So, just to be certain, when USA today keeps giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and uses words in this article like, riot, and alleged role, they’re carrying water for him right? The man has been found to have had a role andtaken part in an insurrection in multiple cases now. They should just say it.

When was he convicted of insurrection or anything related to that?

Here you go happy reading: www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/…/23SA300.pdf

You will find section G. Titled “President Trump engaged in an insurrection” to be of interest.

So a judge did an unjust thing and you want me to accept that as something that as okay?

Are you guys aware of what his happening right now with trump and all these cases and how its targeted prosecution? I am not even going to vote for him, but its pretty obvious what is happening, and I fear how this will end.

If each and every one if these cases was not carefully and fully investigated over a course if several years, you might have an argument.

Were both of the impeachments careully and fully investigated?

Lol. Considering even I watched the events in one case happen live? Yeah. Some things are very easy to investigate.

What’s that got to do with the conversation? You’re not even any good at the what-a-bout-ism thing, dude. Feel free to overthink it so you can come up with another “zinger”; I don’t care, and won’t be responding anyway…