Full on crazy. Lane, Judge G...you on board?

Execute the judge and the jurors?

May 31 - Supporters of former President Donald Trump, enraged by his conviction on 34 felony counts by a New York jury, flooded pro-Trump websites with calls for riots, revolution and violent retribution.
After Trump became the first U.S. president to be convicted of a crime, his supporters responded with dozens of violent online posts, according to a Reuters review of comments on three Trump-aligned websites: the former president's own Truth Social platform, Patriots.Win and the Gateway Pundit.

Some called for attacks on jurors, the execution of the judge, Justice Juan Merchan, or outright civil war and armed insurrection.
“Someone in NY with nothing to lose needs to take care of Merchan,” wrote one commentator on Patriots.Win. “Hopefully he gets met with illegals with a machete,” the post said in reference to illegal immigrants.
On Gateway Pundit, one poster suggested shooting liberals after the verdict. “Time to start capping some leftys,” said the post. “This cannot be fixed by voting."

Threats of violence and intimidating rhetoric soared after Trump lost the 2020 election and falsely claimed the vote was stolen. As he campaigns for a second White House term, Trump has baselessly cast the judges and prosecutors in his trials as corrupt tools of the Biden administration, intent on sabotaging his White House bid. His loyalists have responded with a campaign of threats and intimidation targeting judges and court officials.

“This was a disgrace, this was a rigged trial by a conflicted judge who was corrupt,” Trump told reporters afterwards, echoing comments he often made during the trial.
A 12-member jury found Trump guilty on Thursday of falsifying documents to cover up a payment to silence a porn star’s account of a sexual encounter ahead of the 2016 election. Sentencing is set for July 11, days before the Republican Party is scheduled to formally nominate Trump for president ahead of the Nov. 5 election. Trump has denied wrongdoing and is expected to appeal.

Trump continued his attacks online after the verdict.

On Truth Social, he called Merchan “HIGHLY CONFLICTED” and criticized his jury instructions as unfair. One commentator responded by posting a picture of a hangman's platform and a noose with the caption: “TREASONOUS MOBSTER OF THE JUSTICES SYSTEM!

Jacob Ware, a co-author of the book “God, Guns, and Sedition: Far-Right Terrorism in America”, said the violent language used by Trump’s followers was testament to the former president’s “ironclad ability to mobilize more extreme supporters to action, both at the ballot box and through violence.”
“Until and unless he accepts the process, the extremist reaction to his legal troubles will be militant,” said Ware, a research fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
A spokesperson for Truth Social said, “It’s hard to believe that Reuters, once a respected news service, has fallen so low as to publish such a manipulative, false, defamatory and transparently stupid article as this one purely out of political spite.”
All three sites have policies against violent language, and some of the posts were later removed. Representatives of Patriots.Win and Gateway Pundit did not immediately return requests for comment. A Trump spokesperson also did not respond to an email seeking comment.
“HANG EVERYONE”

After Thursday's verdict, many of his supporters also said that his conviction was proof that the American political system was broken and that only violent action could save the country.
“1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to Washington and hang everyone. That's the only solution,” said one poster on Patriots.win. Another added: “Trump should already know he has an army willing to fight and die for him if he says the words...I’ll take up arms if he asks.”
Other posts specifically urged targeting Democrats, in some cases suggesting they be shot. “AMERICA FULLY DESTROYED BY DEMOCRATS. LOCK AND LOAD,” wrote a commentator on Gateway Pundit.
While the posts identified by Reuters all called for violence or insurrection, most fell short of the legal standard for a prosecutable threat, which typically requires evidence that the comment reflects a clear intent to act or instill fear, rather than simply suggesting a frightening outcome.
Still, one researcher who studies extremist militias said the guilty verdict could inspire violence by reinforcing a conviction among some of Trump's supporters that he's a victim of a conspiracy orchestrated by his enemies.
“I do think a lot of these folks have been looking for an excuse to maybe mobilize for a while,” said Amy Cooter of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism. “I hope I’m wrong. I’ve said for a long time, though, that I would not be shocked to see violence result from a guilty verdict, either directed toward the jurors” or others connected to the case.

https://www.reuters.com/world/...-verdict-2024-05-31/

They will rationalize why this is the fault of Democrats.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
They will rationalize why this the fault of Democrats.

