Isn't impeaching Trump where the process won't be complete until after he leaves office just sour grapes from a vengeful woman?

Trump is more than a lame duck, he is a dead duck

https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.go6UTCF0nK27K9oZ8NP-JwHaE8?w=219&h=180&c=7&o=5&dpr=1.5&pid=1.7

Isn't impeaching Trump where the process won't be complete until after he leaves office just sour grapes from a vengeful woman?Trump is more than a lame duck, he is a dead duck

After January 20, as part of the impeachment process, the Senate can vote to prevent Trump from ever holding federal office again, thereby stopping any run for president in 2024. The Senate will then have a majority.

Yes that was apparent to me, but as I said a vengeful act, given his age and record of poor behaviour. In the light of day Trump is likely to think better of it anyway, he can write another book, gain fees from endorsement and the lecture circuit telling it the way he sees it and an encore performance seems unlikely

It's not just sour grapes, but accountability for his continuing CRIMINAL behavior while in office, and not just from one PO'd woman either. He ain't above the law despite the popular right wing looney belief.

Yes that was apparent to me,

If it was apparent to you, why did you omit it and call it just sour grapes? Plus what Tal said.

what are you? the post police? the point of discussion is to mull over various aspects

what are you? the post police?
You called ;)

You called ;)

are you and athos the same? while I have your attention, why do I have to keep logging in, the "remember me" doesn't work in PC mode

are you and athos the same? Nope

while I have your attention, why do I have to keep logging in, the "remember me" doesn't work in PC mode
Clear cache and try again.

what are you? the post police? the point of discussion is to mull over various aspects

Is that what you call it? "Mulling over various aspects"? Actually it's called making error-filled posts which you are famous for. After many corrections you may learn something and they will help you find the truth of things.

Have you been told today? consider yourself told!

Told what? Ranted at is becoming the new conservative discussion style. Factless and irrelevant.

Told what? Ranted at is becoming the new conservative discussion style. Factless and irrelevant.

That was meant for Athos but to enlighten the unenlightened, we use that when we don't want to stoop to the lower levels of discourse, usually you only get told one thing or maybe two

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Trump


Doesn't sound like incitement to me .

This does .....

"Make the phone calls, send the emails, show up," "You know, there needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives." Ayanna Pressly Rep . Mass.

When Pelosi calls Federal agents defending government court houses in Portland "storm troopers " she is inciting by supporting the Antifa terrorists .
“Trump & his stormtroopers must be stopped.” Nancy Pelosi

This is what happened in Portland and continues to happen:

Bricks, frozen water bottles, mortars, marbles, ball bearings are fired at and thrown at the Portland police.

Police are blinded with laser lights ,car tires are slashed .
Arson to the Federal court house and to police precincts ,private homes, cars and businesses . Reporters are assaulted ;and individuals assaulted .

The Democrats and the left support the terrorism of Antifa.

I condemn the attack on the Capitol and our law makers .

If all Trump supporters are to be painted with a broad brush because the acts of a few then in fairness so should all the left who has openly supported the acts of Antifa .

Clete ,to your question ....I'm not sure an impeachment conviction after a President leaves office is constitutional . Art 2 Sec 4
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Nothing in the text says anything about after a President leaves office . So if they go through with the plan to impeach but not convict before Jan 20 then I'm sure it would go to SCOTUS for adjudication.

Also conviction alone would not ban Trump from running for office again . The Senate would have to hold a separate vote on that measure Not that it matters . His support has been sufficiently damaged since the elections . I doubt that he could rebuild it .

we use that when we don't want to stoop to the lower levels of discourse, usually you only get told one thing or maybe two

In other words, cast aspersions when you are not capable of answering or discussing the subject. You have now failed/erred when discussing socialism, AGW, and American politics. Time for you to meditate in your hermitage down there.

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Trump

Doesn't sound like incitement to me .

That's because you left out what Trump ACTUALLY did.


This does .....

Predictably, you reacted EXACTLY as Trump did this morning on his first trip outside since January 6 hiding in the West Wing where he gleefully watched his rioters on television for hours on end.

Trump immediately deflected from the Capitol riots by bringing up Portland - EXACTLY as you did!!


I condemn the attack on the Capitol and our law makers

You're not fooling anybody, tomder. If you truly condemned the attack, you would equally condemn Trump for inciting the riots. FACTS, tomder, FACTS. Don't leave home without them.

Watching the riots on TV like the rest of the nation didn't lead to any rescue actions by the dufus as the lawmakers including Pence were hunkered down calling for help. The conservative and the elected repub reaction to this event defies logic which is why the cult of the dufus continues.

Let's have that impeachment vote. To not would be just as looney!

In other words, cast aspersions when you are not capable of answering or discussing the subject. You have now failed/erred when discussing socialism, AGW, and American politics. Time for you to meditate in your hermitage down there.

I did not "cast aspersions" or anything else for that matter. I was direct but you don't understand like so much of your discourse. I have an opinion, whether you value it or not, it is an opinion but you feel you must correct any opinion that doesn't accord with your own. As I said before, consider yourself told

If all Trump supporters are to be painted with a broad brush because the acts of a few then in fairness so should all the left who has openly supported the acts of Antifa .Outstanding post, as usual.


In other words, cast aspersions when you are not capable of answering or discussing the subjectPot...kettle...again.

I have an opinion, whether you value it or not,

I don't value an opinion that goes against the facts or reality.


you feel you must correct any opinion that doesn't accord with your own.

I correct only those opinions that don't accord with reality - the FACTS! It's not a hard concept to understand.


As I said before, consider yourself told

Yes, I saw that. I don't know what it means. Unlike you, I don't obsess over Australian-ese the way you obsess over America. If you translate it into American, I'll consider it.

I don't value an opinion that goes against the facts or reality.



I correct only those opinions that don't accord with reality - the FACTS! It's not a hard concept to understand.



Yes, I saw that. I don't know what it means. Unlike you, I don't obsess over Australian-ese the way you obsess over America. If you translate it into American, I'll consider it.

{expletive off} I'm trying to be polite for the benefit of others. I try not to obsess over americans but they take up space and inject themselves. I don't like the culture, I don't like the foreign policy, I don't like loud mouthed braggarts, I hear the scenery is nice

Let's have that impeachment vote. To not would be just as looney!

I have no doubt Madam Mim will have her vote and the House will impeach again. I was speaking of the blatantly political games playing by the Schmuckster and Quid who plan to delay the trial until after the first 100 days of the reign of the Quid .


It will of course be one of those banana republic show trials the Dems are so good at conducting . It will keep those fund raising requests littering my phone ;as has happened by both sides since the election . Good thing I can block addresses . I must have blocked a hundred since the election .

The left is a joke . They are not even calling it inciting a riot (which Trump did not do . ) They are absurdly calling it inciting insurrection

Either way the standard for incitement was set in the 'Brandenburg v Ohio 'case .That case set the bar high . Speech must in FACT include intent to incite AND include specific instructions to do violence . It does not say that the speech implied that insurrection or violence should happen.

