Traitor Watch - The 45 & 47 Thread
- Thread starter Wheelimus
- Start date
I mean, the storming of the Bastille (A prison renowned for issuing royal indictments which could not be appealed and gave no reason for imprisonment, meaning the prisoners housed there had zero idea what they were even being charged with) was an important historical landmark within France and for Feudalism in general (As it really is considered the death blow to the practice).
Yup, the storming of the Bastille was symbolic. The people overthrew of the monarchy. Sure, in a couple of year a fanatical wing took over the government and instituted the terror, within two decades, France was ruled by a dictator, but the symbol remains. I don't know enough of the history of France to say, but I'd imagine Charles de Gualle probably heavily used the symbolism of Bastille during the Nazi occupation of France to help keep the French Resistance motivated.
Not going to lie, I have a hard time believing he legit assaulted the head of the Secret Service when they refused to take him to the Capitol. Mostly because Donald J. Trump is an abject coward.
Also having a hard time understanding if the drivers refused due to the violence at the Capitol, why the President wasn't evacuated to a safe site as (I'd assume) SOP demanded? Instead they just took him back to the White House while a riotous mob was desecrating the halls of Congress.
The story just isn't jiving in my brain. Not the idea he wasn't taken to a secure location (Because we demonstrably know he was not), but the idea he demanded and assaulted someone trying to get to the Capitol. Honestly it reads more like someone trying to hype his image up. As the Conquering Hero Denied.
Also having a hard time understanding if the drivers refused due to the violence at the Capitol, why the President wasn't evacuated to a safe site as (I'd assume) SOP demanded? Instead they just took him back to the White House while a riotous mob was desecrating the halls of Congress.
The story just isn't jiving in my brain. Not the idea he wasn't taken to a secure location (Because we demonstrably know he was not), but the idea he demanded and assaulted someone trying to get to the Capitol. Honestly it reads more like someone trying to hype his image up. As the Conquering Hero Denied.
There's assault, and there's assault. I agree with the idea that 45 is a coward, but he's also known to have a temper. After all, he didn't actually punch the Secret Service guy, or actually wring his neck. He just made clear he wanted to, in a moment of temper.
Too bad. If they'd let him go, we'd have actual footage of him directly involved in the attack. Maybe then somebody would finally throw the fucker behind bars.
Someone get the Finding Bigfoot people in here and tell me what the hell this footage is supposed to show.
Also, remember when somebody linked to that one webpage listing off all the evidence for Trump being the Antichrist? I try not to be superstitious about this sort of thing, but I have to admit my heart did a weird maneuver when they referred to Trump's SUV as "the Beast". Does anyone know if that's a standard, flexible designation like "Air Force One" where it just means "whatever vehicle the President is in at the moment", or if it referred to that SUV in particular?
I believe the term predates Trump It's simply a class of custom armored SUVs the secret service uses to carry the President and important foreign dignitaries. It's not an official name for the vehicle, more of a nickname. Kinda like the A-10 Thunderbolt Ii being referred to as the warthog.
Also being president and thinking that that makes him invincible may have given him the stones to put his hands on someone that would cripple him for doing that in any other circumstance.
IIRC it actually started with Obama; there was a whole thing when his motorcade got upgraded early in his presidency.
That was quick!
"But for me, it was Tuesday." Literally and figuratively, that's what yesterday felt like.
In 2016, this would've felt like the most explosive moment in American history since Watergate. But in 2022, it's hardly surprising, even expected. That's how low we've sunk.
If this is the most shocking revelation the committee has planned for us, then it will amount to nothing. Because it means they think we still live in a country guided by an objective standard of behavior, of propriety and good character, and people who supported Trump were blinding themselves to his true nature. The people who support Trump now will support him even more after this, because they support the idea of the rioting on January 6th. They downplay it and "whatabout--" it in the media, but ultimately they're in favor of a non-peaceful transfer of power as long as it subjectively benefits them.
If the committee is intent on building a case for criminal charges against Trump, good -- but if their plan is still to change minds and shock the conscience of Trump supporters (the die-hards, the yes-men, or the leeches)...then they are dangerously missing the point. Proving Trump threatened our institutions of government only matters if people value our institutions more than winning. And there's very little evidence of that in this country anymore.
In 2016, this would've felt like the most explosive moment in American history since Watergate. But in 2022, it's hardly surprising, even expected. That's how low we've sunk.
If this is the most shocking revelation the committee has planned for us, then it will amount to nothing. Because it means they think we still live in a country guided by an objective standard of behavior, of propriety and good character, and people who supported Trump were blinding themselves to his true nature. The people who support Trump now will support him even more after this, because they support the idea of the rioting on January 6th. They downplay it and "whatabout--" it in the media, but ultimately they're in favor of a non-peaceful transfer of power as long as it subjectively benefits them.
If the committee is intent on building a case for criminal charges against Trump, good -- but if their plan is still to change minds and shock the conscience of Trump supporters (the die-hards, the yes-men, or the leeches)...then they are dangerously missing the point. Proving Trump threatened our institutions of government only matters if people value our institutions more than winning. And there's very little evidence of that in this country anymore.
I swear it was an informal term even before Obama. I remember History Channel doing a special on Air Force One and the Presidential Motorcade early on during Dubya's Presidency and I feel like it was referred to as "The Beast" there.
I mean... as a colloquialism from a mechanic... the thing is a beast. Upgraded everything, as much armor as a tank and counter measures like a fighter jet. And that's just the unclassified jive.
These two goals are by no means mutually exclusive. I've seen commentary more than once that suggests that even if the former (building a case for criminal charges) is successful, it would ultimately mean little to nothing if no minds are changed. Folks who support Trump, or who would take his place, need to know that these things matter. If for no other reason than that there are consequences.
But, yes, more than anything else, there need to be consequences.