump took office. You have provided none of the trade agreements or other accomplishments from this long list that you referred to. I don't know where you get your "news" from, but it is obviously not keeping you well informed.

So no specific number of troops requested, just an order to fill a request from the DC mayor if he made one. Also, it wasn't "the left" that refused the hypothetical third party request, but Trump's Assisitant SecDef. In other words, the post "Also was it not Trump that asked for 20,000 troops for the day and the left turned the troops down ?" was completely wrong.

"Also was it not Trump that asked for 20,000 troops for the day and the left turned the troops down ?" Got any sources to back that claim up? Was it something you heard on Tucker Carlson?

You open up with "I read somewhere 6 people died at the hands of the police that day. Anybody know their names? " then you treat your vague recollection as a fact. Why don't you verify your facts before using them in a post? It's not difficult. Four protesters died during the day of the attack, one shot by police while attempting to break into the House chambers, three of medical emergencies that could not be treated because of the mob. One police officer died two days later of injuries sustained during the attack. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/capitol-riot-deaths/

Rudy is the new-school Republican: No firm beliefs, no integrity, totally opportunistic and gives the US public, or at least the Trump base, no credit for intelligence.

She is an old-school Republican. I disagree with her on many issues, but I respect her integrity and trust her not to ruin the country.

I guess this means there will be no more soapies in Bangkok. ????

January 6 was a violent attack on the Capitol staged with the intent of preventing the legal certification of the election. It was no more a protest than a bank robbery is some people protesting about being broke.

Something had better happen or we can never again assume a peaceful transition of power following an election.

You should have stopped at your first sentence: "An "insurrection" is a violent rally, protest, or action whose intent is to affect some kind of change in the law/government." The January 6 mob made a violent attempt to prevent the legal certification of the election of Joe Biden, which was necessary for the peaceful transfer of power from one President to the newly elected President. This legal, peaceful transfer of power is essential for democracy to work. Attempting to prevent the legal transfer of power is a blatant attempt at affecting "some kind of change in the law/government". By your own definition, President Trump and the mob he urged to march to the Capital and fight are guilty of insurrection.

"Ivanka Trump, the daughter of former President Donald Trump and a senior adviser in his administration, told the Jan. 6 select committee that she “accepted” former Attorney General William Barr’s assessment that there was no evidence of sufficient fraud in the 2020 election that could have overturned the results." https://www.yahoo.com/news/ivanka-trump-told-jan-6-committee-that-she-accepted-her-father-lost-election-011357007.html Oh....Daddy won't be happy with his little girl.

Just to be clear, are you ok with me calling the countries "corrupt states noted for stifling their press, leaving people easy prey to Russian propaganda promoted on social media."? You only question the rogue part of my post, is that it? ????

Do you understand that there is a difference between expressing an opinion and telling a mob to march on the Capital and fight? From your first source: "During a campaign event in New Hampshire, former Vice President Joe Biden said he agreed with a woman who said that President Donald Trump is an "illegitimate president in my mind."" From your second source: "“No, it doesn’t kill me because he knows he’s an illegitimate president,” she said. “I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.”" In neither instance did Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton advocate the violent overthrow of the government. What you describe as a "soft insurrection" is nonsense. Impeachments following established Constitutional guidelines, protests over police brutality, and a critical press do not constitute any form of insurrection, they show the system is working as intended.

I read your posts. I summarized the views you expressed. I asked you if the summary was off. Electing someone who has shown contempt for the democratic process and a willingness to abuse power and spark an insurrection to any office would be incredibly damaging to the US. I haven't watched the Johnny Depp court case. It doesn't interest me. I don't know why so many people waste time on it.