So even if Trump's speech turned out to be inflammatory(which it wasn't ) ,it is still protected speech . So all the impeachment talk is political theater . It's intent is to get Republicans on the record prior to the 2022 midterms .

a banana republic show trial, Tom, but it is fitting that a banana republic show trial be conducted in the banana republic the US has become

a banana republic show trial, Tom, but it is fitting that a banana republic show trial be conducted in the banana republic the US has become can't argue . The Dems set the law enforcement and intelligence apparatus of government power on an opposition candidate and then tried coup attempts against him and his administration . They are in their second attempt to unseat him even as his tenure is up in a week ,

can't argue . The Dems set the law enforcement and intelligence apparatus of government power on an opposition candidate and then tried coup attempts against him and his administration . They are in their second attempt to unseat him even as his tenure is up in a week ,

as I said elsewhere the acts of a vindictive, vengeful woman

The left is a joke . They are not even calling it inciting a riot (which Trump did not do . ) They are absurdly calling it inciting insurrection.


as I said elsewhere the acts of a vindictive, vengeful woman

I cannot imagine any two statements that I would agree more with. The charge of "inciting insurrection" is flatly wrong and so absurd that it reflects terribly on those who are agreeing with it. And yes, Pelosi is a hate filled little woman who only thinks of getting Trump. None of this has anything to do with the good of the country. And Biden wants to speak of unity? If they keep this up, the results are going to end up being regrettable. I wish they would move on to their other equally loony but less divisive ideas.

The left is a joke .

Apparently, you haven't heard that McConnell is in on the joke. He says Trump should be impeached. McCarthy wants him censured.


They are absurdly calling it inciting insurrection

They're calling it what it was. Trump, in a miasma of his derangement, calls it peaceful.


Either way the standard for incitement was set in the 'Brandenburg v Ohio 'case .That case set the bar high . Speech must in FACT include intent to incite AND include specific instructions to do violence
Trump accomplished both qualifications.


So even if Trump's speech turned out to be inflammatory(which it wasn't ) ,it is still protected speech

Wrong. Incitement to riot/rebel is never protected.


It's intent is to get Republicans on the record prior to the 2022 midterms .

That would be a delightful by-product.

intent to incite AND include specific instructions to do violence



Trump accomplished both qualifications.Perhaps you can provide the quotes?

Perhaps you can provide the quotes?

The right to free speech protects inflammatory rhetoric unless it’s intended to incite “imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” That is a direct quote of the Brandenberg decision . The decision has not been challenged since the 1969 ruling .

An interesting note is that Brandenberg who was a Klan leader had the support of the ACLU . But that was in the days when the left believed ,,,, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

One has to do some heavy parsing of language to come up with the conclusion that Trump was intentionally calling on the people at the rally to storm the Capitol .
I have no doubt that the House Dems will successfully impeach . All that will prove is that impeachment is a political tool to be used by the majority ......something that was feared by some of the framers when they debated the concept of the Legislature impeaching the President .Gouverneur Morris and Charles Pinckney were both concerned that a President would feel beholden to the branch of government that could impeach him, leading the President to become “a tool of a faction.” History has proven them right with the system broken down to factional partisanship . Every impeachment except perhaps Nixon who resigned 1st ;has been a partisan political football.

One has to do some heavy parsing of language to come up with the conclusion that Trump was intentionally calling on the people at the rally to storm the Capitol .Even worse than that, it requires a claim of being able to understand the person's intent even though it was not expressed by the words. In short, the dems must possess the ability to read minds.

One has to do some heavy parsing of language to come up with the conclusion that Trump was intentionally calling on the people at the rally to storm the Capitol

All one has to do is read the news or watch the news. There are dozens of videos starring Trump showing him in no uncertain terms inciting the flag-waving screwballs to march on the Capitol to ensure that Pence overturns the vote and results in Trump being president. He said, "...and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down ... to the Capitol".

As it turned out Trump never did walk down to the Capitol. Coward that he is he snuck off to safety as the rioters did their thing. He also said, "You'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength".

His intent was to overthrow the first branch of government and nullify the presidential election. In the melee that followed, five died including a policeman.

You have a bad habit of cherry picking your quotes. Trump said, "And after this, we're going to walk down there, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down ... to the Capitol and we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women," Trump told the crowd. "And 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 and you have to be strong."


And after that, he said these words which no doubt stirred many brave hearts to insurrection! "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

And after that, he said these words which no doubt stirred many brave hearts to insurrection! "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
Apparently, over a thousand people missed his point and spread s**t on the hallway floors, vandalized the Capitol and various offices, terrorized the senators and representatives and staff, and literally made their voices heard.

Apparently, over a thousand people missed his point and spread s**t on the hallway floors, vandalized the Capitol and various offices, terrorized the senators and representatives and staff, and literally made their voices heard.You mean like they did in Portland? Who was held responsible for that? Or like they did on May 31 in D.C. Who was held responsible for that? Or when Pelosi referred to Trump and his allies as "domestic enemies". Was she held responsible for that? Why the selective outrage?

You mean like they did in Portland? Who was held responsible for that? Or like they did on May 31 in D.C. Who was held responsible for that? Or when Pelosi referred to Trump and his allies as "domestic enemies". Was she held responsible for that? Why the selective outrage?
Change the subject, why doncha!

At least the PGA was able to "gut" Trump.

Change the subject, why doncha!I didn't change the subject. I am asking why you are so upset about the 1/6 incident, and so uncaring about the other incidents. Why is that? Why the selective outrage?

I didn't change the subject. I am asking why you are so upset about the 1/6 incident, and so uncaring about the other incidents. Why is that? Why the selective outrage?
I'm upset? You don't know me very well. Now, tell me, why did you change the subject?

Possibly the dufus over estimated his ability to control and manipulation of his red meat crowd, or there were enough right wing vanilla ISIS types to take things to a far more dangerous level than even the dufus anticipated. Of course he never considered that so there goes the NY tough guy's mouth trying to scare and intimidate the congress to keep his job. 6 people died so heads must roll, and his may too.

No way this gets swept under a rug, nor should it. That would be loony logic!

I try not to obsess over americans but they take up space and inject themselves. I don't like the culture, I don't like the foreign policy, I don't like loud mouthed braggarts, I hear the scenery is nice

All of that is fine. You're entitled to dislike America. But that's not what I asked you.

You wrote, "As I said before, consider yourself told". That's the question you have yet to answer. Yes, I saw that. I don't know what it means. If you translate it into American, I'll consider it.

At least the PGA was able to "gut" Trump.
and the community of small businesses and employees that rely on big events like the PGA . You only think they hurt Trump ? He will survive . What they did instead was hurt the working people of Bedminister NJ ; a town that voted for Quid .

Possibly the dufus over estimated his ability to control and manipulation of his red meat crowd, or there were enough right wing vanilla ISIS types to take things to a far more dangerous level than even the dufus anticipated. Of course he never considered that so there goes the NY tough guy's mouth trying to scare and intimidate the congress to keep his job. 6 people died so heads must roll, and his may too.

No way this gets swept under a rug, nor should it. That would be loony logic!

