January 10, 2021

If Trump knew there was a plan to storm the Capitol building, then his speech to the crowd was an incitement, even though he never told the crowd to commit any act of violence.

2 days ago, I read Trump's speech looking for any language that could support the claim that he incited the crowd to storm the Capitol. I wrote a post listing the 7 most violence-inducing statements. They're about fighting and showing strength and never giving up, but they're all consistent with an idea of having a big, traditional street protest — with lots of people marching and displaying their passion for the cause through big numbers, determined-looking faces, and lots words on signs and in chants and speeches. 

But what if Trump knew there was a plan to storm the Capitol? Then all those words are transformed! They become an incitement to the violence, especially if the people in the crowd know he knows. The avoidance of references to violence would be part of a shared understanding — like winking. We know what we're going to do. 

Now, at this point, I don't even know that there was a plan. 

Yesterday, I wrote about a New Yorker article titled "A Palm Beach Proud Boy at the Putsch," and, in the comments, Bob Boyd said, "Putsch implies a plan. There was no plan. It was a protest that turned into a riot." 

I replied: "That's your hypothesis. I await investigations. You have no way to know the extent to which subdivisions of the crowd were acting according to a plan." 

I'm not going to assume either way. Was there a plan or wasn't there? If there was a plan, when did it develop and who knew about it? If it was talked about on social media, the record exists. Wouldn't the FBI have seen it in advance and communicated to the President about it? But then, why was the Capitol not fully protected?! The vulnerability of the Capitol raises the inference that there was no advance knowledge of a plan.

This morning, I'm seeing this at Buzzfeed
The first glimpse of the deadly tragedy that was about to unfold came at 9 a.m. on the morning of the insurrection for one Black veteran of the US Capitol Police....
“I found out what they were planning when a friend of mine screenshot me an Instagram story from the Proud Boys saying, ‘We’re breaching the capitol today, guys. I hope y’all ready.’” 

Now, that's 9 a.m. on the day of the protest, so it could be a plan that arose at the last minute. But Trump's speech did not begin until 1:11 p.m. That's 4 hours of lead time. Perhaps that Capital Police officer is lying or mistaken or perhaps he doesn't exist at all and Buzzfeed is wrong. But it's a fact that can be checked with Instagram. And I want to see all that there in social media, all the evidence of a plan, and what law enforcement knew about this plan, whether Trump was informed, and why there wasn't better protection of the Capitol. 

I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd to breach the Capitol. You can see that in my 7 statements post. But if he was informed of a plan, then I will read all of those statements as an incitement, and I would have to say that he should resign.

436 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 436 of 436
I'm Not Sure said...

YoungHegelian said...

I'm not assuming that at all. So far, we just don't know.

My point is that it could either be that we don't know the cause of death or it's known but not due to a protester, so there's no urgency to report it.

Sorry for not being clearer.

Leigh said...

Seconding @Ray-SoCal a second time today, and seconding @Paul Snively. We are now solidly in the middle of the Salem Witch trials, and Trump supporters (for now) are the witches. Logic has left the building and mass hysteria has firmly taken root. This has to stop, or it truly will be our end.

Howard said...

Portland wasn't the only riot, Rick. It was a nation-wide summer of street protest. Nice try. Thanks for playing. Please see Don Pardo for your parting gift.

effinayright said...

Blogger Stephen said...
Young Hegelian,

Watch this video, at the end of which Trump explicitly says to the criminals who seized the Capitol: "We love you. You are
***************************************

What garbage. He is explicity saying to ALL the hundreds of thousands who demonstrated peacefully that day to "go home, go home in peace".

It takes a truly disgusting POS, warped and twisted by 4th stage TDS, to assert otherwise.

Donatello Nobody said...

steve uhr, good effen' riddance. You will not be missed.

Stephen said...

Rick, Sorry, I did not realize you were quoting someone else. My mistake and glad to know we agree on something. I believe that in our exchange you have also made a couple of mistakes with respect to Biden's denunciation of violence in the George Floyd protests. Can you acknowledge them or is that not your style?

YoungHegelian said...

