Would you say the same about the BLM riots?

Thought not. Transparent, principles-free partisanship.

Who knows, who cares, we are not talking about BLM!

Yes, exactly. You’ve proved my point.

What, that you went to change topic to prove something irrelevent.

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about politics?

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about a politically motivated and operated congressional "investigation"?

You think it's irrelevant that those pointing the finger at Trump are guilty of the same thing themselves?

Of course not.  You know it's relevant, you just don't want to talk about it because it will expose your double-standards.

So yes, you proved my point quite nicely.

No single instigator, true. It was half the Democratic Party leadership and their legacy media cheer squad.

And it went on for months.

So agreed, not the same thing at all.

Of course it isn't. Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism. On the other hand, the great Orange one telling people to march to the seat of Government because he is pi$$ed with the election result.

Yeah certainly isn't, is it?


Mannie

How many unarmed black people were killed by police in the US in 2019?

I bet you won't answer.

Manny, where did the donations to BLM go?  

What happened when they were required to submit their paperwork and audit?

They weren't only there to make trouble, Manny.  They were there to make money.

If BLM were not credible about their central claim of systemic police killing of innocent unarmed black people, then I don't see why anyone should consider that they have a shred of credibility on anything else.  

They condoned, encouraged and organised violence.

The organisation stinks, Manny.

The BLM protestors (as opposed to the rioters) were well meaning.  They reacted appropriately when they believed what they were told.  But what they were told were lies and distortions.

But by all means Manny, gloss over the death and destruction and grift and believe what they say about themselves.

Would you say the same about the BLM riots?

Thought not. Transparent, principles-free partisanship.

Who knows, who cares, we are not talking about BLM!

Yes, exactly. You’ve proved my point.

What, that you went to change topic to prove something irrelevent.

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about politics?

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about a politically motivated and operated congressional "investigation"?

You think it's irrelevant that those pointing the finger at Trump are guilty of the same thing themselves?

Of course not.  You know it's relevant, you just don't want to talk about it because it will expose your double-standards.

So yes, you proved my point quite nicely.

No, we were talking about DT and you went off on a tangent.

Manny, where did the donations to BLM go?  

What happened when they were required to submit their paperwork and audit?

They weren't only there to make trouble, Manny.  They were there to make money.

If BLM were not credible about their central claim of systemic police killing of innocent unarmed black people, then I don't see why anyone should consider that they have a shred of credibility on anything else.  

They condoned, encouraged and organised violence.

The organisation stinks, Manny.

The BLM protestors (as opposed to the rioters) were well meaning.  They reacted appropriately when they believed what they were told.  But what they were told were lies and distortions.

But by all means Manny, gloss over the death and destruction and grift and believe what they say about themselves.

But by all means Manny, gloss over the death and destruction and grift and believe what they say about themselves.

By all means, totally ignore what I have said about some elements of the BLM. Because that is what you do. But it is not my fault you don't like what you see in the mirror. A person who thinks the current GOP is in any shape or form a decent party. A party with zero policies because all they believe in is who can they hate on next. Single Mothers, Gays and Lesbians, Women seeking Abortion, The Woke, whatever that is. Ron DeSantis is your idea of a good pollie. Says it all really.

They condoned, encouraged and organized violence.

Prove it.

The organization stinks, Manny.

Yep maybe. But who cares about your opinion about BLM? I certainly don't.


Mannie

Would you say the same about the BLM riots?

Thought not. Transparent, principles-free partisanship.

Who knows, who cares, we are not talking about BLM!

Yes, exactly. You’ve proved my point.

What, that you went to change topic to prove something irrelevent.

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about politics?

You think politics is irrelevant to a thread about a politically motivated and operated congressional "investigation"?

You think it's irrelevant that those pointing the finger at Trump are guilty of the same thing themselves?

Of course not.  You know it's relevant, you just don't want to talk about it because it will expose your double-standards.

So yes, you proved my point quite nicely.

No, we were talking about DT and you went off on a tangent.

We were talking about the House investigation.  If you think an investigation of a politician by a bunch of opposing politicians isn't about politics, then I'm not sure what else I can say to help you understand.

Trump is being investigated by political opponents, yet you think it's irrelevant to point out that bias.  

He's being investigated for things that they say are shocking and unprecedented, but are things that their side had also been doing over the previous 2-4 years.  The reckless rhetoric.  Spurious questioning of the legitimacy of elections.  Condoning political violence.  Lies and distortions.  Abuse of process.  Both sides do it.  But pointing this out is irrelevant?