Yes Trump did NOT intend to incite . Unintended consequences yes . As I said ,not criminal according to SCOTUS interpretation . Impeachable ? Read my comments about impeachment being a political process .

When you add this to comments by Quid ,the Dem leadership ,the actions of the high tech monopoly ,the only conclusion is that the left has determined that it is time to have a Stalinist purge of the Trump populist movement . Evita called half of Trump supporters people in a basket of deplorables .The other half were “people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures.”.... “those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”


But now it is clear that 74 million people who voted for Trump are now going to be lumped in with the few people who attended the rally and attacked the Capitol . There is an effort to identify ,cancel ,and exclude people hired by the Trump administration from ever having a government job again. College students are being sent out emails comparing the most extreme attackers of the Capitol with the "mostly peaceful protests" over the last year by BLM/Antifa . Social media unlawfully took down access to an alternate site to Twitter ;while at the same time Twitter was purging Trump supporters and the President himself from their site .

And it is not just Trump supporters that have to be cancelled . It’s conservative beliefs in general they wish to obliterate, labeling anything outside the progressive sphere of thought as “hate speech” and threatening.

The question is will Quid be a leader who lives up to his rhetoric of being a "uniter " ?
Or will he be a follower as has been his tendency over the course of his long government career . ?

When you add this to comments by Quid ,the Dem leadership ,the actions of the high tech monopoly ,the only conclusion is that the left has determined that it is time to have a Stalinist purge of the Trump populist movement I'm afraid that is exactly how it will work out.

Just a reminder of the May 31 siege of the White House by "mostly peaceful " protesters who at times succeeded in breaking through security barriers .

Protesters besiege White House as chaos sweeps Washington | ITV News - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwDcvAH43UQ&feature=emb_logo)

Just a reminder of the May 31 siege of the White House by "mostly peaceful " protesters who at times succeeded in breaking through security barriers .

Thanks, Tom. I watched that video and you're right - it was mostly peaceful.

I missed the part where the protestors beat a policeman to death and another died of his injuries and still others are still hospitalized and the 4 others who died.

I missed the part where the protestors deposited their feces in the WH.

I missed the part where the protestors demanded that Congress be overturned so Trump cold be declared President.

I missed the part where confederate battle flags were on display.

I missed the part where elected lawmakers huddled in a room in fear of their lives.

I missed the part where Republican lawmakers in that room arrogantly refused to wear masks resulting so far in 3 lawmakers getting Covid-19.

I missed the part where Trump and his cohorts urged the protestors to march down to the Capitol and wreak havoc.

I missed the part where the protestors morphed into Insurrectionists.

I missed the part where Trump dawdled for hours watching the riots on television while refusing the pleas of those around him to do something.

I missed the part where days later more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance.

I missed the part where Trump was impeached for the second time (unique in American history) due to his incitement to overthrow the legitimately elected Congress.

Finally, I noted how powerful were the protectors of the government compared to their near absence on Jan6.

There's more, much more, but that's enough for now.

I missed the part where Trump and his cohorts urged the protestors to march down to the Capitol and wreak havoc.He never did it at any time.


I missed the part where the protestors morphed into Insurrectionists.Didn't happen on 1/6 either.


I missed the part where Trump dawdled for hours watching the riots on television while refusing the pleas of those around him to do something.I doubt that is true.


I missed the part where days later more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance.Source?


I missed the part where Trump was impeached for the second time (unique in American history) due to his incitement to overthrow the legitimately elected Congress.He was impeached a second time due to being hated by liberal dems.


Finally, I noted how powerful were the protectors of the government compared to their near absence on Jan6.I would agree with that one. The Capitol police performed poorly. They are under the authority of the Congress, so perhaps someone should hold the Congress responsible.

The dufus has been impeached AGAIN, the techs have cancelled his accounts, the donors have pulled their money, the banks have stopped the money. All we need is a perp walk during primetime to make it better. Finally...JUSTICE!

There can be no healing until the poison is cleaned from the wound and the doctors have arrived to do just that!

amputation cures everything

amputation cures everythingDepends on what you use to replace the severed limb.

depends on which limb is severed, losing Trump is like losing a finger, it doesn't matter much

The last four years do not agree with you.

You don't agree with me, doesn't make me wrong

You don't agree with me, doesn't make me wrongI would agree with that.

10 repubs of 200 joined the dems to impeach the dufus, and even the minority speaker acknowledged the dufus part in the events of Jan the 6th, which has prompted not just another senate trial, but more troops in the nations capital than in other global hotspots.

The investigation continues into the possibility of an inside job and other police officers from other states being involved. Them crazies on the right have done it this time.

More troops are in DC than in Afghanistan and Iraq combined.

Really now. Which party should be ashamed of its members?

49333

Given Trump was the commander in chief of all loud mouthed inciters, the pelicans, because they failed to moderate his speech. the demonrats talked a lot but talk is cheap, Trump created an environment where insurrection could grow

https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.OlT3vZSJd53umxkayw4M7AHaHa?w=173&h=180&c=7&o=5&dpr=1.5&pid=1.7

the demonrats talked a lot but talk is cheap, Trump created an environment where insurrection could growNah. Good for the goose...good for the gander.

Nah. Good for the goose...good for the gander.

I think Trump got goosed

I think Trump got goosed

No that was JL not satisfied with shoulder deep up the dufus's arse.

It's just the ole double standard. The dems have spent much of the past four years encouraging violent demonstrations. That's fine, but when violence occurs in a conservative protest, then they all lose their minds. They think they will back conservatives down. They are mistaken.

It's just the ole double standard. The dems have spent much of the past four years encouraging violent demonstrations. That's fine, but when violence occurs in a conservative protest, then they all lose their minds. They think they will back conservatives down. They are mistaken.

When did the rule of law and common sense leave?

When did the rule of law and common sense leave?It remains to be seen if it has, but I will not say I am encouraged. I oftentimes think that when a person like AOC is seriously listened to, then we are in big trouble.

Yes there are rabble rousers on both sides

It's just the ole double standard. The dems have spent much of the past four years encouraging violent demonstrations. That's fine, but when violence occurs in a conservative protest, then they all lose their minds. They think they will back conservatives down. They are mistaken.

That's as much a lie as I've ever heard from you fringers. Is it anyone's fault but your own that you fail to separate peaceful protesters from criminals? Seems you cannot even separate your own peaceful protestors from the criminals that stormed the capital. If I can, why can't you? liberals won't back down either dude.

No response needed since you chose to block me and make this a one sided discussion, but just saying.


When did the rule of law and common sense leave?

It never leaves but can be conveniently ignored, and just as conveniently invoked.


It remains to be seen if it has, but I will not say I am encouraged. I oftentimes think that when a person like AOC is seriously listened to, then we are in big trouble.

You listen to the loons you like easy enough.

Here is the Schmuckster inciting violence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYAe6-JIT6s&feature=emb_logo

Maxine Waters inciting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJCDe7vdFfw

Cory Booker :
'Get in the face of Congress members ' .

Evidently OK if you are a liberal dem. And how about H Clinton telling Biden not to concede the election, "under any circumstances"? Wasn't Trump simply following the advice she gave to Biden?