Stephen,

Watch this video, at the end of which Trump explicitly says to the criminals who seized the Capitol: "We love you. You are beautiful." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8PHImxb8Po

I watch that video & I see him tell his supporters to go home, that violence is playing into the hands of the opposition. I don't see him praising the rioters at all.

Find me something where Biden has done anything remotely similar....His comments on the misconduct by persons protesting Floyd's murder unquivocally condemn criminal or violent conduct.

Well, maybe, but his VP & a great many other Democrats in position of power sure did.

As for the claim that Trump supporters merely "bludgeoned" the police officer (reportedly with a fire extinguisher), I don't think it changes my question: why hasn't Trump called his family or ordered flags to be flown at half staff?

That's not true. See I'mNotSure's posting at 4:58.

I'm sorry, you don't seem to be either following the thread or arguing in good faith here. I simply can't see that video as advocating or praising violence & your statement about the half-mast is simply no longer true, but you keep repeating it.

Howard said...

YH: Exactly correct. Trumps style is to hide the hand after throwing the rock (h/t to Dr. Michael Savage who likes saying that phrase). You people are driven by algorithm induced lizard brain chemical secretions to make up his excuses, unexpectedly.

YoungHegelian said...

@Howard,

Trumps style is to hide the hand after throwing the rock (h/t to Dr. Michael Savage who likes saying that phrase). You people are driven by algorithm induced lizard brain chemical secretions to make up his excuses, unexpectedly.

You get called on your bullshit & your response is to post a barely coherent ad hominem response.

QED to my previous posting to you.

mockturtle said...

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

Rick said...

Howard said...
Portland wasn't the only riot, Rick. It was a nation-wide summer of street protest.


Right, it was much worse than my single example so it's interesting you pretend not listing every event is some sort of exoneration of the left.

Rick said...

Stephen said...
Rick, Sorry, I did not realize you were quoting someone else. My mistake and glad to know we agree on something.


We don't though. I don't agree we should minimize support for violence when it comes from the left.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

resigning because
someone said
there was a screenshot
of an intsagram
about Proud Boys
having a nefarious plan.

what thresholds were met that warrant resignation?

RichAndSceptical said...

If it was a plan, it wasn't a very good one. By my calculations, at most .02% of the people at the protest were involved in violence or property damage. Count the arrests plus the pictures of people FBI is looking for and it's less than 100. That's out of a crowd of about a half million people.

There was a news article that said FBI and other security organizations had been monitoring communications and web sites for days leading up to the rally and had learned of plans to commit violence. But for some reason, the fence didn't get put up which is always put up when Congress is in session and a large protest is planned. They found the time the next dat to put it up.

There are so many things that just don't make sense. Why was security lax? Why was security understaffed? Why wasn't the security wall in place? Why do we see video of what appears to be security officers waving the crowd into the Capitol? Why won't they tell us how the security officer died?

Readering said...

Half a million! Trump arithmetic!

Qwinn said...

Easily half a million. Easily. A sea of people. At least a dozen times as many people as were there on Dec 12th, and that was several tens of thousands at least.

Achilles said...

MayBee said...

Achilles- a cop was definitely beaten:
https://twitter.com/secondchances09/status/1348338762003181570/photo/1


That was a still from a camera.

If there was video it would have been all over the news.

These people are liars. They have been cheering on BLM for months. BLM protestors have literally walked up on police cars and shot police assassination style.

Now they care about police.

I think this is garbage.

Anonymous said...

There was no plan. Americans congregated at the Capitol to make their presence known. To seek redress of their grievance that Progressives were slapping them in the face with their blatant voter fraud. If Progressives fear 'Proud Boys', then I am a Proud Boy. Fear me.

OT...Dr K. You've seen this before. Cities burning in the late '60s/early /70s. Whaddya think about this? Are we doing this right. Personally, I think we've been a little milk-toast. None of the Capitol protestors were carrying rope. One more time we wanted to protest peacefully.

I think the time for peaceful protest has passed.

daskol said...

I was wondering when Howard would crack and revert to form. It happened here, just a little while ago.

The Godfather said...