They have to say something, right?

Start off with taking Soros out.

And all his puppets in government.

Then all the religious zealots.

You know, those giving rewards to reporting your neighbor for having an abortion.

Third World banana Republic is full swing!

I find it quite amusing that Trumpers think they have the exclusive ability and willingness to resort to violence.

Bring it Pussies, just don't cry about Geneva Conventions, I didn't sign them.

YEAH!!
i mean, you KNOW what to expect...

Sorry, wait, you expected righties to riot, burn, loot, murder? Nah, Bruv, that's from the lefty play book ..

Cute story from the kleagle of peckerwood county, though... you just gotta love and respect the mouthing off tough guys .. they ALWAYS come through...


Could you imagine, though, the riots if trump WASN'T found guilty?

Has everyone forgotten them invading government offices?

Haven't we been asking for this?
I think we have.

Our society, our rule of law or sense of law and order didn't come down nearly hard enough on the Rodney King riots, the BLM/ anti fa riots nor on the January 6th folks. All these folks have asked themselves, "what can I get away with?" and the answer has been more and more and more.

Was it just last week a guy was convicted for choking a cop on 1/6? Why was he arrested and convicted? He should have been shot on sight.

But that's where we're at. That's what we can get away with these days. So are some of Trump's folks increasingly bold enough to resort to violence?
Of course and we allowed it.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
YEAH!!
i mean, you KNOW what to expect...

Sorry, wait, you expected righties to riot, burn, loot, murder? Nah, Bruv, that's from the lefty play book ..

Cure story from the kleagle of peckerwood county, though... you just gotta love and respect the mouthing off tough guys .. they ALWAYS come through...


Could you imagine, though, the riots if trump WASN'T found guilty?

No, I expect them to huff and puff and blow each other, as per usual.

But if a bunch of them work up the courage to try some of what they threaten I expect them to do the Dance of the Dying Cockroach.

If it needs to be said this is absolutely unacceptable, it is.

Once started, political violence is a genie that’s very hard to stuff back in a bottle.

President Strunk and the far Right started this political violence with the Big Lie and Jan 6.

They are trying to do it again, now.

Go read Sen. McConnell’s words about President Trump’s actions bring an order to insurrectionist.

Go read how Sen. McConnell said then that President Trump would face the courts of justice upon vacating the presidency.

I do applauded your unequivocal statement.

How can anyone become so attached to a fucking political candidate that they would commit violence for them? I'm mostly indifferent to them.

Americans fighting Americans, reminds me of "Cripple Fight" from South Park.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
YEAH!!
i mean, you KNOW what to expect...

Sorry, wait, you expected righties to riot, burn, loot, murder? Nah, Bruv, that's from the lefty play book ..

Cute story from the kleagle of peckerwood county, though... you just gotta love and respect the mouthing off tough guys .. they ALWAYS come through...


Could you imagine, though, the riots if trump WASN'T found guilty?

blah blah blah -- whataboutism --
No, children, this isn't about Jan 6 -- I do realize being topical is difficult for your agenda --

Mike's post, with subject date of 5/31/24, is the topic of this post --

What you are "expecting" is the typical behavior of those that riot when they don't get their way --

ATM, this scope in that matchup more appears to be 2,345 to 1 - low score "wins" for decorum ...

it's rather pathetic that you are sky screaming about something NOT happening -- almost like, "Well, our side would have" is a valid reason --

sigh ...
grow up

Trump and his cronies are going to this fundamental institution the same they did to the election.

Yes, it is the same as before. Hopefully, unlike last time no one will act up his calls.

The language is exactly the same: “rigged”, “sham,” “crooked,” etc.

No, I do nut believe the leaders in Congress from the Democratic side would be using this language is the verdict had went the other way.

