Gransnet forums

News & politics

The Capitol Riots, how on earth did they happen?

(54 Posts)
nanna8 Wed 10-Feb-21 22:07:09

I still don’t get how those rioters were able to break into the Capitol building in one of the most security sensitive countries in the world. This morning they were showing some of those people as part of the impeachment trial. The US was on a knife edge at that time with Dodgy Donald in the background.

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 13:46:20

Difficult to prove. I’m thinking of Thomas a Beckett and King Henry saying “ Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” Henry didn’t actually want Beckett killed but his knights took him literally. True Henry was contrite afterwards. I can see Trump’s defence using this argument and I don’t think they will find 17 Republicans to join the Democrats so the impeachment will fail. Personally I wouldn’t have impeached him but just sent him off to obscurity. It’s arguable you can’t impeach someone who is no longer president as well.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 14:07:18

25Avalon

Difficult to prove. I’m thinking of Thomas a Beckett and King Henry saying “ Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” Henry didn’t actually want Beckett killed but his knights took him literally. True Henry was contrite afterwards. I can see Trump’s defence using this argument and I don’t think they will find 17 Republicans to join the Democrats so the impeachment will fail. Personally I wouldn’t have impeached him but just sent him off to obscurity. It’s arguable you can’t impeach someone who is no longer president as well.

Those voting not to convict will not do so because of the case not being proved - but to save their own political skins and/ or because they are frightened for their own safety. What message would sending him off into obscurity ( as if) send?Imo that’s a cowardly way of behaving. And yet again he has been impeached - the Senate vote is not on impeachment. It’s on incitement to insurrection. And the argument about his no longer being a president has already been lost. He was President when he committed the alleged behaviour. I guess if he was convicted in the Senate then maybe that point could have been appealed to the Supreme Court but it will not happen anyway.

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 14:12:38

Suziewoozie My thinking was that Trump thrives on publicity and denying him any publicity would be one of the worse things you could do to him and he would end up in obscurity which he would hate. The danger I suppose is that he has too many supporters who won’t accept that.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 14:16:05

25Avalon

Suziewoozie My thinking was that Trump thrives on publicity and denying him any publicity would be one of the worse things you could do to him and he would end up in obscurity which he would hate. The danger I suppose is that he has too many supporters who won’t accept that.

But because people crave publicity isn’t a good reason not to give it to them. That’s letting them call the shots and ignores the importance of the message sent both inside and outside the US that actions have consequences. Terrorists crave publicity - so would you argue they should never be put on trial?

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 16:50:44

So suziewoozie are you saying Trump is a terrorist? The problem with hearings held in the senate is that lies are allowed I believe unlike a court of law so idk how you get to the truth.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 17:06:49

25Avalon

So suziewoozie are you saying Trump is a terrorist? The problem with hearings held in the senate is that lies are allowed I believe unlike a court of law so idk how you get to the truth.

No - but maybe? The point I was making is that you don’t not prosecute someone in order to deny them the publicity they crave.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 17:07:29

People lie in court as well

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 17:56:51

True but there is a comeback in court, where there is none in the senate and you can’t commit perjury or so is my understanding.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 18:00:22

25Avalon

True but there is a comeback in court, where there is none in the senate and you can’t commit perjury or so is my understanding.

I think it’s because what they say in Congress is privileged - exactly the same as our H of P. But the real issue is what evidence is there in addition to witness evidence? In this case the videos say it all.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 18:43:29

If they don’t find the actions by Trump guilty of inciting insurrection, they will get exactly what they deserve.

This will only be the beginning. The future for America will be very insecure.

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 18:54:03

Not so sure he did incite insurrection- it’s not absolutely clear cut. What I wonder is how much he was responsible for the security staff standing back. Initially there didn’t seem much defence - almost as if the doors were open to let the rioters in.