They are doing it to get people to vote for them rather than their opponents.  But if they engage in similar conduct, that's not relevant?

You can disagree about whether the Democrats had done the same thing in relation to the BLM riots.  That would be fair enough.  But you go much further.  You're effectively saying that even if the Democrats had incited political violence, that wouldn't be relevant to their conduct of this investigation into a political opponent.

You either realise all of this, and you don't want to expose your one-eyed partisan double standards, or you don't realise it, in which case you are blind in both eyes.

No single instigator, true. It was half the Democratic Party leadership and their legacy media cheer squad.

And it went on for months.

So agreed, not the same thing at all.

Of course it isn't. Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism. On the other hand, the great Orange one telling people to march to the seat of Government because he is pi$$ed with the election result.

Yeah certainly isn't, is it?


Mannie

How many unarmed black people were killed by police in the US in 2019?

I bet you won't answer.

Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism.

Just gloss over the systemic racism that black people receive and just concentrate about how many black people were killed by police in 2019. Prove to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter? You can't and you know it, so why continue with this busted flush of an argument?

Just look at the cases of Justine Damond and Philando Castille to get an idea as to why many black people in the US think that they had not choice but to march.

Other than that, I cannot help your intelligence.


Mannie

But by all means Manny, gloss over the death and destruction and grift and believe what they say about themselves.

By all means, totally ignore what I have said about some elements of the BLM. Because that is what you do.

But you did gloss over the death, destruction and grift.

But it is not my fault you don't like what you see in the mirror. A person who thinks the current GOP is in any shape or form a decent party. A party with zero policies because all they believe in is who can they hate on next. Single Mothers, Gays and Lesbians, Women seeking Abortion, The Woke, whatever that is. Ron DeSantis is your idea of a good pollie. Says it all really.

Called it.  Remember how I said you'd respond?  You responded in almost exactly the way I said you would.  You just proved me right 95%.  I deducted the 5% because I predicted that you'd present some evidence, which you didn't. Silly me.

They condoned, encouraged and organized violence.

Prove it.

I don't have to.  You admitted it a couple of posts ago.  You also admitted it last time we discussed this.  You couldn't distinguish between the riots organised by BLM and the protests organised by BLM.  So they organised them both.

The organization stinks, Manny.

Yep maybe. But who cares about your opinion about BLM? I certainly don't.

Mannie

You care enough to keep responding.

No single instigator, true. It was half the Democratic Party leadership and their legacy media cheer squad.

And it went on for months.

So agreed, not the same thing at all.

Of course it isn't. Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism. On the other hand, the great Orange one telling people to march to the seat of Government because he is pi$$ed with the election result.

Yeah certainly isn't, is it?


Mannie

How many unarmed black people were killed by police in the US in 2019?

I bet you won't answer.

Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism.

Just gloss over the systemic racism that black people receive and just concentrate about how many black people were killed by police in 2019. Prove to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter? You can't and you know it, so why continue with this busted flush of an argument?

Just look at the cases of Justine Damond and Philando Castille to get an idea as to why many black people in the US think that they had not choice but to march.

Other than that, I cannot help your intelligence.


Mannie

I'm not criticising the marchers.  I've said that over and over.  That you keep coming back to that accusation tells everyone that you have no real arguments.

And yes, there are a small number of tragic incidents where innocent people are killed by police.  Justine Diamond and Philandro Castille are two clear cases.  But they don't amount to systemic racism, and they don't justify the fear that the Dems and BLM whip up that there is a high chance that an innocent black person going about their day will be shot by police.

I notice you didn't answer the question as to how many unarmed black men were killed by police in 2019.  Out of 375,000,000 police interactions, it was nine.  Nine unarmed black men killed by police for the whole of 2019 for the whole of the United States. That's from the Washington Post.  Nine too many, but does that sound like systemic racism to you?    

I don't care what BLM claims they are doing - they are not a credible and worthy organisation for all of the reasons I have stated and that you have all but confirmed.  Your request that I prove that BLM got most of its public traction by claiming that police systemically kill innocent black people is so ludicrous I'm not even going to bother pulling up quotes.  BLM also supports defunding the police, which exactly the opposite of what will make black lives safer.  BLM doesn't care whether the police shot in self-defence, or defending others.  Every case the same to them - the facts don't matter.  BLM even supported Jussie Smollett after he was convicted of staging a race-hate hoax.  I could go on and on.  