There is a hatred of Trump that is really stunning. It reminds me of how many individuals felt about Obama, but it is far worse.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/hillary-clinton-says-biden-should-not-concede-2020-election-under-n1238156

Nice try fringers. The last 4 years of lies and soaring rhetoric has us where we are and no excuse for criminal behavior from anybody, so lets get to the actions and behavior, which while pointing out everybody else's you still ignore your own!

Keep defending the dufus...he may need it.

Should I have countered your links with an ad by congresswoman MT Green depicting her with a rifle amid images of three female minority congress people?

Here is the Schmuckster inciting violence

Maxine Waters inciting

Cory Booker :
'Get in the face of Congress members ' .

Pretty harmless, tom, compared to Jan 6.


Once again, lest you have forgotten:

I missed the part where the protestors beat a policeman to death and another died of his injuries and still others are still hospitalized and the 4 others who died.

I missed the part where the protestors deposited their feces in the WH.

I missed the part where the protestors demanded that Congress be overturned so Trump cold be declared President.

I missed the part where confederate battle flags were on display.

I missed the part where elected lawmakers huddled in a room in fear of their lives.

I missed the part where Republican lawmakers in that room arrogantly refused to wear masks resulting so far in 3 lawmakers getting Covid-19.

I missed the part where Trump and his cohorts urged the protestors to march down to the Capitol and wreak havoc.

I missed the part where the protestors morphed into Insurrectionists.

I missed the part where Trump dawdled for hours watching the riots on television while refusing the pleas of those around him to do something.

I missed the part where days later more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance.

I missed the part where Trump was impeached for the second time (unique in American history) due to his incitement to overthrow the legitimately elected Congress.

Finally, I noted how powerful were the protectors of the government compared to their near absence on Jan6.


With every passing day, we learn more about how these Trump thugs planned to assassinate members of Congress. Time for you to end your false equivalence.

Pretty harmless, tom, compared to Jan 6.

Harmless? Really? Well, let's see.

I missed the part where the protestors beat a policeman to death and another died of his injuries and still others are still hospitalized and the 4 others who died.

Over a dozen people were killed just during the George Floyd rioting.

I missed the part where the protestors deposited their feces in the WH.

How about the part where BLM protests have cost more than 2 billion dollars and are the costliest rioting in American history?

I missed the part where the protestors demanded that Congress be overturned so Trump cold be declared President.

Did you miss the part where left wing protestors actually set up their own city in Portland, and where the feckless democrat mayor basically sided with them?

I missed the part where confederate battle flags were on display.

Check this flag out. https://i.redd.it/8jevis8ih3451.jpg

I missed the part where elected lawmakers huddled in a room in fear of their lives.

Did you miss the part where entire blocks of innocent people huddled in their own homes afraid of their lives?

I missed the part where Republican lawmakers in that room arrogantly refused to wear masks resulting so far in 3 lawmakers getting Covid-19.

Did you miss the part where arrogant democrat mayors and governors went on trips in defiance of their own stay at home orders and gathered together without masks?

I missed the part where Trump and his cohorts urged the protestors to march down to the Capitol and wreak havoc.

You did indeed miss that part since it never happened.

I missed the part where the protestors morphed into Insurrectionists.

Refer again to Chaz in Portland.

I missed the part where Trump dawdled for hours watching the riots on television while refusing the pleas of those around him to do something.

Or where dem mayors and governors did nothing while mobs burned buildings, or where the dem mayor of D.C. was not properly prepared for this protest?

I missed the part where days later more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance.

Rumor mill at this point. Was Chaz planned?


I missed the part where Trump was impeached for the second time (unique in American history) due to his incitement to overthrow the legitimately elected Congress.

Oh please. There is no evidence at all to support that.

So turns out that selective and politically driven outrage is pretty incomplete.

TDS at work again.

Huh. Right on cue, a BLM activist named John Sullivan is arrested for his involvement in the Capitol riots. Who would have ever figured on that? It must be part of the, "more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance," investigation.

Huh. Right on cue, a BLM activist named John Sullivan is arrested for his involvement in the Capitol riots. Who would have ever figured on that? It must be part of the, "more evidence is emerging proving that the attack was planned well in advance," investigation.

Why not Jl BLM is just another rightist plot, right?, maybe he was fighting for his cause against Trump. i know you are trying to say it was a leftist plot to oust Trump

Not trying to say anything other than they arrested a left winger for his participation in the Capitol rioting. More to come? We'll see.

Sure will.

States declare emergencies, close capitols ahead of rallies (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/states-declare-emergencies-close-capitols-ahead-of-rallies/ar-BB1cNmrg?ocid=msedgntp)

DC protests updates: 4 dead after US Capitol breached on day of riots (usatoday.com) (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/01/06/dc-protests-live-updates-trump-supporters-electoral-college-proud-boys/4126018001/)

Not trying to say anything other than they arrested a left winger for his participation in the Capitol rioting. More to come? We'll see.


Never let a good riot go to waste, eh?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jlisenbe https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?p=3863125#post3863125)

Not trying to say anything other than they arrested a left winger for his participation in the Capitol rioting. More to come? We'll see.


Never let a good riot go to waste, eh?

Those claiming antifa infiltrated or led the mob at the Capitol have provided no proof. The evidence of Trump supporters participating, however, is indisputable.

I'm sure the liberal dems are searching diligently.

Even in the face of ever growing evidence the fringers still hold to the desperate idea they can prevail in stopping the future. It's been decades even centuries coming but the fringers have lost and they know it. They can no longer terrorize, suppress and oppress others with bald face lies and antics with impunity as we witness right wing loony fringers heads explode before our eyes across the nation.

No wonder they hate the dems and liberals. The past is dead and the future is NOW and they don't like it not one bit and all they can do is holler, hate, and run around in a big circle because their sky has fallen and they can't stop it.

They can block us but not ignore us!

They can block us but not ignore us! oh the irony

Not trying to say anything other than they arrested a left winger for his participation in the Capitol rioting. More to come? We'll see.

You mean John Sullivan ;the guy who organized a terrorist group called 'Insurgence USA ;who spoke in DC about 'ripping Trump out of that office ' because they could not wait for the next election ;and “we about to burn this sh+t down” ?
Antifa Activist John Sullivan: 'We Got To Rip Trump Out Of That Office' - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBcL9whXi2w&feature=emb_logo)

He says he was there to 'record 'the break in .BUT according to the police they have video where he can be seen and heard in the Capitol saying "There are so many people. Let’s go. This sh+t is ours! F+ck yeah... We accomplished this sh+t. We did this together. F+ck yeah! We are all a part of this history... Let’s burn this sh+t down.”

Yes Trump had nothing to do with it, it was all a leftist plot

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

Yes but that didn't happen, did it

Yes but that didn't happen, did itOn that same day, several banks were robbed. Amazingly, Trump had nothing to do with those events either. Just because something happened does not mean Trump authored it. It's a ridiculous idea born of hatred.