Just like Al Gore did not act like Trump when the courts told Gore he lost.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Trump and his cronies are going to this fundamental institution the same they did to the election.

Yes, it is the same as before. Hopefully, unlike last time no one will act up his calls.

The language is exactly the same: “rigged”, “sham,” “crooked,” etc.

No, I do nut believe the leaders in Congress from the Democratic side would be using this language is the verdict had went the other way.

Just like Al Gore did not act like Trump when the courts told Gore he lost.

Trump supporters have posted names and addresses of a least some of the jurors on far-right websites.

If a single one is so much as harassed I hope AC-130s are sent to deal with the miscreants.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
No, I do nut believe the leaders in Congress from the Democratic side would be using this language is the verdict had went the other way.

you do NUT believe?
well, my sweet summer child, let me remind you what the left does when they get a ruling they don't like.. the "leaders" (they are elected representatives, not leaders... do read the Constitution.. i'd be happy to be educated where the Constitution calls them "Leaders")

Here's little chucky, all mad about a court decision
https://www.cnn.com/videos/pol...bortion-lead-vpx.cnn

This is your queue to say "opps, i was wrong"

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:


If a single one is so much as harassed I hope AC-130s are sent to deal with the miscreants.

Hey, Jeffie ... did you hop on a greyhound to DC when the left was "harassing" scotus justices? Yeah, about what I thought

the weird part? harassing the other side is, like riots when they don't get their way, a lefty concept ===

Oh, Joshua, you might look at this one too
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25...officials/index.html

. . . why be so consistently insulting and condescending in making a point? Discussions do not always have to be personal.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . why be so consistently insulting and condescending in making a point? Discussions do not always have to be personal.

let me save that one, right there, mike..

i didn't swear, i asked POINTED questions and provided actual data .. literally the "worst" thing i said was "sweet summer child" ...

i guess giving facts and demanding accountability for one's own actions is "insulting" ...

oh, i guess that requiring consistent, non-hypocritical actions is now "condescending" .. welcome to the 20s, i guess

proving someone wrong, as in directly WRONG, isn't insulting, sir .. facts don't care about feelings


oh, wait, i assumed you didn't mean mitchell's initial post --

but, sure, oh holder of righteousness, do use that little quip EVERY TIME it gets the least little personal.. Can't wait to see you throwing that everytime one person calls another a name or swears at someone ...

After all, it isn't ME wanting a spectre gunship turned on other citizens without a trial .. but you do you, mike

Jefffive’s vulgar statements of violence are wrong, not helpful, play into the opposition rabble’s hand, are the type of reaction that serves to undermine the rule of law.

There is no place for violence. Assuming, and hoping not violence occurs, we can address that violence in legal means as it occurs.

The debate must be free from the rhetoric of violence by those, is, who wish to stop and expunge from this political culture violence as a legitimized means to a political end.

By all means identify those as miscreants who seek to use the language of violence and delegitimization of our institutions. However, violence and the language of violence must not be an option. Frankly, such language must be publicly rejected if used.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Jefffive’s vulgar statements of violence are wrong, not helpful, play into the opposition rabble’s hand, are the type of reaction that serves to undermine the rule of law.

There is no place for violence. Assuming, and hoping not violence occurs, we can address that violence in legal means as it occurs.

The debate must be free from the rhetoric of violence by those, is, who wish to stop and expunge from this political culture violence as a legitimized means to a political end.

By all means identify those as miscreants who seek to use the language of violence and delegitimization of our institutions. However, violence and the language of violence must not be an option. Frankly, such language must be publicly rejected if used.

sure thing .. let's get rid of people "leaders" who deny violence is being used as a tool to advance a political agenda -
you can start HERE
https://www.congress.gov/116/m...0-20200728-SD037.pdf

I have no idea what is going on in Portland today.

Let us assume that Antifia is the source of violence.

I did not see the Representative using calls to violence, violent language, or attacking a legitimate due operation of government.

I agree that, assuming the violence is engaged by Antifia, that for a Congressman to mislead the people as to the source of political violence request censure, reporting, rejection, and hopefully a loss of votes.