But circling back to the original point.  You say Trump's rhetoric was false, reckless and divisive and I agree.  But you also say that the Democrat and BLM rhetoric was justified.  No it wasn't.  They lied about the threat posed to innocent black lives at the hands of supposedly racist police.  What they said was sure to stir anger and unrest, and it was intended to do so.  That was just as bad, and in many ways worse, than what Trump did on Jan 6.

And it's not irrelevant to point that out.

Just reminiscing.

No single instigator, true. It was half the Democratic Party leadership and their legacy media cheer squad.

And it went on for months.

So agreed, not the same thing at all.

Of course it isn't. Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism. On the other hand, the great Orange one telling people to march to the seat of Government because he is pi$$ed with the election result.

Yeah certainly isn't, is it?


Mannie

How many unarmed black people were killed by police in the US in 2019?

I bet you won't answer.

Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism.

Just gloss over the systemic racism that black people receive and just concentrate about how many black people were killed by police in 2019. Prove to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter? You can't and you know it, so why continue with this busted flush of an argument?

Just look at the cases of Justine Damond and Philando Castille to get an idea as to why many black people in the US think that they had not choice but to march.

Other than that, I cannot help your intelligence.


Mannie

I'm not criticising the marchers.  I've said that over and over.  That you keep coming back to that accusation tells everyone that you have no real arguments.

And yes, there are a small number of tragic incidents where innocent people are killed by police.  Justine Diamond and Philandro Castille are two clear cases.  But they don't amount to systemic racism, and they don't justify the fear that the Dems and BLM whip up that there is a high chance that an innocent black person going about their day will be shot by police.

I notice you didn't answer the question as to how many unarmed black men were killed by police in 2019.  Out of 375,000,000 police interactions, it was nine.  Nine unarmed black men killed by police for the whole of 2019 for the whole of the United States. That's from the Washington Post.  Nine too many, but does that sound like systemic racism to you?    

I don't care what BLM claims they are doing - they are not a credible and worthy organisation for all of the reasons I have stated and that you have all but confirmed.  Your request that I prove that BLM got most of its public traction by claiming that police systemically kill innocent black people is so ludicrous I'm not even going to bother pulling up quotes.  BLM also supports defunding the police, which exactly the opposite of what will make black lives safer.  BLM doesn't care whether the police shot in self-defence, or defending others.  Every case the same to them - the facts don't matter.  BLM even supported Jussie Smollett after he was convicted of staging a race-hate hoax.  I could go on and on.  

But circling back to the original point.  You say Trump's rhetoric was false, reckless and divisive and I agree.  But you also say that the Democrat and BLM rhetoric was justified.  No it wasn't.  They lied about the threat posed to innocent black lives at the hands of supposedly racist police.  What they said was sure to stir anger and unrest, and it was intended to do so.  That was just as bad, and in many ways worse, than what Trump did on Jan 6.

And it's not irrelevant to point that out.

I don't have to.  You admitted it a couple of posts ago.  You also admitted it last time we discussed this.  You couldn't distinguish between the riots organised by BLM and the protests organised by BLM.  So they organised them both.

Yeah, you keep on believing that. Urging people to march against racism is the same as telling them to riot. As appalling as the riots were and all involved should be arrested its funny that you do not mention the 97% of the Marches were peaceful. Still have not proved that the BLM has organized the riots.  

And yes, there are a small number of tragic incidents where innocent people are killed by police.  Justine Diamond and Philandro Castille are two clear cases.

Did you actually read about those cases? Justine Damond's family got a massive payout ($20 Million) and the Policeman in question got 10 years.

Philandro Castille's family $3.8 million and the Policeman got cleared of all charges.

Those cases were chosen because they happened in the same city a month apart. If you think that Blacks and Whites are treated the same by all Police in the US then I have a bridge to sell you.  

But they don't amount to systemic racism, and they don't justify the fear that the Dems and BLM whip up that there is a high chance that an innocent black person going about their day will be shot by police.

So you think that those fears are not felt by Black families up and down the US? It is just a conspiracy theory drummed up by the Democratic Party and BLM. Yeah right? So the dreadful hoax by Mr. Smollett is evidence that systemic racism does not exist?

