I don't think Trump intended what happened so blaming him isn't going to stick.

However, it shows that if Trump really wanted violence, indeed if he really wanted to go for it....I'd give him fifty fifty.

I don't see the military shooting on their own crowds....you'd get the odd incident but they would be very reluctant.

Then it would be Antifa/blm v Proud boys and all the rest of them and finally Mainey would get his chance out on the streets.

I don't think Trump has the balls though. Rather I think you were right about the media route.

Edited by Stirlingsays (09 Jan 2021 8.54pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Pretty sure I read somewhere that the military have already come out and distanced themselves from getting involved in this dross. He’s on his own there

I also read that allegedly the people left in the ‘inner circle’ of aides etc in the White House are effectively operating under the 25th to limit any further damage he might want to cause. Says it all really

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Well with empty stadiums at games now, it would be good to see the crowds back. 'Antifa/blm v Proud boys' on PPV with Anthony Joshua vs Tyson Fury on the undercard?

When is it suggested that she made this request?

If, for instance, it was as armed intruders were breaking into her office and she was in fear both for her life and the future of democracy in the USA then she would obviously have requested help.

If then those able to help her refused because to do so would mean them defying orders from Trump she could well have requested them to ignore those orders. I guess you would too.

This is why a full and objective investigation into all the aspects of Wednesday's events is not only necessary but almost certainly going to happen.

We need to know whether the Pentagon, acting on Trump's direct instructions, or just reacting to nods and winks, deliberately allowed the rioters to gain entry and then failed to respond effectively.

Until that is known I think we all need to be cautious and not jump to too many conclusions. Some though are too obvious to be ignored.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

God Wisbech you're such a square.

Have a laugh for once.

Find a tickle stick and knock yourself out.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

But it must go beyond heads rolling. I would hazard a guess that all kinds of scenarios involving variations of what happened this week must have been 'gamed' hundreds of times. Bloody hell I think there is even a TV show based on the notion of the entire US senate being blown up.

The US has been in its 'war on terror' since 2000. The risk of a group of whoever storming the Senate building must have been deemed a definite 'what if' on all kinds of peoples radars, especially on a day like that.

And with a much higher risk factor valued in that in a normal electoral process for all kinds of reasons.

Yet we see that group of misfits and freaks do that? Imagine if they had been serious? Come in with assault rifles and so on? If that was a coup it was the s***iest one I have ever seen.

Those people should not have been within 100 metres of that main entrance. Let alone able to breach those doors. Surely they have some kind of emergency barriers in place? The ability to close that entire complex down just in case somebody with serious intent decides to have a day out in it? Especially in a country with the US's history of mass shootings and so on?

This goes beyond incompetence.

Edited by Matov (09 Jan 2021 9.15pm)

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.