Deep thoughts

He beats around the bush when saying those things.

Does he now? He could clarifyba million times a hundred different ways but yet liberals have this super power to read the peoples minds.

Funny thing because Proud Boys does the same thing as well as the rest of the white Supremacists. Leftists see the language for what it is, why it's dangerous, Right wing extremists are acting under what he says, Trump supporters are in denial of the effect his speechcraft (or lack thereof) is having on this country.

It's all good tho.

I'm not familiar with language of the proud boys. Leftists use dangerous language as well that cause riots in the street. Yeah, man. Both sides use language they shouldn't. Only thing that bugs me is the hypocrisy.

We all have seen the power of words now to light the fires of unrest. Going forward, it's going to be on all of us to stop the insanity.

Just minutes before the coup, Trump was speaking at a rally within walking distance of the Capitol, to a crowd of thousands of people. He said, and I quote: “After this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them—because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength.”

In response, people started yelling about storming the Capitol and thousands of them literally turned around and started marching down there thinking Trump was coming with them. This is the culmination of a months long campaign ramping up rhetoric about voter fraud and fighting and taking the country back. You want to continue to sit here and make all these disingenuous denials but Trump has been pouring gasoline on his base all 2020 and on Jan 6 he lit a match and threw it on them. That's what happened.

I mean isn't their entire movement based on decoding a secret message Trump supposedly sent when he said in a press conference while standing with military generals that "this was the calm before the storm" or some shit? Trump says proud boys stand back and stand by in the debates and their leader answers by saying "we're standing by" and starts selling merch showing Trump's catchphrase. Right now there are posts on Twitter trying to decode secret messages Trump is sending out about storming inauguration day.

What did he say that was seditious? Direct quote, please.

Why bother? You only accept a quote that says "Storm the capitol" when legal precedence states you don't need to state that via the Brandenburg test.

Again, you drooling imbecile, give me a direct quote. What did President Trump say that was seditious or inciting violence?

GIVE ME THE QUOTE OR SHUT YOUR DAMNED MOUTH.

F**k off, you're in no position to shut anybody's mouth.

Why bother? You only accept a quote that says "Storm the capitol" when legal precedence states you don't need to state that via the Brandenburg test.

Unless you're willing to hear it in earnest, it'd be a waste of time. As everything else has been with the majority of Trump supporters for the past five years.

Brandenburg? You think, in accordance with the Brandenburg decision, that Trump was inciting violence?

So tell me, are you grossly misinformed, or are you willfully lying?

https://infogalactic.com/info/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

No, President Trump's speech was not inciting violence, as understood by the courts.

I gotta find another venue to argue. The leftists here are too stupid to be worth bothering with.

This coming from the party of denial. Do I need to go down the lists of everything you've denied as a party so far?

I have an argument in favor of Brandenberg as a base for my argument. I also have pattern of behavior and precedence. Using Brandenberg alone is a fools errand. I'm not a lawyer, and I am smart enough to know for a fact, that you don't base your entire case on one line through one test.

And you say the left is too stupid to be worth bothering.* (or, too stupid with which to be bothered ) Give me a break.

Look, it appears to me you suffer from severe cognitive deficiencies. But if you want to prove to me that's not the case, here's your chance. Give me a quick summary, in your own words (not copied and pasted from Wikipedia or elsewhere), of the nature and conclusions of Brandenburg vs. Ohio.

Of course, if you actually did that, you'd see that it utterly demolishes your claim that, legally, President Trump was inciting violence.

Without quoting the primary source (which, mind you isn't wikipedia), that also makes for weak arguments. Not because of the content of the source, but because for legal definitions, you must copy word for word.
Yes, Brandenberg v Ohio did fail and Brandenberg was found not guilty. However, the test that is in place is still a used test and as such still a valid avenue to make a case. Simply citing BvO is not enough. "Legally, Trump was inciting violence?" I never made such claim.

Of CoUrSe If YoU aCtUaLlY rEaD tHaT oR uNdErStOoD hOw OuR lEgAl SyStEm WoRkS, yOu'D kNoW tHaT.

By the way, the preposition rule is stupid and simply does not match actual English usage.

Feel free to educate yourself further, you pedantic nitwit.

https://www.gingersoftware.com/content/particle-grammar/

When someone is so triggered, they have to attack a satire meme.

You're making it really hard not to clap back twice as hard. If you'd just not be a douche canoe, I wouldn't have to pwn you.