Three years after supporters of Donald Trump violently stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the future of the criminal cases against the rioters may hinge on the presidential election.
He has also hosted fundraisers for a controversial nonprofit group that financially supports Jan. 6 defendants, and campaign finance records show that his political action committee donated $10,000 to the group.
In the days immediately after the Capitol riot, when he was still president, Trump "floated the idea" of a blanket pardon for everyone involved in Jan. 6, ...
There were 14 days after the insurrection that he could have used to pardon them and he chose to use that time to pack up classified documents instead. That’s the talking point I’d start with,
“if he really cared about you then why did he sit on his hands for two weeks instead of signing a blanket pardon?”
I ask the same about Obama when he sat his hands in 2009 instead of codifying roe v wade, or when he compromised on bodily autonomy for his Heritage Foundation insurance handout.
The election is coming up right? And Democrats are going to run in that election. So if the “talking point” is that Trump didn’t pardon the rioters when he had the chance, therefore he is lying to them, how is it that the democrats promises they broke re:abortion and the environment when they had the chance, not relevant to the topic at hand?
They are lying to you about what you think you are voting for just like trump.
Let’s try it this way. Based on your comment, I understand your argument structure to be like this (correct me if I’m wrong):
Election is coming up > democrats are running in the election > as part of the election strategy democrats are pushing a “talking point” about trump campaign dangling pardons and legal defense funding for his insurrection conspirators > trump had the chance to pardon them already but chose not to, so therefore he’s lying to them > democratic party promises they broke re: abortion and environment when they had power are the same type of lie and therefore relevant to the discussion about trump campaign dangling pardons and legal defense funding for his insurrection conspirators in the current campaign…because they’re both lies?
Surely you can see how you’ve had to construct an entirely different argument structure around the actual subject of discussion (trump campaign dangling pardons and legal defense funding for his insurrection conspirators) to try and build relevance? But even then it doesnt actually work logically.
Your original response was essentially “but what about Obummer?!” That’s whataboutism. It’s a logical fallacy.
The answer is that if he tried to pardon them then the senate would have convicted him in his impeachment and the entire white house legal team would have walked out (along with a lot of other white house staff).
Your comment doesn’t match the content, nobody is trying to let him lie in this article, it’s just pointing out that Trump and the GOP are pretending these traitors are “political prisoners” and he’s lying to them about pardons and money, he’s not going to give AF about any of these idiots even if ue takes power, unless of course it suits him somehow, like if they have a million bucks they want to trade for their freedom, like how Lil Wayne, Kodak Black and others paid Trump for pardons in Trump’s first term in office.
Add comment