In a few days, a new President will be innaugurated. He ran for the nomination and for the Presidency as a moderate, who could be the President of ALL Americans, who could bind up the wounds from conflicts during the Trump Presidency. Yet his Party is proposing the entirely useless symbolic act of "impeaching" the sitting President in the last few days of his term. Shouldn't President-Elect Biden tell the Speaker of the House that yet another partisan impeachment is not the way to bind up the Nation's wounds? Wouldn't that give President Biden some bona fides when he goes to the narrowly divided House and Senate and asks for unity?

And if he DOESN'T do that, wouldn't we rightly consider him a phoney and a hypocrit?

Anonymous said...

There was a guy who wanted to get away from it all. He moved his family to the top of a mountain called Ruby Ridge. I think he was like me, a Proud Boy. He just wanted to get away.

The FBI got wind of this 'separatist' and went up that mountain. They killed his dog. They killed his son. They killed his wife. The 'separatist' was Randy Weaver.

Whenever I think of Randy Weaver, I think of Crack Emcee. Both trying to find their way in this world, and find peace.

If you were out in the woods, and had a blazing campfire, and just wanted to talk about life, philosophy, art, everything, who would you like to be at that campfire? (Assuming the FBI wasn't going to assassinate you)

Crack Emcee would not be my first choice, but he would be on the list. Maybe 3rd, but there's plenty of room around that fire. I'd like Crack to be there.

Ann Althousians, with whom would like to sit around that fire?

daskol said...

For a couple of days, though, whatever natural sympathy he has for genuine populists and patriots actually seemed to drive a better early impression of things than most people had. It’s interesting in Howard’s case. He seems to have instincts for the right and the good, but they are overridden by his non-lizard human brain in, oh, around 48 hours of time to think.

Howard: don’t think, just feel. You’ll be much more right:

Anonymous said...

There was a guy who wanted to get away from it all. He moved his family to the top of a mountain called Ruby Ridge. I think he was like me, a Proud Boy. He just wanted to get away.

The FBI got wind of this 'separatist' and went up that mountain. They killed his dog. They killed his son. They killed his wife. The 'separatist' was Randy Weaver.

Whenever I think of Randy Weaver, I think of Crack Emcee. Both trying to find their way in this world, and find peace.

If you were out in the woods, and had a blazing campfire, and just wanted to talk about life, philosophy, art, everything, who would you like to be at that campfire? (Assuming the FBI wasn't going to assassinate you)

Crack Emcee would not be my first choice, but he would be on the list. Maybe 3rd, but there's plenty of room around that fire. I'd like Crack to be there.

Ann Althousians, with whom would like to sit around that fire?

Bilwick said...

So much verbiage from the New Tories (Inga the State's Handmaid, Sprezzatura, Howard, etc)--people who might be better off studying history, economics and logic. Let me just, as the cool folks say, "cut to the chase:"

State-shtuppers gotta shtup State.

Anonymous said...

Unlike Ann, I do not oppose violent protests. Here's why. When Democrats protest, the news media floods the zone. The protest is MASSIVE, even if it's only 30 people. It's peaceful, even if they burned down the local 7-11.

When Americans flooded the Capitol City in 2009 to protest a Fed takeover of Health care, Obama smirked, got on Marine One and went golfing. The news media did not show the crowds. They pooh-poohed the miscreants who would dare speak against a Gov't led by Black Jesus.

In his time, Nixon went out to the crowd of protesters to talk to them. Democrats don't do that.

Understand this. Peaceful protests don't work for Americans.

Readering said...

The Godfather, we're all overtaken by events. What care you if Trump is impeached? Pull up a chair and enjoy the show, like von Trump family enjoyed the assault in the Capitol, dancing and all.

DeepRunner said...

Ann Althouse mused:
"I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd to breach the Capitol. You can see that in my 7 statements post. But if he was informed of a plan, then I will read all of those statements as an incitement, and I would have to say that he should resign."

Yes, Professor, IF he knew. My guess is that if he DID know, he would have been very clear and very direct in reminding people that the GOP "is the party of law and order," and to strongly encourage peaceable assembly and protest. He might have even strongly DISCOURAGED the march to the Capitol.

The speech was ill-advised, but not materially different from what he has been saying the last couple of months. Perhaps you can look past your dislike of Trump and perhaps, in the spirit of cruel neutrality, hold to your position that he did not incite, so far as your previous reading of his text has been.