Nine unarmed black men killed by police for the whole of 2019 for the whole of the United States. That's from the Washington Post.  Nine too many, but does that sound like systemic racism to you?    

Still haven't proved to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter. You are just loudly opining about your dislike for Democrats and BLM, which is your right. You strike me as someone who criticizes people for being partisan and biased whilst being partisan and biased.

I have stated that it was not just about Police killing 9 unarmed black men in 2019. That is in your words a very shallow argument. I cannot help your lack of understanding.



Mannie

@michaelgm

I'm not sure we learn much from that video.  Some of the scenes in the video are confronting and shocking - and I'm sure there is worse footage to come.  However, none of it was surprising.  Riots are ugly, whoever is doing the rioting.  And it could have been much worse - the rioters didn't kill anybody (more by luck than restraint), didn't attack bystanders, didn't destroy peoples homes or businesses or neighborhoods, and it didn't go for months on end. Don't get me wrong - there are no excuses here - the rioters should be prosecuted and should go to jail - and so should Trump if he deliberately incited or organised the violence.

Here are some other thoughts, more or less in chronological order:

• some or all of the crowd that was at the Capitol when the riot started were organised prior to the event - the precise intent of the organisers isn't clear - that violence occurred is not proof that this is what they intended (or is it, Manny?).  I'm sure we will hear more about this.
• it is clear that many in that crowd (ie the people highlighted in this video) went in with violent intent from the start - at the very least with the intent to test the police line and break it if they could
• the rioters were violent, dangerous and stupid far right lunatics.  It wasn't Antifa.
• none of them had firearms - and all of these people would have been card-carrying NRA types who definitely owned suitable weapons.  If this was a serious attempt at actual insurrection they would have brought their guns.  That doesn't mean they didn't plan to riot, it just means that this wasn't really an insurrection.
• nothing in that video was evidence that Trump organised, had prior knowledge of, or deliberately encouraged or condoned, the violence.  Perhaps there is more on that to come.
• the riots were started by people who were not at Trump's rally when he spoke.  It's not even clear that they listened to his speech at all.  They were rioting before he'd finished - and before he said the words that are alleged to constitute the incitement on the day. That indicates that what he said in that speech was not what incited them to violence.
• one thing I did learn was it was clear that the situation was dangerous and out of control about 30 minutes before the Capitol building was breached.  That extends Trump's delay in calling for calm from about 30 minutes to about 60 minutes. It's pretty clear that even if he had called for calm an hour earlier, it would have made no difference.  It's not clear what Trump knew about the course of events on the day.  It would be interesting know what he was told and when.  I'm sure there will more on this.  
• it looks like the rioters didn't really plan what they would do after they got inside - perhaps they got a lot further than they thought they would
• it's not clear that those who followed the rioters into the building after the initial breach had any prior intent.  Many (I'd guess most) of these followers just went in opportunistically and did not engage in any violence
• police and security were woefully unprepared and reinforcements were slow, despite obvious warning signs both prior to and on the day.  I would like to know why, but I don't think we'll find out.
• another thing I learnt is that today, 18 months later, there are still people in prison awaiting trial - some of them in solitary confinement for much of that time.  Whatever you think about the rioters, that is not acceptable.  Judges and senior Democrats (eg Elizabeth Warren) have also condemned their treatment and this delay.  I would make the same point if there were BLM rioters in that position.  Are there?

40-year high inflation, stock market tanking, gasoline and energy costs through the roof -

But look over there!

Obviously the insurrection, now clearly orchestrated by Trump where police officers died through the actions of the insurrectionists and those same people were in the Capitol building to kill Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi who feared for their lives was a non-event to you.

Nothing more needs to be said does it

Mike.

40-year high inflation, stock market tanking, gasoline and energy costs through the roof -

But look over there!

Obviously the insurrection, now clearly orchestrated by Trump where police officers died through the actions of the insurrectionists and those same people were in the Capitol building to kill Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi who feared for their lives was a non-event to you.

Nothing more needs to be said does it

Mike.

If there's nothing to say I can guarantee that you'll say it, Mike.

@michaelgm

I'm not sure we learn much from that video.  Some of the scenes in the video are confronting and shocking - and I'm sure there is worse footage to come.  However, none of it was surprising.  Riots are ugly, whoever is doing the rioting.  And it could have been much worse - the rioters didn't kill anybody (more by luck than restraint), didn't attack bystanders, didn't destroy peoples homes or businesses or neighborhoods, and it didn't go for months on end. Don't get me wrong - there are no excuses here - the rioters should be prosecuted and should go to jail - and so should Trump if he deliberately incited or organised the violence.

Here are some other thoughts, more or less in chronological order:

• some or all of the crowd that was at the Capitol when the riot started were organised prior to the event - the precise intent of the organisers isn't clear - that violence occurred is not proof that this is what they intended (or is it, Manny?).  I'm sure we will hear more about this.
• it is clear that many in that crowd (ie the people highlighted in this video) went in with violent intent from the start - at the very least with the intent to test the police line and break it if they could
• the rioters were violent, dangerous and stupid far right lunatics.  It wasn't Antifa.
• none of them had firearms - and all of these people would have been card-carrying NRA types who definitely owned suitable weapons.  If this was a serious attempt at actual insurrection they would have brought their guns.  That doesn't mean they didn't plan to riot, it just means that this wasn't really an insurrection.
• nothing in that video was evidence that Trump organised, had prior knowledge of, or deliberately encouraged or condoned, the violence.  Perhaps there is more on that to come.
• the riots were started by people who were not at Trump's rally when he spoke.  It's not even clear that they listened to his speech at all.  They were rioting before he'd finished - and before he said the words that are alleged to constitute the incitement on the day. That indicates that what he said in that speech was not what incited them to violence.
• one thing I did learn was it was clear that the situation was dangerous and out of control about 30 minutes before the Capitol building was breached.  That extends Trump's delay in calling for calm from about 30 minutes to about 60 minutes. It's pretty clear that even if he had called for calm an hour earlier, it would have made no difference.  It's not clear what Trump knew about the course of events on the day.  It would be interesting know what he was told and when.  I'm sure there will more on this.  
• it looks like the rioters didn't really plan what they would do after they got inside - perhaps they got a lot further than they thought they would
• it's not clear that those who followed the rioters into the building after the initial breach had any prior intent.  Many (I'd guess most) of these followers just went in opportunistically and did not engage in any violence
• police and security were woefully unprepared and reinforcements were slow, despite obvious warning signs both prior to and on the day.  I would like to know why, but I don't think we'll find out.
• another thing I learnt is that today, 18 months later, there are still people in prison awaiting trial - some of them in solitary confinement for much of that time.  Whatever you think about the rioters, that is not acceptable.  Judges and senior Democrats (eg Elizabeth Warren) have also condemned their treatment and this delay.  I would make the same point if there were BLM rioters in that position.  Are there?

Yeah, surprised by the absence of fire arms carried by the insurgents.

Yeah, surprised by the absence of fire arms carried by the insurgents.

I'm not.

The insurrectionists would have been well clued up that carrying arms into the Capitol building would likely mean certain death to them. Being unarmed meant they had a chance of survival.

Bearing in mind the insurrectionists would have been clueless regarding the level of security at the Capitol Building which was pretty pathetic and only routinely overseen by the DC police force. Nothing like the Protective Security Officers (PSO's) that are stationed in the Treasury precinct in Melbourne and likely their equivalent in other capitals around Australia.

Mike.

How many unarmed black people were killed by police in the US in 2019?

I bet you won't answer.

Urging people to march against injustice and systemic racism.

Just gloss over the systemic racism that black people receive and just concentrate about how many black people were killed by police in 2019. Prove to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter? You can't and you know it, so why continue with this busted flush of an argument?

Just look at the cases of Justine Damond and Philando Castille to get an idea as to why many black people in the US think that they had not choice but to march.

Other than that, I cannot help your intelligence.


Mannie

I'm not criticising the marchers.  I've said that over and over.  That you keep coming back to that accusation tells everyone that you have no real arguments.

And yes, there are a small number of tragic incidents where innocent people are killed by police.  Justine Diamond and Philandro Castille are two clear cases.  But they don't amount to systemic racism, and they don't justify the fear that the Dems and BLM whip up that there is a high chance that an innocent black person going about their day will be shot by police.

I notice you didn't answer the question as to how many unarmed black men were killed by police in 2019.  Out of 375,000,000 police interactions, it was nine.  Nine unarmed black men killed by police for the whole of 2019 for the whole of the United States. That's from the Washington Post.  Nine too many, but does that sound like systemic racism to you?    