What was ironic about Sullivan's Youtube rant was that he ended his profanity laden dialogue by encouraging everyone to, "Be safe. Be blessed." I guess we should be happy he didn't suggest that they, "Be f**king blessed." The most disturbing thing about it is the knowledge that AOC and her ilk would have loved his violence-promoting rhetoric. Well no. Even more disturbing than that is the knowledge that the three supposedly freedom-loving amigos on this board who pretend to be so much in favor of non-insurrectionist, peaceful dialogue will let this video slide by without so much as a peep of protest. They are opposed to the promotion of insurrection only if they think it can be pinned on a conservative.

Sullivan was released without bail today. This even after his brother turned him in because he says Sullivan was one of the leaders of the protest /attack on the Capitol

Sullivan was released without bail today.This is a guy who is on video record as threatening the President of the United States. Even so, why am I not surprised? Will be interesting to see what ends up happening to his honest brother.

Sullivan was released without bail today.
From The Salt Lake Tribune:
Judge Daphne Oberg denied a prosecutor’s request to keep Utah activist John Sullivan in jail, but she agreed to release him only under conditions that include electronic monitoring and a mental health evaluation.

Sullivan was in virtual court Friday afternoon, one day after being booked at the Tooele County Jail on a warrant for allegedly participating in the rioting (https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/01/14/utah-activists-who-was-us/) at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. Sullivan was charged in federal court in the District of Columbia with civil disorder, being in a restricted area and disorderly conduct.

He previously told The Salt Lake Tribune that he attended the riot to document what was happening, but a government affidavit alleges he did more than just film. The affidavit says Sullivan yelled things such as “We accomplished this sh--. We did this together,” and, “We are all a part of this history. ... Let’s burn this s--- down.” He also broke a window and claimed to have a knife, according to the affidavit.

Sullivan claimed in a YouTube video that he was just trying to fit in at the riot for his own safety.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/01/15/utah-activist-john/

Sullivan claimed in a YouTube video that he was just trying to fit in at the riot for his own safety.If you want to be safe, then stay away from the riot.

If you listen to his rant in the video Tom linked, he is openly proclaiming his desire to assault the White House. This is not a peaceful man.

There is video proof that shows he was more than just trying to "fit in" . He was with photo journalist Jade Sacker and can be heard claiming ownership for the riot . They are both seen early ,entering the Capitol ,before anyone from the Trump rally arrived .
(9) Max Blumenthal on Twitter: "Seated w/Sullivan on CNN is Jade Sacker, a photojournalist who followed him into the Capitol to film his exploits as part of a documentary project. Here she's heard congratulating him - "We did it!" - and he says, "Is this not gonna be the best film you've ever made in yr life?" https://t.co/KWLVfgKPA7" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1349577194369134597)

And there's a name for someone like Sullivan....

And there's a name for someone like Sullivan....
Sure is. "Repeat offender"

https://universe.byu.edu/2020/07/10/police-arrest-fourth-person-in-connection-with-june-29-provo-protest/

He is one of the founders of Insurgence USA. How encouraging.

Leave it to the loony fringers to focus on one "lefty loon" and say nothing of the invited dufus mob of killers, assaulters, and vandals, and loony right wing sycophants. Many cops who left the places they serve and protect to visit mayhem and chaos on our capital.

Many are "repeat offenders" and planning more repeat offenses.

Many are "repeat offenders" and planning more repeat offenses. I have often given the Napoleon remedy to that kind of lawlessness as a solution .( a whiff of grapeshot)

I'll settle for perp walks and prosecutions. Leaders and followers! You're gonna need a lot of grapes.

See years of violent evidence against Trump and enablers for Capitol riot (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/see-years-of-violent-evidence-against-trump-and-enablers-for-capitol-riot/vi-BB1cNxsy?ocid=msedgntp)

That's gripes Tal

The gripe of wrats?

The gripe of wrats?
You guys would know all about wrats

Can't say we don't. A roo is a big wrat you know.

Can't say we don't. A roo is a big wrat you know.

No, a roo is a failed human, they can box you know so don't give them cheek

Is Pelosi going to file charges of impeachment against Biden since this riot occurred on his very first day in office? I have a funny feeling that this is the first of many to come. No doubt the liberal dem mayor of Portland will come forward with his usual vigorous response to the property damage.

At least things are back to normal with left wing, dem-leaning groups doing the rioting.

"Portland rioters damage ICE building; police declare 'unlawful assembly'"

https://www.foxnews.com/us/anti-biden-antifa-portland-police

Is Pelosi going to file charges of impeachment against Biden since this riot occurred on his very first day in office? I have a funny feeling that this is the first of many to come. No doubt the liberal dem mayor of Portland will come forward with his usual vigorous response to the property damage.

At least things are back to normal with left wing, dem-leaning groups doing the rioting.

"Portland rioters damage ICE building; police declare 'unlawful assembly'"

https://www.foxnews.com/us/anti-biden-antifa-portland-police


Err no, but why I hear you say.
The answer is right at the lead.

a demonstration against Biden and law enforcement
Were as storming the Capitol was urged on by Mr T, quite a difference.

Were as storming the Capitol was urged on by Mr T, quite a difference.You should become a fiction writer. You're very good at it, and especially when you can turn "peaceful and patriotic" into "urged on by Mr. T." Very impressive imagination!

10 months of violence ;arson ,vandalism ,assault of Federal buildings and on Federal personnel in Portland was called 'mostly peaceful' . Why should yesterday change anything ?

One day won't change years of pent up frustrations. Especially among the fringers...from both sides.

Protests are the American way, violence should not be tolerated.

Comparing the Portland stuff to the capital stuff is fringer propaganda. LOONY!

You should become a fiction writer. You're very good at it, and especially when you can turn "peaceful and patriotic" into "urged on by Mr. T." Very impressive imagination!
[Trump] called them to the rally. He told them that the future of our country was at stake, that the election had been stolen from him and that weakness could not be an answer. "Peaceful and patriotic" were tossed in at the end of his yelling when few were still listening.

I think that most of the dufus supporters were peaceful, but like the left the right wing has it's own fringers with bad intentions that makes the whole crowd look bad.

[Trump] called them to the rally. He told them that the future of our country was at stake, that the election had been stolen from him and that weakness could not be an answer. "Peaceful and patriotic" were tossed in at the end of his yelling when few were still listening.And then he said, "Now go out there and invade the Capitol Building!!". Uhm...no, he didn't say that. I abhor what a small portion of the crowd did, and those should absolutely be arrested and charged. You know, kind of like what was NOT done to BLM protestors. But I understand their anger, and I think it has at some basis in fact. It is not going to go away.

And then he said, "Now go out there and invade the Capitol Building!!". Uhm...no, he didn't say that. I abhor what a small portion of the crowd did, and those should absolutely be arrested and charged. You know, kind of like what was NOT done to BLM protestors. But I understand their anger, and I think it has at some basis in fact. It is not going to go away.
***No doubt the president's supporters will cite the "peacefully" part in his defense. But after two months of bizarre conspiracy theories, constant presidential complaints about a stolen election, declarations that conceding Biden's victory is not an option, and repeated warnings that the fate of the nation hangs in the balance, that is more weight than a single adverb can bear.***
https://reason.com/2021/01/06/here-is-what-the-president-told-pro-trump-rioters-before-they-stormed-the-capitol/

declarations that conceding Biden's victory is not an option,He followed the advice given by HC to Biden months ago.

