Fears of a second civil war grow among democrat & republican pundits

[lickin_starfish 1,477]

1 hour ago, riversco said:

We had the Brooks Brothers riot in November 2000, when republicans rioted in the streets and several people were injured over recounts outside the offices of the Miami-Dade Canvassing Board.  Republicans claimed the recount was moved to a secret room and could not be verified or trusted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot

That could have been the start of some serious deterioration in national unity had not Gore conceded to end the election (and 911 reunified the nation totally for about a decade).  911 may have postponed the crack of our nation by 10 years or more. 

There was the Hard Hat Riot in 1970 over Vietnam.  Union workers aligned with Nixon rioted and attacked hippies that protested.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_Hat_Riot

 

 

 

But one thing to keep in mind is that the GOP only very recently morphed into a blue-collar party.  To be more precise, you should be asking "can you provide examples of blue collar america rioting?" because regardless of party, its the blue collar that will riot in favor of republicans.  If you are a white collar republican, or are over 40, you really don't fit in the same universe with the republicans that will riot. 

So you have two examples of Republicans rioting, the most recent being almost 20 years ago. The rest is speculation and wishful thinking on your part.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

2 hours ago, lickin_starfish said:

So you have two examples of Republicans rioting, the most recent being almost 20 years ago. The rest is speculation and wishful thinking on your part.

Do you think we should be having widescale riots first, and THEN move on to a civil unrest stage?   How do you delineate between the two, exactly?  And why do you consider it wishful thinking?  What the hell do I have to gain from this?  My goal is to see us change course before it happens?

Here's my impression of how some view the subject:

today:  why are you talking about civil war?  do you WANT it?  Do you wish for war?  What is wrong with you?

me:  I don't want war.  I want to see something changed so it doesn't happen.

 

after civil unrest starts:  why did no one do anything to stop it?  we should have had discussions on how to work towards peace instead of all this violence!  yet no one stood up!

me:  uh, i did and people said to shut up.  i tried to start discussion on how to stop it and people said i was crazy.  i was even banned from FBGs trying to stop it by raising awareness and trying to generate solid discussion.

[Baker Boy 1,477]

Fears of a second civil war grow among democrat & republican pundits

 

Only a Moron would believe this, what is wrong with you poeple.

[RLLD 3,455]

15 hours ago, Baker Boy said:

Fears of a second civil war grow among democrat & republican pundits

 

Only a Moron would believe this, what is wrong with you poeple.

 

I have little doubt that AOC and the rest of the idiots with her will happily tout this, blame Trump for it, blame white people for it etc....

[JustinCharge 2,397]

in trump tweet on sept 29th 2019, trump warned of civil war if he is impeached.   this was expected.  the trump rallies are for building a revolt.  i expect the response from the left ultimately will be to shut down the trump rallies, to which trump will respond that freedom of assembly is under assault.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

2 minutes ago, riversco said:

in trump tweet on sept 29th 2019, trump warned of civil war if he is impeached.   this was expected.  the trump rallies are for building a revolt.  i expect the response from the left ultimately will be to shut down the trump rallies, to which trump will respond that freedom of assembly is under assault.  

No he didn't. He re-tweeted someone saying impeachment would result in a "civil war LIKE fracture" of the country. Read your words man. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

24 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No he didn't. He re-tweeted someone saying impeachment would result in a "civil war LIKE fracture" of the country. Read your words man. 

the democrats are 100% certain to take that as a veiled threat of civil war

[Reality 2,710]

Fock it, we are due for a culling.  Let me know where the tailgate is prior to kickoff.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

You guys do know you come across like dangerous lunatics with this stuff, right?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

10 minutes ago, riversco said:

the democrats are 100% certain to take that as a veiled threat of civil war

Of course they are. But how can you take them seriously when it comes to comparisons when the say things like concentration camps and Hitler with a straight face when talking about Trump?. Correct them like you would a child and put them in their place.  It's easy. 

[RLLD 3,455]

16 minutes ago, riversco said:

the democrats are 100% certain to take that as a veiled threat of civil war

You cannot use them as a gauge, everything they do is to exploit people for power.  Racism, this "ism" and that.....all simply a ploy to manipulate the less intelligent to continue to consume power.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No he didn't. He re-tweeted someone saying impeachment would result in a "civil war LIKE fracture" of the country. Read your words man. 

It wasn't a retweet either.  Trump went out of his way to copy and paste a quote from some other nut job.  He knew what he was doing and it was stupid to post it.  More fear mongering.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

[Chorus]
When the Revolution come I'm gonna be up front
With my finga on the trigga of a Mossburgh Pump
When the Revolution come I'm gonna be right there
With my nine in my hand and braids in my hair

[cbfalcon 824]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

You guys do know you come across like dangerous lunatics with this stuff, right?

None of the guys I've seen here seemingly itching for a civil war are dangerous. They are simply rooting for others with more bravery to do something drastic, so they can claim they saw it coming/blame others for it/etc. It's about winning the internet message board fight to them really.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

4 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

You guys do know you come across like dangerous lunatics with this stuff, right?

Have you looked at all the links to the policy experts that also see a civil war looming?   Do you call them dangerous lunatics?

[sderk 1,040]

3 hours ago, cbfalcon said:

None of the guys I've seen here seemingly itching for a civil war are dangerous. They are simply rooting for others with more bravery to do something drastic, so they can claim they saw it coming/blame others for it/etc. It's about winning the internet message board fight to them really.

Who is rooting for a civil war? And how would you know that if there was one that noone here would stand up for themselves? Is it because you would run and hide rather than to protect your rights? Or rather, since you on the left, to destroy other people's rights?

[RLLD 3,455]

7 minutes ago, sderk said:

Who is rooting for a civil war? And how would you know that if there was one that noone here would stand up for themselves? