Why didn't Trump ask the January 6th rioters to stand down earlier?

You are the one using the "false flag" concept, your question fit's it well. You are choosing a specific question to create an avenue to place blame on your target of choice- and you ignored the circumstances surrounding and indicating the correct perception of things. You aren't curious or wondering, you are looking for a way to bash anyone with a different view.

Next time just identify your trolling intent in advance, and save us both time.

 

So exactly at what time would you like to have seen Trump responding?

 

Below is what I wrote in post #88. Does that look like a rabid partisan? You are simply wrong. I'm choosing a question which to me clearly suggests (as I believe) that Trump behaved shamefully on the 6th. I'm asking for alternative viewpoints that might exonerate him - you're welcome to bring in anything to validate that viewpoint. So far, no-one has provided an explanation that seems to me at all persuasive; in fact, hardly anyone has provided any direct answer to the question, yourself included. So unless you're willing to answer the OP question directly, you might consider withholding your suggestions of partisan bias.

 

Not until the video at 4:13.

 

At the very least, in his first tweet. But preferably, as soon as the barriers were breached.

 

Trump was hoping the insurrection would succeed so he clearly would not tell them to stop.

 

The first the people entered the building was 2:13 p.m. The Capitol Police were throwing flashbangs, tear gas, and beating the protesters with their fist at 1:30 p.m.

His first tweet was at 2:38... ""“Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”""

Can I ask where you got the "hours" from? 2:13 to 2:38 is not hours.... The crowd was not violent at 1:30, the Capitol Police were... the crowd was not throwing flashbangs and pepper spraying the police, it was the other way around..

But you know what would have stopped this before it started ... the guard....
Would you like to have a repeat discussion about them and the lack security that the CP and overseers Pelosi and ilk caused.. Their job is to protect the Capitol ... they failed .... no excuse...
This was not a crowd problem... it was a crowd control problem.

 

So you've said.

 

And? You disagree?

 

Move what goalpost? none of your photos shows anyone watching YouTube or Twitter. People that selfies of everything.

You didn't show any people watching Trump or reading his tweets; I think you know that was my point. In fact your photos show a whole lot more people NOT using their phones.
Don't bother replying - I'm done with the stupidity.

 

Anyone that thinks the rioters had even a remote chance of overtaking our Democracy and declaring Trump the POTUS should immediately return any educational diplomas they received. They obviously don't deserve them.

 

Since I haven't screened every piece of communications on that day (have you?) I can't agree or disagree. Nor am motivated sufficiently to waste my time trying to find out.

 

Hahahaha...you must not be aware of these things known as 'alerts' that people can get on their phones. That being said, you claimed no one had their phones in their hands. I showed they did and now because you feel silly you resort to trying to insult me. Meh...whatever. I made my point.

 

(a) It was hours until he told people to go home. I don’t understand what is so complicated about this.

(b) His first tweet after 2:13 was actually 2:24: “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands truth!””. He already knew about the violence at that time, it was testified to in today's hearing. His deputy press secretary said she thought the tweet was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Deflect all you want to Pelosi. If she was negligent then she should be held accountable too. But that doesn't take away from the effect of Trump's actions and inaction.

 

This is one of the easiest facts of the day to establish - every public utterance of Trump once the riot started was a huge deal. So yes, I can say with confidence - he didn't ask people to leave until 4:17 (sorry, not 4:13). Not sure why you're participating in the discussion if you're so little motivated to find out the basic facts.

 

~ Yes indeed. Politicians should be held responsible for their actions and influence on citizens. Let's start with these Insurrectionists :

 

Who here is stupid enough to think once the riots started and the breaching of the Capitol began that ANYONE or ANYTHING would have stopped the riots and damage? Get real, folks, get real.

 

I have no problem with democrats facing consequences for overheated rhetoric, especially if it inspires violence.

 

Are you really saying there's no chance on earth that the person the rioters were chanting for could have convinced them to go home?

 

Glad you can at least admit your purpose was to trash Trump. Which is- just what I said you were doing.
When people genuinely are open to other views, thy listen, and think it through.
When they are set on reinforcing a conclusion they already hold, they measure everything new with their existing belief, and thereby discredit it. That is what you are doing here. You rejected rational reasons to see things in a different light. The force limiting your thinking- is you.

 

✔ ~ Good analysis of the narrow mind psychology that infects a certain segment of American society — in my opinion .

~ We are still waiting ...

 

I demonstrate that I'm willing to hold dems accountable and you go straight back to accusing me of being partisan. I can't help it if you can't imagine that someone who criticises Trump might actually be able to take a measured view.

But back to the facts: tell me what rational reasons for Trump's delay in telling people to go home I have rejected. I am honestly open to a different viewpoint; I simply haven't heard one yet that makes any sense.

 

I don't think you are open at all- except to a view that fits neatly into what you already believe. That means you are not at all able to shift your mindset. You read my reply and understood nothing.
Lawyers have a joke about certain tactics, in the question- "Have you stopped beating your wife?" That's your question. Whatever the answer, you would find it proving your conclusion- so the on;y "right" answer is to agree with yours, providing the confirmation you want to hear.

If your "yardstick" (the mindset you have) is actually 48 inches long instead of 36, everything you measure that you are skeptical about comes up short. This can apply to a single issue- or life.
It's that simple. It's a bit like the numerical constant of Pi. if you don't have it right, everything calculation you use it in is wrong. We have a lot of people who's tools of evaluation are either far off, or made of rubber for convenience.

The left's campaign was directed toward making everything associated with Trump actions or logic or policy- wrong because it was associated with Trump, period. That's why we have truly stupid things going on here, too many people using "Orange man bad" mindset as their standard of judgment; and so p[re-occupied they fail to notice things off the rail and going critical around them. . Those people are unable to think for themselves, to reason, to get past the conditioned emotional labeling of Trump. And sadly- unable to control their own thoughts or lives. They have been manipulated, used- and haven't got a clue. Truth is- any political organization that would employ that kind of political attack on anybody is full of people unfit to be a citizen of a free nation in my opinion, because they themselves are enemies of freedom. They may not see themselves that way- but their actions say it loud and clear. Make no mistake- the prime reason for the "hearings" is to keep the public focus on Trump as the bad guy, and distract their attention from the dumpster fire that is the current administration.

Now I'm not committed, not obligated to any political group, I don't adopt anyone's philosophy because it's popular. I usually support the person who supports the values I believe in, provided I think they have the character and competence to do the job. It is however always a choice of evils to some extent. I voted for Obama on his first term, but today I apologize for that mistake. I've voted for many democrats over the years, but today's democrats are nothing like those of 40 years ago, or even 20. There are no democrats I would vote for today for any office, and that is just because they associate themselves with the people behind all our troubles. If they aren't smart enough to walk away from that, they aren't smart enough to hold office. But they do- and we're paying dearly for allowing it.

Trump wasn't perfect, but one hell of a lot better than anything they have, now or then.

 

I'm not interested in your diatribe. I have told you I'm not overtly partisan and I've demonstrated it by quoting one of my own posts. You continue to insist on painting me as a partisan. Fine, I've no interest in a conversation with someone who can't take what I say at face value. Have the last word if you want.

 

Take you at face value... I think I already said that's what you want. If a view doesn't confirm yours, it's..... Diatribe?
That insures you won't question your own view. That IS partisan.