However, I disagree the language presented in the article is violent language. I agree, assuming Antigua is the source, that it is reprehensible. We must demonstrate its reprehensibility. Again, official censure, and loss of votes are needed.

None of this changes the overt scheme of Trump to destroy within the citizen’s the faith in our institutions that give birth to the Constitution. That this scheme is inspiration and call to violence against our constitutional system.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I did not see the Representative using calls to violence, violent language, or attacking a legitimate due operation of government.

i literally posted links, of them SAYING IT OUT LOUD, of schumer and waters -- oh, i get it, you didn't bother to click on the links --

it's right there - and in harsher terms than the kleagle would dispatch gunships on other americans without any form of trial


i mean, i get it, you want to preserve your confirmation bias, everyone does this - but let's call it what it is

take your rose colored glasses off, and look for bad actions on BOTH sides.. technically i prefer to see it as 4+ sides -- progressives, liberals, conservatives, traumplicans, and everyone else - trumplicans and progressives are equally repugnant, to me at least

wild, lawless people, howling for government "executed" killings without due process are beneath contempt --- and yet they still get to vote and it counts the same as a sane or dead persons vote

He calls it a “myth” in your article.

That is short of it’s rigged, kill the judge.

I did just notice something. This “myth” quote is from 2020. Calling it a myth is not the use of violent language. It is what I said above. I have no pro dropping the let us assume, as in some point 2020 the violence by Antifia as the force engaged cannot be disputed.



It is not representative of a current situation.

This a far cry from telling everyone that out fundamental practice of justice is rigged and most be uprooted. “That’s a myth that’s being spread only in Washington, D.C.,” Mr. Nadler responded.

Your article does not say what you say it says.

quote:

“1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to Washington and hang everyone. That's the only solution,” said one poster on Patriots.win. Another added: “Trump should already know he has an army willing to fight and die for him if he says the words...I’ll take up arms if he asks.”

I am not the one calling for violence, but by staying in their insulated circle-jerks Trumpers convince themselves they are the only people with the means and willingness to employ force, and it just ain't so.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
He calls it a “myth” in your article.

That is short of it’s rigged, kill the judge.

I did just notice something. This “myth” quote is from 2020. Calling it a myth is not the use of violent language. It is what I said above. I have no pro dropping the let us assume, as in some point 2020 the violence by Antifia as the force engaged cannot be disputed.



It is not representative of a current situation.

This a far cry from telling everyone that out fundamental practice of justice is rigged and most be uprooted. “That’s a myth that’s being spread only in Washington, D.C.,” Mr. Nadler responded.

Your article does not say what you say it says.

you missed these
https://www.cnn.com/videos/pol...bortion-lead-vpx.cnn

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25...officials/index.html

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
I am not the one calling for violence....

weird ..

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
If a single one is so much as harassed I hope AC-130s are sent to deal with the miscreants.

Jeffee, what's your point?

Is it to make one person wrong? That seems a bit personal.

If so, let's be clear.

Did Trump supporters call for violence or not?

And does it matter?

Why does it matter, or not?

Is there a remedy?

And so forth.

Ted Koppell did a story this morning on CBS about the cult members. Bunch of old overweight farts wearing MAGA gear talking about how the country will cease to exist if trump loses and making vague references to use of force to prevent it. One idiot wearing a sweatshirt with "Condition One" emblazoned on it and talking shit.

I would call that about right MM.
Most of the folks on here claiming "let em try" are old, as are the Trump supporters calling for violence.
I'm younger than most on here. I work out and run 7 days a week, along with a physically demanding job. I shoot all but a handful of days a year. I have a combat background. All that and I'm still not as combat ready as I was when I was in service, in my 20's.
so when these out of shape old shits start talking what they will do, I laugh it off.
At least the BLM rioters were young, and the most were thugs with a thugs mentality. They had more of a prayer than the crowd on here or supporting Trump.

I think we are probably missing a significant point.

I think violence is not going to be the means, but a consequence instead, and limited - a distraction.

The means is political corruption from within - turning the system and using it against itself.

