Comments by "" (@MeanBeanComedy) on "Prosecutors rest their arguments in Trump trial | USA TODAY" video.

@miseryhatescompany4195 No.
3
@miseryhatescompany4195 You've never met that man. You don't have the slightest clue what he believes.
3
@miseryhatescompany4195 What? First off, you have no clue who I bash. You haven't kept up with my opinions or beliefs; you're just guessing things. Second, if I criticize them for their public policies, that's in no way the same as you just running in here and assuming beliefs about people you've never met or learned anything about. Biden and Obama have each publicly stated their desired policies. I haven't, and neither did the either bloke here. If I criticize them for their policies, that's perfectly fine; I'm not making things up. You criticizing people you know nothing about because of what you assume their beliefs are isn't the same thing. Don't be a low-IQ, low-information automaton, and try to think for yourself instead of just projecting strawmen like a troglodyte.
3
Danaha Banaha No one said that.
3
@Mathewfriescountdown I'd say he hates anyone Marcuse would describe as a "dangerous authoritarian," so that includes Christians, Americans, Civic Nationalists, and people who value family. 🤷🏼‍♂️ But I'm just basing that off his screeching I've read here.
3
@Mathewfriescountdown Yup. They won't see it until the next Mao "takes care of them."
3
@miseryhatescompany4195 No. See what I mean? You literally have no idea what I believe, so you're just making things up. It's not shocking behaviour from a leftist; just disappointing.
3
It's so damned depressing to see how quickly their case falls apart when you look into things more and see the riot was planned weeks in advance, he told them to peacefully protest (and they keep cutting off the speech before then!), the riots started before he finished speaking, miles away, he told them to stop and go home and Twitter banned him so it wouldn't be heard, and they're using photoshopped tweets and unnamed sources' hearsay to "prove" he's guilty of incitement, the definition of which doesn't apply to any of his actions, yet millions somehow think this is an airtight case. 🙄🙄😒 The media's #1 goal is to lie to you and deceive you. Don't fall for it.
3
It also gives them a chance to smear all of us as evil by proxy.
3
@wbokunic Video of a riot and a few clauses cut out of context from Trump's speech isn't proof of incitement, especially when the riot was planned weeks in advance, the riot happened DURING his speech, miles away, and the speech explicitly called for them to protest peacefully. They cut the clip away just before he told them to be peaceful. There is a legal definition of incitement. "If not for" is not the definition we use. He has to explicitly call for them to attack the Capitol, which he didn't. The entire case was based on lies and omission of facts (like the ones I just started), and anonymous hearsay and photoshopped tweets. You should really take the time to go to the primary sources instead of letting the media curate your reality for you.
3
@Mathewfriescountdown We can just split up and go out separate ways. We won't miss the coastal elites. You can't coexist with people who despise you. Gramsci did it. He marched through the institutions.
2
@extremejon They blocked his tweet asking them to stop.
2
@extremejon None of it was "insane." It's all easily verified fact. Time is objective (assuming Trump hasn't broken general or specific relativity), so he can't cause something after it's already happened. Cause and effect. Instead of playing the Young Turks-esque card of, "Oh gosh, oh wow, I don't even know where to start, oh gosh oh wow, that's all so crazy!" Look into each of these points I made.
2