I think your attempt to suggest that Trump intended to incite insurrection, if that is what you are suggesting, is simply absurd.

I think your attempt to suggest that Trump intended to incite insurrection, if that is what you are suggesting, is simply absurd.
Um, it certainly doesn't take much to get people riled up and thus incite insurrection. Be a playground monitor someday or a kindergarten teacher. Easy to whip up unsophisticated minds.

Um, it certainly doesn't take much to get people riled up and thus incite insurrection. Be a playground monitor someday or a kindergarten teacher. Easy to whip up unsophisticated minds.You forget that I have vastly more experience with elem. kids than you do. As to the rest, if you want to impeach Trump for getting, "people riled up", then go for it. That is not encouraging insurrection. But you'll also have to impeach Maxine Waters, Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi, and a host of other dems.

Deal?

You forget that I have vastly more experience with elem. kids than you do.
Thus, you know I am correct!

News flash. The people who stormed the Capitol were not elem. kids.

I guess you declined the deal.

News flash. The people who stormed the Capitol were not elem. kids.

I guess you declined the deal.
As I said (more reading comprehension problems?), "it certainly doesn't take much to get people riled up and thus incite insurrection." And then I compared it to riling up kids on a playground or to stirring up kindergarteners.

In fact, since the people who stormed the Capitol were NOT elem. kids (and not even kindergarteners, though they acted like kindergarteners who desperately needed a time-out), those people were adults and shudda knowed better.

jlisenbe, remember what I said earlier about incendiary rhetoric, that includes twisting things and arguing the toss.
We all like a good discussion, but this has dropped to playground level.
Really not acceptable.
Black isn't white and what's done is done.

In fact, since the people who stormed the Capitol were NOT elem. kids (and not even kindergarteners, though they acted like kindergarteners who desperately needed a time-out), those people were adults and shudda knowed better.I think everyone here agrees that what was done was terrible. The problem is when liberal dems suggest Trump was inciting insurrection. It's just an absurd suggestion that is completely untrue. And if you had made similar remarks about the BLM protestors, your statement would be much more acceptable and meaningful.

CBen, if you want to refer to something specific, then feel free to. I don't know how to respond to something like, "...that includes twisting things and arguing the toss."

The problem is when liberal dems suggest Trump was inciting insurrection. It's just an absurd suggestion that is completely untrue.
It's on many videos.

And if you had made similar remarks about the BLM protestors, your statement would be much more acceptable and meaningful.
I had stated at that time that the troublemakers were opportunists who wanted to smash and grab plus insurrectionists who were now grownups and were there only to show off their "power" and yelling ability. (Mommie had shushed them when they were still living at home and even made them sit on the naughty chair.) The REAL BLM protesters behaved themselves and did their lawful protesting.

The REAL BLM protesters behaved themselves and did their lawful protesting.How do you know that?

How do you know that?
I watched on tv the live action. I later watched videos. I saw who was legally protesting with signs and chants. I saw others (heads/upper bodies covered with hoodies, faces covered, carrying clubs, guns, knives) who had no interest in protesting but went about hither and yon -- smashing, grabbing, looting, setting fires, pushing and shoving protesters.

So in other words, you really don't know. You just think that is true. I could say that I think the Capitol protestors are not your usual Trump supporters because I watched on tv the live action. I later watched videos. I saw who was legally protesting with signs and chants. I saw others (heads/upper bodies covered with masks, faces covered, carrying clubs, guns, knives) who had no interest in protesting but went about hither and yon -- smashing, grabbing, looting, setting fires, pushing and shoving protesters.

https://images.theweek.com/sites/default/files/20210219edshe-b.jpg?resize=807x807

https://images.theweek.com/sites/default/files/wu210120.gif?resize=807x807

https://images.theweek.com/sites/default/files/247728_rgb_768.jpg?resize=807x807

https://images.theweek.com/sites/default/files/sbr012121dapr.jpg?resize=807x807

The problem is when liberal dems suggest Trump was inciting insurrection. It's just an absurd suggestion that is completely untrue.

For weeks, Trump whipped up his far-right supporters with unfounded conspiracy theories about election fraud, then summoned them to DC for his "Save America" rally, promising them that "it will be wild". At the rally, he urged thousands to march on the Capitol, showing "strength" and "fight like hell" to keep the Democrats from "fraudulently taking over our country".

Clearly, his behavior smacked of rebellion, insurrection, seditious conspiracy and incitement to a riot - take your pick.


CBen, if you want to refer to something specific, then feel free to. I don't know how to respond to something like, "...that includes twisting things and arguing the toss."

You're the master of twisting words around on these pages. Your "not knowing how to respond" is just another of your evasions.

There was Trump's call to the Georgia Secretary of State pressuring him to "find 11,780 votes" - the exact number he'd need to win the state. He openly threatened the secretary with a crime if he didn't accede to Trump's bogus claims of fraud.

People died because of Trump's incitement, hundreds have been arrested with more to come, even members of Congress are now believed to have been criminally involved. Trump will be facing civil and criminal, state and federal charges for the rest of his life - a fitting end to a man truly touched by evil.

If you see me twisting words, then point it out. Your general criticisms just come across as angry remarks that accomplish nothing.

If you see me twisting words, then point it out.
Just like with the Bible, you cherry-pick.

Sorry you feel that way, but I think you simply don't like some of the verses I "pick". I would think that for every verse I present that you consider to be "cherry picking", I can find ten or more others that say the same thing. At some point the numbers become overwhelming.

But as I've said many times, when you feel that is the case, then point it out. These vague, generalized accusations just sound like the complaints of angry people.

Sorry you feel that way, but I think you simply don't like some of the verses I "pick". I would think that for every verse I present that you consider to be "cherry picking", I can find ten more that say the same thing. At some point the numbers become overwhelming.
Consider the context. Just because it's said ten times doesn't mean it has the meaning you think it does. The Bible is packed with poetry, history, allegories, parables, etc. and each fits into the context in some way.

Just like with the Bible, you cherry-pick.

True of all Bible literalists. The trees always get in the way of their seeing the forest.

Consider the context. Just because it's said ten times doesn't mean it has the meaning you think it does. The Bible is packed with poetry, history, allegories, parables, etc. and each fits into the context in some way.Like I said, if you see a particular instance of that happening, then point it out. But honestly, I cannot point it out in the case of the two of you since you practically never quote the Bible. There is just this never ending appeal to some mystical "forest" that, I suspect, exists only in the minds of two people who simply don't want to accept the clear and plain teaching of the Bible. You certainly don't seem to be able to articulate that "forest" by using the Bible.

Like I said, if you see a particular instance of that happening, then point it out. But honestly, I cannot point it out in the case of the two of you since you practically never quote the Bible.
Here's one: The Garden of Eden story didn't actually happen. It's an allegory.