That what Trump(ism) is planning, and they say it out loud. Project 2025, attacking the institutions and rule of law, stoking division, distrust, doubt, lying, 20,000 shock troops, breaking the administrative/deep state, gerrymandering/rigging elections, refusing to accept elections, and so forth.

"let um try" is BS. They are doing far more, from within, than trying. They are succeeding. While we are looking for roaches under the rug the rats are everywhere, chewing, chewing, chewing and shitting everywhere, and looking forward of being comfortable in their new home of their making.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Trump and his cronies are going to this fundamental institution the same they did to the election.

Yes, it is the same as before. Hopefully, unlike last time no one will act up his calls.

The language is exactly the same: “rigged”, “sham,” “crooked,” etc.

No, I do nut believe the leaders in Congress from the Democratic side would be using this language is the verdict had went the other way.

Just like Al Gore did not act like Trump when the courts told Gore he lost.

Trump supporters have posted names and addresses of a least some of the jurors on far-right websites.

If a single one is so much as harassed I hope AC-130s are sent to deal with the miscreants.

Short memory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GP3RmAYBzI


We discuss things here like, "no-one is above the law". The protestors in the video I posted, are ALL breaking the law. The law was not enforced for what reason?

Can you give me a plausible explanation as to why they weren't? The situation was serious enough that the DOJ gave the justices US Marshall protection.

The only one arrested (to my knowledge) was that nut-job that had the materials and a plan to kidnap and kill Kavanaugh.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I think we are probably missing a significant point.

I think violence is not going to be the means, but a consequence instead, and limited - a distraction.

The means is political corruption from within - turning the system and using it against itself.

That what Trump(ism) is planning, and they say it out loud. Project 2025, attacking the institutions and rule of law, stoking division, distrust, doubt, lying, 20,000 shock troops, breaking the administrative/deep state, gerrymandering/rigging elections, refusing to accept elections, and so forth.

"let um try" is BS. They are doing far more, from within, than trying. They are succeeding. While we are looking for roaches under the rug the rats are everywhere, chewing, chewing, chewing and shitting everywhere, and looking forward of being comfortable in their new home of their making.

I don't think anybody but the cult members are missing that point. Or embracing it, more likely.

It is significant to note that Americans are attending political rallies and demonstrations where the subject of armed resistance to the government is discussed as a consequence or a solution, or both.

I wonder what sort of contingency plans are being drawn up by law enforcement agencies all over the land to be ready to deal with the trumptards if he loses?

LEO's need a better plan than dealing with ANTIFA and BLM and J6. Not because trump people would be any better, but because the LEO's sucked in their response to those mentioned.

quote:

I wonder what sort of contingency plans are being drawn up by law enforcement agencies all over the land to be ready to deal with the trumptards if he loses?

I have been thinking about that sentence since yesterday.

As I said in my previous post, I'm more concerned about what will happen to law enforcement, the judiciary included, if he wins.

I did some reading, almost too much material to reference for this forum. In part it was prompted by thinking about my post in another thread about GOPers not having a red line regarding Trump's political corruption.

But I'll try to be brief.

Starting with original founding concepts, such as republicanism, the definition, through to an essay on the Rise of Political Violence.

There is one concept buried in it all. That's what I was looking for.

It's herein - highlighted in bold:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...canism#United_States

United States
Main article: Republicanism in the United States

Abraham Lincoln
The values and ideals of republicanism are foundational in the constitution and history of the United States.[57][58] As the United States constitution prohibits granting titles of nobility, republicanism in this context does not refer to a political movement to abolish such a social class, as it does in countries such as the UK, Australia, and the Netherlands. Instead, it refers to the core values that citizenry in a republic have,[59][60] or ought to have. Political scientists and historians have described these central values as liberty and inalienable individual rights; recognizing the sovereignty of the people as the source of all authority in law;[61] rejecting monarchy, aristocracy, and hereditary political power; virtue and faithfulness in the performance of civic duties; and vilification of corruption .[62] These values are based on those of Ancient Greco-Roman, Renaissance, and English models and ideas.[63]

