MovieChat Forums > Politics > So now the J6 bake sale was “the worst a...

So now the J6 bake sale was “the worst attack on our democracy since the civil war”


The analogies for the J6 bake sale change more than the climate hoax.

Civil War>Pearl Harbor>911

What will it be compared to next?
The meteor that killed the dinosaurs?
The Big Bang?

One can only guess when it comes to the ignorant lies the Dumbocrat party leadership comes up with to manipulate their dumbfuck lemmings.

Note: we still don’t live in a democracy and never have. We live in a Republic.

reply

Lies, deceptions, and exaggerations.

Yes, I saw where the "liberal-left", compared it to all three of those in the 7-part documentary.

Bloody Hill: The Seven Abominations Of January 6

S01E01 A Proud Look
S01E02 A Lying Tongue
S01E03 Hands That Shed Innocent Blood
S01E04 A Heart That Deviseth Wicked Imaginations
S01E05 Feet That Be Swift In Running To Mischief
S01E06 A False Witness That Speaketh Lies
S01E07 He That Soweth Discord Among Brethren


https://www.bloodyhill.com/

reply

What will it be compared to next?

The genocide of the native Americans.

reply

It's Donald J Trumps crowning achievement, his unprecedented ginormous grift of a lifetime - the BIG LIE

reply

They remember the civil war because of evil white supremacists. At least in their heads that's what the entire thing was about and they believe the confederate army was composed of a bunch of people fighting to keep slaves. Even though 99.9% of those people had never owned a slave.
Eventually they are going to suggest the protestors at the capitol that day were there in support of slavery. It's always got to be a race thing.

reply

and 99.9% of germans never killed or gassed a Jew. I guess nazi Germany wasn't racist..

is this really conservative peak logic?

reply

The socialists who took control were certainly racist.

reply

the right wingers you mean. but nice historical reimagination yet again :)

nice dodging my rebuttal of your initial comment on slavery. you had no argument and your showed that. care to concede publicly and show you have a spine?

reply

You think the confedarate army was enlisting because they wanted rich people to have slaves? And the Nazis were 100% leftwing, the national socialist German workers party could not be clearer, but you know that.

reply

Yes the elites who had political and economic power in the south and didn't want that to end were willing to go to war. how fucking dumb are you to deny this?

you really think people have only gone to war to protect their own poor and middle class interests and never the rich? you think peasants wanted to go to war for kings for some foreign land they saw no benefit from? the rich had the power and led, and the poor followed. was there likely propaganda at the time saying "hey the north is threading our way of life" rather than "hey poor southern boy fight for us rich peoples right to own slaves". of course there was.

no matter how you guys try and use ephamisms to deny the war was about slavery by saying "states rights" it doesn't change it.

yes and North Korea is a democratic republic. its in the name so its true? meanwhile the nazis

-helped the Spanish conservatives/Christians against the socialists.

-never allied with German socialist parties. yet literally formed coalition government and political alliances with ONLY German conservative parties

- in the night of the long knives took out the parties most left wing member who was publicly advocating for a proletariate revolution.

-the party was made up of tonnes of former right wing party members and paramilitaries

-every single German conservative party member lived out their life in nazi Germany in peace. every single socialist and commie leader was either jailed or fled Germany.\

0the concentration camp of Dacau was LITERALLY became the first regular concentration camp established by the coalition government of the Nazi Party and the right German National People's Party for political enemies. the camp was LITERALLY built to hold commies and socialists, but also included jehovahs witnesses, homosexuals and jews.

its quite amazing!! because the nazis sure saw themselves as conservatives and the left as their enemies. but you know better

reply


no matter how you guys try and use ephamisms to deny the war was about slavery by saying "states rights" it doesn't change it.


It was about state rights, and it’s more accurate to say slavery related politics. They didn’t go to war to fight slavery, because there was no real threat to end slavery at that point.

The north also didn’t go to war to fight against slavery, they wanted to keep the union together. They only decided to change focus and make it war to end slavery because the south was holding their own, and there were threats that Europe was going to get involved and support the south, which would surely turn the tide. So they wrote the emancipation proclamation, and made it a righteous war.