Nancy Reyes said...

excuse me, but the dirty little secret is that the city officials, the mayor, and those in charge of security knew there would be 100 thousand angry protesters half a mile down the street in the mall, but did not bother to ask for personnel trained in crowd control or to have basic protection in place.
Who failed to order this basic protection?
If a real terrorist had entered hundreds could have been killed.

Here in Manila, protests in front of the US embassy are common, but the cops and military are alert to problems. Maybe the Washington DC mayor should contact our mayor on how this is done.

Unknown said...

Detective Althouse

Watson here

- what time was the capital breached and what time was trump's speech?

- If "Trump knew of plans" then don't the intelligence agencies know?

- If some dopes push/wander in and take selfies and leave - how is that Bastille day?

- How is "impeachment" appropriate punishment for instigating trespassing?

Rusty said...

Donatello Nobody said...
"steve uhr, good effen' riddance. You will not be missed."
I'm just surprised he condescended to be among us scum for so long. I'm sure he's in touch with the internet authorities as we speak to appraise them of this den of villainy. It has been my experience that if a prog. loses an argument they will get back at you in some childish way.

MayBee said...

Achilelles- if you check that same twitter feed, there is video. There is.

mockturtle said...

We're just being groomed for our Chinese overlords.

Billy Bob Doe, Esq. said...

Has their been an insurrection?

An insurrection is defined as "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government" with "revolt" being defined as: "to renounce allegiance or subjection."

Nothing said by President Trump said, or amounted to, a call to renounce allegiance to the U.S., or that people should not hold themselves within the due bounds of our laws and civil society.

Because nothing said in any way suggested a violation of our laws or a rebellion to attempt to overthrow the government, an insurrection could not have been incited. Further, the professor here tries to have it both ways, suggesting Trump NOT inciting violence, was the incitement of violence. Cute, but no cigar. I am pretty sure he would have had to wink for that to have occurred and/or passed out notes that said to the crowd, "now, when I don't incite you to an insurrection, I really mean the opposite and you will know it because I am not going to call for an insurrection, so you all will know I mean for you to revolt."

Accordingly the president was exercising the same rights of free speech and assembly that any person within our sovereign borders enjoys. We don't attribute the acts of individuals to other individuals unless they actually call for or encourage others to disobey our laws. That's why nobody complained when the late Michael Brown's father was arrested for encouraging that the crowd assembled before him riot and commit arson when he called for rioting and said "let's burn this [scurrilous epitaph omitted] down!"

Impeaching a president who has committed no crime, twice, is asinine, but it is far worse this time around because a political measure is being used to violate a civil right we all enjoy under the 1st Amendment. Apparently the Democrats believe they will hold power forever, and do not understand that it is bad precedent that a political party can attempt to remove an opponent simply because they want to, and can.

Sydney Ski said...

Ann Althouse says, "I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd ..." My take on this entire statement is that Althouse want us to know how well-reasoned and fair she is. She "held off." Wow! Such restraint. Look at the origins of the incitement throughout the last 5 years.
Let's not forget the cause of the protest. That the only thing we should be discussing. Instead, we get "I held off from believing that Trump deserved what he got. But if Trump was wearing a provocative dress ..."

Sydney Ski said...

Ann Althouse says, "I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd ..." My take on this entire statement is that Althouse want us to know how well-reasoned and fair she is. She "held off." Wow! Such restraint. Look at the origins of the incitement throughout the last 5 years.
Let's not forget the cause of the protest. That's the only thing we should be discussing. Instead, we get "I held off from believing that Trump deserved what he got. But if Trump was wearing a provocative dress ..."

Ann Althouse said...

@George Putnam I had to delete part of your comment because you included a name that I always delete.

I preserved the rest of your comment:

"Professor Althouse: I like how you think. You ask the right questions. Keep digging. I'll keep coming back to see what you find. I trust you to ask the right questions a great deal more than I trust the NYT, WaPo, etc. Other good sources I have read: Heather Mac Donald in City Journal 1/8; WSJ editorials and op-ed columns on 1/8 and 1/9 (the WSJ is worth a subscription, Ann)."

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 436 of 436   Newer› Newest»