I don't care what BLM claims they are doing - they are not a credible and worthy organisation for all of the reasons I have stated and that you have all but confirmed.  Your request that I prove that BLM got most of its public traction by claiming that police systemically kill innocent black people is so ludicrous I'm not even going to bother pulling up quotes.  BLM also supports defunding the police, which exactly the opposite of what will make black lives safer.  BLM doesn't care whether the police shot in self-defence, or defending others.  Every case the same to them - the facts don't matter.  BLM even supported Jussie Smollett after he was convicted of staging a race-hate hoax.  I could go on and on.  

But circling back to the original point.  You say Trump's rhetoric was false, reckless and divisive and I agree.  But you also say that the Democrat and BLM rhetoric was justified.  No it wasn't.  They lied about the threat posed to innocent black lives at the hands of supposedly racist police.  What they said was sure to stir anger and unrest, and it was intended to do so.  That was just as bad, and in many ways worse, than what Trump did on Jan 6.

And it's not irrelevant to point that out.

I don't have to.  You admitted it a couple of posts ago.  You also admitted it last time we discussed this.  You couldn't distinguish between the riots organised by BLM and the protests organised by BLM.  So they organised them both.

Yeah, you keep on believing that. Urging people to march against racism is the same as telling them to riot.

Crying racism is not a free pass to create mayhem.  Especially when those claims are false.  Nine deaths from 375,000,000 interactions is not systemic racism. The risk that a police officer would be killed by a black man was 18 times higher than the chance of an unarmed black man being killed by police. The real risk that an innocent black person just going about their day would be killed by police was basically nil.

BLM leaders have explicitly condoned and justified the violence and looting on a number of occasions. They have rarely, if ever condemned that violence and looting. They have rarely, if ever, called on their followers to express themselves peacefully, at least not in the terms and with the prominence that you would expect from a supposedly peaceful organisation whose protests were regularly turning violent, destructive and deadly.

They were not just condoning the violence, but they were stoking and exaggerating the false fears and stereotypes in the black and the white community about police. They were advocating defunding the police, which would make, and has made, the lives of black people even less safe. They didn’t care about he circumstances of each fatality - justified or not, the protests happened.

They were selling a lie and using it to stoke irrational anger and fear, and were content to let law enforcement collapse, cities burn, and people die in order to make trouble, gain power, and make money for themselves.

As appalling as the riots were and all involved should be arrested

Remember how you had to be dragged (kicking and screaming) to that conclusion last time we discussed this?

its funny that you do not mention the 97% of the Marches were peaceful.

It’s for exactly the same reason you don’t mention the hundreds of peaceful Trump rallies. They are irrelevant. I don’t care how many peaceful rallies Trump or BLM organised. If they organised or deliberately incited even one riot, they should be condemned and imprisoned for it.

And no, it’s not true that 97% of the BLM marches were peaceful. 100% of the BLM marches were peaceful. The violent riots were not marches. But once again you effectively admit that both the riots and the marches were organised by BLM.  

Still have not proved that the BLM has organized the riots.  

I don’t need to. You proved it for me  And BLM proved it too. If you applied the same reasoning to BLM as you are to Trump, you wouldn’t be asking for any proof.

And yes, there are a small number of tragic incidents where innocent people are killed by police.  Justine Diamond and Philandro Castille are two clear cases.

Did you actually read about those cases? Justine Damond's family got a massive payout ($20 Million) and the Policeman in question got 10 years.

Philandro Castille's family $3.8 million and the Policeman got cleared of all charges.

Those cases were chosen because they happened in the same city a month apart. If you think that Blacks and Whites are treated the same by all Police in the US then I have a bridge to sell you.  

They are two cases, with different facts. They were not a month apart, they were a year apart.

Castille was shot in 2016 and the settlement and trial verdict were announced in June 2017.  The jurors said they weren’t satisfied b eyond reasonable doubt that the officer didn’t reasonably believe Castille was reaching for the gun Castille told the officer he had.   I agree with you that justice was not served in this case: the police officer was completely incompetent and panicked for no reason. At the time it was the first officer-involved shooting in 30 years for the St Albans Police Department (according to the Police Chief). That might account for the relatively low pay-out.

Just a month after the Castille verdict and settlement, Damond was killed in July 2017. The trial verdict and settlement was announced in May 2019. Damond’s killer had a string of prior complaints and problems that may have added to his, and the City’s, culpability. As hard as it is to believe, the way Damond was shot was possibly even worse than Castille. But the officer didn’t get 10 years, he got 4.75.