Political Corruption - consequences:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ruption#Consequences

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...yi3?ocid=socialshare

Republicans join Trump's attacks on justice system and campaign of vengeance after guilty verdict

The essay: (the best I could find even though written in 2021)
The Rise of Political Violence in the United States
October 2021

https://www.journalofdemocracy...n-the-united-states/

(excerpt)

Between 2017 and 2020, Democrats and Republicans were extremely close in justifying violence, with Democrats slightly more prone to condone violence—except in November 2019, the month before Trump’s first impeachment, when Republican support for violence spiked. Both sides also expressed similarly high levels of dehumanizing thought: 39 percent of Democrats and 41 percent of Republicans saw the other side as “downright evil,” and 16 percent of Democrats and 20 percent of Republicans said that their opponents were “like animals.” Such feelings can point to psychological readiness for violence. Separate polling found lower but still comparable levels: 4 percent of Democrats and 3 percent of Republicans believed in October 2020 that attacks on their political opponents would be justified if their party leader alleged the election was stolen; 6 percent of Democrats and 4 percent of Republicans believed property damage to be acceptable in such a case.20

The parallel attitudes suggest that partisan sorting and social pressures were working equally on all Americans, although Republicans may have greater tolerance for online threats and harassment of opponents and opposition leaders.21 Yet actual incidents of political violence, while rising on both sides, have been vastly more prevalent on the right. Why has the right been more willing to act on violent feelings?

The clue lies in the sudden shift in attitudes in October 2020, when after maintaining similarity for years, Republicans’ endorsements of violence suddenly leapt across every one of Kalmoe and Mason’s questions regarding the acceptability of violence; findings that were repeated in other polling.22 In January 2020, 41 percent of Republicans agreed that “a time will come when patriotic Americans have to take the law into their own hands”; a year later, after the January 6 insurrection, 56 percent of Republicans agreed that “if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves even if it requires taking violent action.”23 Moral disengagement also spiked: By February 2021, more than two-thirds of Republicans (and half of Democrats) saw the other party as “downright evil,”; while 12 percent more Republicans believed Democrats were less than human than the other way around.24

The false narrative of a stolen 2020 election clearly increased support for political violence. Those who believed the election was fraudulent were far more likely to endorse coups and armed citizen rebellion; by February 2021, a quarter of Republicans felt that it was at least “a little” justified to take over state government buildings with violence to advance their political goals.25 This politically driven false narrative points to the role of politicians since 2016 in fueling the difference in violence between right and left. As has been found in Israel and Germany, domestic terrorists are emboldened by the belief that politicians encourage violence or that authorities will tolerate it.26

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

I wonder what sort of contingency plans are being drawn up by law enforcement agencies all over the land to be ready to deal with the trumptards if he loses?

Slow your roll, Mike, the LEOs are still dealing with the current trump conviction riots ...

LEOs' job is to deal with now.

Agencies, you know - the dreaded, vile, administrative state, the deep state, thinks ahead a bit. That's their job.

extrajudicial
adjective
ex·​tra·​ju·​di·​cial ˌek-strə-jü-ˈdi-shəl
1
a
: not forming a valid part of regular legal proceedings
an extrajudicial investigation
b
: delivered without legal authority

the judge's extrajudicial statements
2
: done in contravention of due process of law

extrajudicially
ˌek-strə-jü-ˈdi-sh(ə-)lē
adverb

==============================================

"Lock Her UP"

A candidate for the esteemed office of POTUS would never blatantly go "extrajudicial" - right?

Just like a candidate for POTUS would never be a judicially convicted felon - right?

Late night show hosts have never had it so good:

https://youtu.be/SLBAoyjv-ro?s...n3gRj0hlIXv6cq&t=101

Another important part:

Trump Is A Convicted Felon | I Didn't Say "Lock Her Up"

https://youtu.be/SLBAoyjv-ro?s...D4A-j4FVJYpzia&t=352

=========================================

Of course you can watch the whole video by scrolling back. It's a good one.