There is just this never ending appeal to some mystical "forest" that, I suspect, exists only in the minds of two people who simply don't want to accept the clear and plain teaching of the Bible.

It's a figure of speech. I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that.

The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message.

It's a figure of speech. I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that.

The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message.Thank you, captain obvious. Still you cannot articulate that "forest" or point to any passages of scripture to support your view. And when a person puts "forest" in quotes (like that), it is an acknowledgment that it is being used to mean something other than a literal collection of trees. "I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that."

Here's one: The Garden of Eden story didn't actually happen. It's an allegory.An example of an opinion. However, Paul certainly believed it happened as did Jesus. There is, in fact, not one shred of support for your position from any author of the Bible. Rather troubling, don't you think??

Whoops. I forgot. You guys don't think you need the Bible to support your ideas about...the Bible.

Whoops. I forgot. You guys don't think you need the Bible to support your ideas about...the Bible.
Oh,yes, we do. This allegory (tree) is one of many that support the Bible's message (forest). I wonder if you know what that is. Hmm.... The Flood story is another allegory (tree), as is Jonah and the Great Fish.

You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message, so no one could have any idea if your supposed allegories, an idea that I will say (again) is supported nowhere in the Bible, support your supposed central message. And why am I not surprised at that state of affairs?

You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message, so no one could have any idea if your supposed allegories, an idea that I will say (again) is supported nowhere in the Bible, support your supposed central message. And why am I not surprised at that state of affairs?
You don't KNOW the Bible's central message??? Wow!

You know what I said. You're not stupid. Be honest.


You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message

This is why any discussion with you is just an exercise in futility. You will go to any length to avoid actually saying anything of real substance due to, I think, your fear of having to answer any truly serious questions.

CBen, if you want to refer to something specific, then feel free to. I don't know how to respond to something like, "...that includes twisting things and arguing the toss."
Exactly.
This is what I'm talking about, rather than addressing the entirety of the response you focus on one, or two, small elements.
This isn't conducive to an open discussion and just serves to get people's backs up.
If all you want to do is be objectionable, then you are firmly on that path.
Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.

You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message
It isn't "in my view"; it IS the Bible's central message.

from Matthew 22: Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.

from Matthew 22: Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.Those are the two greatest commandments, so that's a good answer.

I would suggest a passage from Colossians. "13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Or we could go with this passage in Ephesians 1. 7 (http://biblehub.com/ephesians/1-7.htm)In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 (http://biblehub.com/ephesians/1-8.htm)which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 (http://biblehub.com/ephesians/1-9.htm)making knownc (https://www.biblehub.com/esv/ephesians/1.htm#footnotes) to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 (http://biblehub.com/ephesians/1-10.htm)as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

How would you put it in your own words? Honest question.

How would you put it in your own words? Honest question.
Love.

Care to expand on that? What, for instance, is "love"?

Care to expand on that? What, for instance, is "love"?
Unconditional.

Good reply.

Let me add this. Unconditional describes the word "love", but it still does not tell us what love IS. So if I am told to love my wife, and I ask you what that means, if you reply "unconditional", I still would not know what to do to love my wife. I cannot go out and "unconditional" a person. So I guess I'm really asking what this love you describe looks like.

Let me add this. Unconditional describes the word "love", but it still does not tell us what love IS. So if I am told to love my wife, and I ask you what that means, if you reply "unconditional", I still would not know what to do to love my wife. I cannot go out and "unconditional" a person. So I guess I'm really asking what this love you describe looks like.
Unconditionally -- with no limits in any way : without restriction by conditions or qualifications

This is about love between humans.

Accept them for who they are, faults and all.
We all have faults, that’s what makes us human. Even more, that’s what makes us individuals. When you can truly embrace someone for ALL their qualities, including their faults, you are choosing to love unconditionally.

Go out of your way for them no matter what the distance.
Loving someone unconditionally sometimes means you have to go travel great emotional distances to meet them. This isn’t always the most fun thing to have to do, but it is the road unconditional love will take you.

When they are happy, you are happy.
Unconditional love creates a special bond between two people. Their happiness and yours become so closely tied that making them happy is what you must do to be happy yourself. It’s the ties that unconditional love creates between two people:

It pleases you to be around them.
When you love someone unconditionally you always want to be around that person. You always want to be there for them, especially when they are sad. That’s when they need your love the most. Unconditional love is the love that draws you closer to your lover when they are the hardest to reach emotionally.

You are open to living their way of life.
Before your lover, you were likely quite set in your ways. You probably thought you wouldn’t change for anything. When you love someone so deeply you will accept them wholeheartedly. Their way of life will become your way of life too.

You are quick to forgive.
When you love someone unconditionally you really forgive them for their mistakes before they even make them. That doesn’t mean you’re giving them a golden ticket to mess up, it just means forgiveness comes easily.
https://lovewideopen.com/what-does-it-mean-to-love-someone-unconditionally/

Christian love is giving to others those things (not necessarily material things) that you would want them to give you if you were in their situation -- and it's doing so even if they can't pay you back. In fact, it's doing so especially if they can't pay you back! -- agape, a selfless, giving love, unselfish and unconditional.

Unconditionally -- with no limits in any way : without restriction by conditions or qualifications

This is about love between humans.

Accept them for who they are, faults and all.
We all have faults, that’s what makes us human. Even more, that’s what makes us individuals. When you can truly embrace someone for ALL their qualities, including their faults, you are choosing to love unconditionally.

Go out of your way for them no matter what the distance.
Loving someone unconditionally sometimes means you have to go travel great emotional distances to meet them. This isn’t always the most fun thing to have to do, but it is the road unconditional love will take you.

When they are happy, you are happy.
Unconditional love creates a special bond between two people. Their happiness and yours become so closely tied that making them happy is what you must do to be happy yourself. It’s the ties that unconditional love creates between two people:

It pleases you to be around them.
When you love someone unconditionally you always want to be around that person. You always want to be there for them, especially when they are sad. That’s when they need your love the most. Unconditional love is the love that draws you closer to your lover when they are the hardest to reach emotionally.

You are open to living their way of life.
Before your lover, you were likely quite set in your ways. You probably thought you wouldn’t change for anything. When you love someone so deeply you will accept them wholeheartedly. Their way of life will become your way of life too.

You are quick to forgive.
When you love someone unconditionally you really forgive them for their mistakes beforef they even make them. That doesn’t mean you’re giving them a golden ticket to mess up, it just means forgiveness comes easily.
https://lovewideopen.com/what-does-it-mean-to-love-someone-unconditionally/

Even unconditional love leading to forgiveness has a balance and the example which illustrates this best can be found with the families of the victims of Dylann Roof (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof) forgiving him of murders, but not stopping his lawful trial for his actions.

Victims' Families Meet Dylann Roof: 'I Forgive You, And Have Mercy On Your Soul' | HuffPost (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dylann-roof-family_n_7623252)

Victims' Families Speak Passionately About Forgiveness at Dylann Roof Murder Trial Video - ABC News (go.com) (https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/victims-families-speak-passionately-forgiveness-dylann-roof-murder-44047711)

I like most of what you copied. The part about Christian love is particularly good.