And George Floyd’s family got $27 million and his killer 22 years. Duante Wrights killer, also a case of gross negligence, got sentenced to 2 years, civil settlement pending.

So what does that tell you?  Exactly nothing. None of those cases were even allegedly about individual racism, and 3 instances is not a case for systemic racism.

But they don't amount to systemic racism, and they don't justify the fear that the Dems and BLM whip up that there is a high chance that an innocent black person going about their day will be shot by police.

So you think that those fears are not felt by Black families up and down the US? It is just a conspiracy theory drummed up by the Democratic Party and BLM. Yeah right?

The fears are real, the risk is not. Stoking that irrational fear and anger in order to create widespread and deadly civil unrest for personal gain is despicable.

So the dreadful hoax by Mr. Smollett is evidence that systemic racism does not exist?

No, the point was that BLM supported the hoaxer, even after the hoax was proven. Tells you something about BLM.

Nine unarmed black men killed by police for the whole of 2019 for the whole of the United States. That's from the Washington Post.  Nine too many, but does that sound like systemic racism to you?    

Still haven't proved to me that the number of black men killed by Police in 2019 or even Police killing black people was the sole and main claim of black lives matter.

I haven’t proven that the sky is blue or the Pope is Catholic either.

Read anything about BLM and it’s rise to prominence. Read its Wikipedia page. All of its protests are prompted by supposedly unjustified police shootings of black people. People protested and got angry because BLM claimed black lives don’t matter to police. It’s in the name, Manny.

You are just loudly opining about your dislike for Democrats and BLM, which is your right. You strike me as someone who criticizes people for being partisan and biased whilst being partisan and biased.

I’m not just throwing out accusations of bias and partisanship, I am proving them with logic and evidence. I am not the one applying different standards to protestors I agree with. You are.

Your hypocrisy here is breathtaking. You were the one who wanted to stomp on the necks  of the peaceful Freedom Convoy, financially ruin them, and impose state violence and punishment without trial.  In the same breath as you were excusing the BLM rioters.

And you’re doing it again.

I have stated that it was not just about Police killing 9 unarmed black men in 2019. That is in your words a very shallow argument. I cannot help your lack of understanding.

I’m trying to help yours, Manny. Is it futile?

With all of the talk and argy bargy, the subject remains Trump's true colours. Well before the Presidential election he was saying that if he failed to win it would be because of a fit-up, cheating, vote-rigging, you name it.
When he lost, he had two options; carry on with his "we wuz robbed" scenario, and look a fool, or accept the result and look a fool for his original comments.
He was left with no chance if he accepted the result, and a minute chance if he challenged it. The rest is history and Trump remains a confirmed fool.

@Valvegear, I tend to agree, but his foolishness is worse than that.

If he had accepted the legality of the result (even if he didn’t accept its fairness) he would have proven all his detractors wrong who predicted that he might not hand over power peacefully.  The GOP would have won Georgia and they would now control the Senate - and they would have had a say in another SCOTUS pick.  To many people, he would be seen to have left a positive legacy, who would have concluded he had been defeated by a dishonest cabal of elitist Democrats, big media, big tech, big corporates, leftist academia, and Marxist culture warriors. Jan 6 would never have happened, which was an own-goal of epic proportions. He would have been the front runner for the Republican nomination or would have anointed them (probably his daughter).  And as a result, and with everything that has happened under Biden since then, he or she would have had a pretty good chance at winning back the White House in 2024.

That’s what his foolishness really cost him.

The insurrectionists would have been well clued up that carrying arms into the Capitol building would likely mean certain death to them. Being unarmed meant they had a chance of survival.

Bearing in mind the insurrectionists would have been clueless regarding the level of security at the Capitol Building which was pretty pathetic and only routinely overseen by the DC police force.

That might actually be a semi-intelligent comment. I’m shocked. Did you think of it all by yourself?

That might actually be a semi-intelligent comment. I’m shocked. Did you think of it all by yourself?

 I suspect that you are a Moderator. Did that comment add anything to the standard of debate?

Yes. It was a humorous acknowledgment of a good point as well as being an admonishment in relation to recent behaviour.

I’m only a Moderator in a forum that has long since passed.

Who put this together?

Who put this together?

A RWNJ.