But that was almost 2 years after the the succession began. If the north ended the war quickly, the war wouldn’t have been about ending slavery at all.

reply

there was a real threat to slavery. they were going to stop its expansion into new states, and the southern states worried that with these future no slavery states, they would have the voting power to end slavery in the south.

you clearly don't know anything about basic history.

and why did they want to keep the union together? because the south saw an attack on their primary institution. again no matter your euphemisms it doesn't change anything.

Europe was dealing with its own massive issues, England in tis prime couldnt even defeat some squirrel shooters in the colonies. yet now they were going to help take on a far more powerful one?

your historical reimagination is dismissed

reply

there was a real threat to slavery. they were going to stop its expansion into new states, and the southern states worried that with these future no slavery states, they would have the voting power to end slavery in the south


New States were allowed to chose if they would be a slave state or a free state upon joining the union. They were never able to get a law like that passed until the free states started to out number the slaves, and then they tried to further shift power by having representation based on population, which didn’t include slaves. Both sides has a hypocritical stance on that btw.

and why did they want to keep the union together?


Because the south controlled the majority of the country’s agricultural industry.


Europe was dealing with its own massive issues, England in tis prime couldnt even defeat some squirrel shooters in the colonies. yet now they were going to help take on a far more powerful one?


Yes because they would be helping the south do the same thing the Americans did during the revolution. Fight a defensive war. And England was still a much more powerful country than that time. They would’ve turned the tide.

reply

Here's 3 other German conservative parties the Nazis worked with, to the point of forming coalitions. they also NEVER allied with the socialists and commies.



The German national peoples party

“At the same time, it lost many votes to Adolf Hitler's rising Nazi Party. Several prominent Nazis began their careers in the DNVP.

After 1929, the DNVP co-operated with the Nazis, joining forces in the Harzburg Front of 1931, forming coalition governments in some states and finally supporting Hitler's appointment as Chancellor (Reichskanzler) in January 1933. Initially, the DNVP had a number of ministers in Hitler's government, but the party quickly lost influence and eventually dissolved itself in June 1933, giving way to the Nazis' single-party dictatorship with the majority of its former members joining the Nazi Party. The Nazis allowed the remaining former DNVP members in the Reichstag, the civil service, and the police to continue with their jobs and left the rest of the party membership generally in peace.”




the German Volkish Freedom party

“After the Nazi Party was banned in the wake of the Beer Hall Putsch, the DVFP entered into an electoral alliance with many Nazis to form the National Socialist Freedom Movement in early 1924, a move endorsed by Erich Ludendorff and encouraged by Graefe, who hoped to gain control of the far right as a whole.[3] However this alliance was not a success, plans for a full merger fell through in August 1924 and Graefe and Wulle re-formed the DVFP, now named the German Völkisch Freedom Movement, as a rival to the Nazi Party in February 1925.”


The DVP

“in October 1929, Ernst Scholz became party chairman, and the DVP tended more to the right. In Thuringia, for example, it participated in the Baum-Frick government, the first state government with Nazi Party (NSDAP) participation. In the spring of 1933 Otto Hugo, the deputy chairman of the DVP, demanded that the party be completely merged into the NSDAP, but Dingeldey refused.”

reply

Socialism = Leftist, Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, Fascism, Nazism, Communism, Maoism, Totalitarianism, Marxism-Leninism, Anarchism, KKK/Pro-slavery

reply

sooo now everything you don't like is socialism. how convenient. the conservative reinvention of terms and history is in full swing.

you uneducated clowns make me laugh.

reply

Unequivocal and Irrefutable Historical facts, but you are already aware of that.

reply

yes the Unequivocal and Irrefutable Historical facts that EVERY SINGLE historian, political scientist and economist disagrees with you with naziism being on the left. with the exceptional of a few libertarians

just reinvent history you little clown to suit your right wing nonsense :)

reply

Prove me wrong.

reply

no no no. YOU have the burden of proof. to prove all of the academics are wrong you clown. you've been watching too much crowder.

YOU made an assertion they are all left wing. YOU PROVE IT

reply

I made a factual statement and you deny it by saying I'm wrong, so prove it.

reply

no you just claim your assertions are facts. there's a difference. my post above responding to Lord rake PROVES your so called facts are BS.

the nazis weren't left wing. they were right wing, and saw themselves as such, and only helped other right wingers whether it was in domestic politics or fighting with them in Spain.

soo new to this site and already establishing yourself as the dumbest contributor. that is no small feat.

reply

You still have not proven me wrong.

reply

you still don't understand a burden of proof. in other words, you don't even have a grade 10 introduction to philosophy understanding of argumentation.