You are open to living their way of life.Here I see a problem. Pedophile? Violent person? Thief? Drug abuser? Conservative republican? (Sorry...I couldn't resist.)


Accept them for who they are, faults and all.Many a child has become a poor quality adult because of parents who did that very thing. Don't want to study? Fine. Don't want to do chores around the house? Fine. Stay out all night doing drugs? No problem. Disrespect adults including your parents? Go for it.

Man alive, you guys sure didn't apply that UC love trait to Trump! At any rate, unconditional acceptance is not how God operates. It's a bad idea for us as well.

Plainly there are limits to those two.

You must be a terrific dancer, the way you twist and shout.

Many a child has become a poor quality adult because of parents who did that very thing. Don't want to study? Fine. Don't want to do chores around the house? Fine. Stay out all night doing drugs? No problem. Disrespect adults including your parents? Go for it.

That's not what loving another person unconditionally means, and you know it!

Man alive, you guys sure didn't apply that UC love trait to Trump! At any rate, unconditional acceptance is not how God operates. It's a bad idea for us as well.

If only I had been a Trump aide in the WH....

Well, we are back to nonsensical replies. Disappointing but certainly not surprising.

Well, we are back to nonsensical replies. Disappointing but certainly not surprising.
Don't make me start loving you unconditionally!!!

Exactly.
This is what I'm talking about, rather than addressing the entirety of the response you focus on one, or two, small elements.
This isn't conducive to an open discussion and just serves to get people's backs up.

Perfect analysis. WG has accurately called it cherry-picking.


If all you want to do is be objectionable, then you are firmly on that path.

That is the defining feeding behavior of a troll.


Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.

Not a chance of that happening. But good of you to suggest it.

That's not what loving another person unconditionally means, and you know it!Just asking a question. Calm down. I was simply probing your view of two aspects of UCL. "You are open to living their way of life." "Accept them for who they are, faults and all."


This is what I'm talking about, rather than addressing the entirety of the response you focus on one, or two, small elements. This isn't conducive to an open discussion and just serves to get people's backs up.I am questioning details. That's how discussions proceed. If you don't like it, then find something else to do. You are most welcome to participate, but do bear in mind that you were not invited.


Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.Thank you for giving a great example of those "volatile" responses you claim to dislike. And you think your response is in any way, "conducive to an open discussion"??? You might want to try out your own advice before giving it to others.

Just asking a question. Calm down. I was simply probing your view of two aspects of UCL. "You are open to living their way of life." "Accept them for who they are, faults and all."
Yeah, be open to living their way of life in a musty pup tent in Utah two weeks out of the year instead of staying in a decent motel with a real bathroom. And yeah, accept them even though they prefer rum raisin ice cream and refuse to try butter pecan, my favorite.

I couldn't disagree with any of that.

I am questioning details. That's how discussions proceed. If you don't like it, then find something else to do. You are most welcome to participate, but do bear in mind that you were not invited.

Thank you for giving a great example of those "volatile" responses you claim to dislike. And you think your response is in any way, "conducive to an open discussion"??? You might want to try out your own advice before giving it to others.
Sir, you forget yourself.

A thought provoking read:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55773123

Last I heard is that Trump is contemplating forming a 3rd Party ;the Patriot Party . If he does I expect the same results as when Teddy Roosevelts led the Progressives out of the Republican party . The spit led to the election of the Democrat radical Woodrow Wilson.

All the legal pile ons and impeachments reminds of the death of the Trojan champion ,Prince Hector at the hands of Achilles . The Greek soldiers were terrified of Hector .He had killed many Greeks and one of their champions . Achilles defeated Hector . The Greeks still wanted their revenge after his death . Achilles troops surrounded the corps stabbing at it repeatedly and Achilles ties Hector to his chariot and drags his lifeless body around Troy .

I would caution the Dems about over playing their hand .The Cadaver Synod is an example of how that could back fire Pope Steven VI exhumed the corps of Pope Formosus ,and put it on trial 7 months after he had died. Well he was convicted and stripped of his papacy and thrown into a river . The trial turned public opinion against Steven ;especially after Formosus' body washed up and was purported to perform miracles . There was an uprising against Steven . He was strangled in prison.

Trump and Trumpism could come back in 4 or 8 years stronger than ever .


So maybe the Dems had best think twice about continuing to pile on the defeated Trump.

I don't think the dems can pursue impeachment with a vigor clearly born of hatred, but then turn around and make calls for unity. If they really want unity, they should take their victory, tainted as it is, and move on. It makes me conclude that unity for them means everyone agreeing with their views. That could very well prove to be dangerous for both them and the country.

And already the new president's bias is showing. After all the dems nearly went crazy over the incident on 1/6, the riots in Oregon go unmentioned by any of them.

Those attacks in Seattle and Portland are not part of the Uncivil war Quid wants to end.

The message is pretty clear. Left wing rioting will be largely ignored by the powers that be.

Someday you will master walking and chewing bubble gum, and see the forest and not just the trees.

From Athos:

It's a figure of speech. I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that.

The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message.


Thank you, captain obvious

Yes, obvious after you had it explained to you. Another self-inflicted shot to your foot. (Do you need that explained?)

Yes, obvious after you had it explained to you.I suppose, amazingly, that you really think I considered the "forest" to be literal trees. I can only say you are free to believe whatever strange ideas you want to believe, but any fair reading of my responses shows that to be ridiculous.

As a reminder, "I'll ask once again. If aionios means, as you have said, something less than eternal when it describes hell, then it would also mean less than eternal when applied to heaven. Correct?"

Ready to reply yet?

I suppose, amazingly, that you really think I considered the "forest" to be literal trees.
You totally missed the point! I'm in shock!

You totally missed the point! I'm in shock!Feel free to explain your response. I suspect you simply cannot see it, but I'm willing to listen.

This is the statement of Athos I was responding to. "The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message."

Rather plainly, I think everyone here understands the relationship of the metaphorical "forest" to the "trees" so any attempt to explain it is just silliness. The one thing missing is Athos describing what he considers the "forest" to be. In other words, the basic message of the Bible. You, WG, have done that by saying it is love. However, you committed what seems to you to be a great sin of using a proof text. Still, I thought it was a good one and said so. But Athos has hesitated to do that, so it is the missing element. All the rest of this is just window dressing.

do bear in mind that you were not invited.

Who invited you? People in glass houses .................................

Feel free to explain your response. I suspect you simply cannot see it, but I'm willing to listen.
Always the nasty crack, the putdown....

Always the non answer.

Always the non answer.
Be nice, even Christ-like, showing unconditional love, and I'll answer.

Be nice, even Christ-like, showing unconditional love, and I'll answer.Oh please, please, be ever so kind and answer.

How was that? I don't know that I can do much better. 8D

Oh please, please, be ever so kind and answer.

How was that? I don't know that I can do much better. 8D
I detect a sneer.

As this thread has problems with common decency and being civil, I'm closing it.
Any repetition will result in similar action
Scream censorship all you want, just remember where you are.