WW010 Thu 11-Feb-21 19:00:05

It disgusts me that politicians will vote (or not) against what is right just to save their seats. We should be able to trust our representatives have integrity when in public office. Do they not swear to that? (I don’t know the answer btw). If they don’t they should and should then be held accountable if they break that oath. This applies to both the US and the UK. Our politicians lie as easily as breathing.

Elegran Thu 11-Feb-21 19:01:56

MaizieD Jane43 That tweet by Miller. is the subject of an article in the website Snopes. It is interesting to read what they say about it. Near the end of it they say:-

"To recap our analysis so far, the claim stemmed, in part, from reporting by Broadwater, a New York Times journalist, who said Miller issued a memo that prohibited DCNG from using weapons during the upcoming pro-Trump events without his approval first.

While no evidence exists to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the document displayed in the tweet, we sought to independently verify its authenticity. Citing the Freedom of Information Act, Snopes on Feb. 3 submitted a request for a copy of the Jan. 4 record from record-keeping centers within the National Guard and Department of Defense. The agencies have not yet fulfilled that request.
www.snopes.com/fact-check/national-guard-capitol-riot/

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 19:34:38

25Avalon

Not so sure he did incite insurrection- it’s not absolutely clear cut. What I wonder is how much he was responsible for the security staff standing back. Initially there didn’t seem much defence - almost as if the doors were open to let the rioters in.

Have you been watching the Senate and the trial.?

Imo there is no doubt that Trump incited insurrection.

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 19:37:57

WWM2 yes I have watched but I’m not absolutely convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 19:39:17

So what would convince you?

25Avalon Thu 11-Feb-21 19:42:50

It’s open to doubt. He didn’t actually say go and break into the Whitehouse.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 19:44:55

I am satisfied that he began to court the participants from at least the beginning of last May, and we know that he failed to criticise the violence at Charlottesville and positively encouraged the Michigan violence, which to my mind was a rehearsal or Jan 6th.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 19:54:16

Trump brought the mob to Washington. His speech was inflammatory and he sent them to the Capitol with words like “fight like hell”.

They would not have turned up if they had not been directed to do so by Trump.

Trump knew what sort of people they are and he knew the risk of inciting such a mob. They have testified that they were doing what Trump had told them to do and this is not over, that this is just the beginning. If this is not something that can possibly be overlooked for the future of America.

He has never shown any remorse whatsoever, in fact he told the mob of white supremacist, Nazis and KKK that “we love you” and “remember this day”

Chewbacca Thu 11-Feb-21 19:55:32

It’s open to doubt. He didn’t actually say go and break into the Whitehouse. shock

Trump incited the mob to violence in his "Save America March" on January 6th. There is no doubt what his intentions were in the 2 weeks leading up to that day or on the day itself.

I'm shocked at your stance 25Avalon.

Casdon Thu 11-Feb-21 20:02:37

It was the Capitol building 25Avalon, not the White House - different buildings, not sure how closely you watched it?

Katie59 Thu 11-Feb-21 20:03:19

I don’t gamble but I would bet that Trump is not adopted as a Republican candidate at the next election. Maybe he has ambitions to starting his own independant party although he’s is going to have enough problems avoiding bankruptcy.

suziewoozie Thu 11-Feb-21 20:14:10

25Avalon

WWM2 yes I have watched but I’m not absolutely convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The phrase you are looking for is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ not ‘shadow’.

Whitewavemark2 Thu 11-Feb-21 20:26:42

What I am in admiration of, is, that this impeachment can take place at all with the arguments laid out and debated for the whole population to see and decide upon.

Western democracy is such a sacred thing, and should be defended with all our strength.

Jane43 Thu 11-Feb-21 21:09:56

25Avalon

It’s open to doubt. He didn’t actually say go and break into the Whitehouse.

They broke into The Capitol Building not The White House. The rally was outside the White House and Trump told them they were going to go down Pennsylvania Avenue to The Capitol and he would go with them but he didn't, he went back into The White House and watched Live tv.