:) thanks for letting me publicly destroy you.

reply

So, you have no evidence and nothing to contradict my stated facts except that rant that proves nothing.

Does your troll farm pay you by the amount of your posts/replies, by time spent on MC, or by letters/words you use? What about using multiple sock accounts, do they pay you extra for those or are they just bonuses for you?

reply

you seem mentally unwell....

reply

Based on your massive amount of trolling and arguing that you have done on this site using the "LogicalLeftist" account and your other sock account(s), it seems that you are the one who is either unwell or you are been paid by a troll farm.

reply

whatever you say mentally ill clown

yes progressives who want a slightly higher tax rate and maybe universal healthcare are just like commies who want a command economy

reply

So you continue to deflect from proving me wrong about the "Socialist left = Nazism" or failure to answer how your troll farm compensates you for your political trolling (by post or time spent here on MC?)

Typical troll guidelines of projection, deflection, and presuming for others.

No one here is going to fall for any of those strawman logical fallacies including your bull$h1t rhetoric about “the burden is on you”…if you are unable or incapable of providing incontrovertible and irrefutable evidence that is not fabricated by the socialist-left than your argument will always fall apart and be refuted.

yes progressives who want a slightly higher tax rate and maybe universal healthcare are just like commies who want a command economy

Nice try (strawman) on trying to twist the true narrative of why the democrats prefer those two which is exactly what the career criminals, degenerates, and the lazy that you represent and defend would prefer in order for them to leech from the rest of us; typical socialist attitude and mentality.

reply

your delusional unhinged rant deserves no thoughtful reply.

you say its a strawman than proceed to call me a socialist.

you just proved I was right :) get help

reply

you say its a strawman than proceed to call me a socialist.


Are you seriously kidding me!?

YOU are calling yourself a socialist by using the name "LogicalLeftist"...and you have not been right about anything.

All that you have done is deflect and project.

Did you receive another bonus payment from your troll farm with that reply?

reply

you do know the left is varied more than just "everyones a socialist". like how everyone on the right isn't automatically a anarcho capitalist right

how did you get so dumb? honestly im wondering what event in your life made you this level of ignorant

reply

You call yourself a "leftist"...ergo, YOU are a "Socialist".

reply

you call yourself a "right winger" ergo YOU are a "anarcho capitalist"

ive encountered people on here I believe to be stupid. but you are truly the most stupid.

grow some balls, admit you made a mistake.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Political_spectrum_Eysenck.png

education is key :)

reply

...and there it is, the graph clearly shows "the socialist" on the left.

Thank you for finally admitting something.

reply

yes socialism is on the left. it doesn't mean everyone on the left is a socialist. idiot

reply

Prove it.

reply

because the left is varied..... a commie is not a socialist is not a progressive is not a Liberal? I have to prove basic reality??

just like all right wingers aren't anarcho capitalists? there's a large variation?

remember when I said dumbest poster on here?

reply

You are ranting nonsense again.

Socialism = Leftist (YOU)

Where is the proof or evidence?
I'm still waiting...

reply

im ranting nonsense?
you are barely holding on to your sanity here.

socialism is on the left. it doesn't mean therefore everyone on the left is a socialist. should I sued smaller simpler words?

all homicides are committed by people. it doesn't mean all people commit homicides.

see the different retarded clown?

reply

That is the most deranged and inept analogy I have ever heard.

I never said everyone is a socialist because that would also include the ones from the right; however, "all those on the left" are "socialists"...like "YOU" for example.

Look at the graph again.
Socialist is on the "LEFT".
It doesn't say "only some", or "just a few", or "with the exception of".

reply

yes socialism is on the left. so is bunch of other ideologies.

this shit isn't hard to understand. retard

reply

In this case I'm referring to "YOU" been on the "LEFT" and therefore, a "SOCIALIST".

So no, that is not difficult to understand, especially since "YOU" provided the most basic evidence to destroy your own irrational argument.

reply

so again just because im on the left doesn't mean im a socialist. just because you are on the right doesn't mean you are an archo capitalist. how are you this stupid?

reply

The graph shows that you are a socialist since you are a "leftist".

The evidence is irrefutable.

reply

no the graphs shows that socialism is on the left. this doesn't mean all leftists are socialists, idiot.

it also shows communism too.

your brain is half functioning huh?

reply

So, are you saying that you are not a socialist?...again, prove that a leftist is not a socialist.

That is, unless you are also not a leftist and just pretending to be one for your troll farm.

reply

I just did 10 times............

the retardation is strong with you

reply

The graph clearly shows that you are a leftist and therefore a socialist.

Not once have you provided evidence to refute it.

reply

no it clearly shows socialism is on the left. just like communism is. just like progressivism. ti doesn't mean everyone on the left is therefore a socialist.

logic tard.

reply

Than provide the "evidence" to backup your lie.

reply

the evidence is literally a basic understanding of anything.

my own picture I sent you proved it. it showed how socialists and communists were both mapped on different places on the "left spectrum"

are you retarded by chance?

reply

Nazis weren't right wing. Right wing centers around the individual. Nazis were anything but individualists.

reply

LOL gunna need to see some sources on that one. how convenient so no dictator in history now was right wing/conservative.

you have no history, economics or political degrees correct?

reply

The commies and the Nazis are still over there fighting today and the left is on the side of the Nazis

reply

yes the democratic albeit not perfect and current Ukraine are all nazis.....

reply

The Nazis and the Commies are fighting as they usually do and America takes this opportunity to sell arms and launder money. Spin and Deny all you want but that's the reality of the situation.

reply

I agree. I thought that speech was stupid. He also said the economic situation in 2019 was as bad as The Great Depression. I had a Grandpa who was 12 years old when The Great Depression happened and he had to go work in a coal mine to support his family. He'd have thrown a fit about that remark had he still been alive at the time. Said Grandpa died in 2009. He'd be 105 if he was still alive today.

reply

Quick reminder that "our democracy" means "Their Power Structure"...

reply

Well it was the first internal threat , Pearl Harbor & 911 were external.

reply

You think a bunch of bumbling Trumpers were a threat in anyway?

reply

Well no , had the army been called in my money would be on them,
provided the general (or whoever) wasnt a delusional trumper - in which case if the army were suddenly on the other side ... thats how a coup happens.

Donalds too fucking dumb to think about how to actually do what he was dreaming of , but the very fact he tried is the problem.
Its the INTENTION

albeit a sad , pointless, doomed to failure intention is beside the point.





reply

The army is like the enabler spouse in a narcissistic family. They know better but they just do what they are told.

reply

Well no


Ok, so let me get this straight...You do not believe for one second that a group of bumbling Trumpers could be a threat to the entire country.

Okay.

Then why on Earth are you giving these people this insane amount of power over you? They are either bumbling fools, or a credible threat to be dealt with.

It can't be both.

reply

Do you think its offensive that Trump can just take a giant shit on the system of democracy in the USA by refusing to acknowledge he lost the election and then getting his gang of clowns to invade the capitol building in a futile attempt to stay in the oval office ?

He should be tried for treason . I guarantee i would say the exact same thing if it was a democrat president doing it .
Its just that Trump id the only fucking idiot with the IQ of a child and the ego and arrogance to do it .

That should be his defense when on trial
"Sorry your honor but in my defence i'm a fucking idiot that acts purely on ego and didnt realise the capitol crime i was commiting"

of course his ego would never let him say that

reply

You should check out what happened in Congress on March 1, 1954.

reply

It’s disingenuous, and it only serves to lessen those events for the people who weren’t there.

I don’t condone people breaking in to a government building, but the morons that did, while posting on social media just isn’t on the same level as a coordinated attack that killed thousands.

At best it was the worst attack on democracy since BLM protesters took over Seattles city hall.

reply

Yeah but what the BLM protesters hoped to gain from that was , In Theory, equality for black people .
what Trump hoped to gain was to overturn and election and retain power as an unelected ruler of the country!


reply

Actually they were demanding that the mayor step down, so it’s not that different. But the reason is irrelevant the cause doesn’t justify the action.

For the sake of argument, what if there was evidence of election fraud. Would you consider 1/6 justified?

reply

Do you also hold this standard to the March 29th Storming of the Capitol during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings?

Asking for consistency.

reply

My stance doesn’t change based on cause. That’s what I’m calling out here. I support peaceful protest, I don’t support rioting because you think have a just cause.

reply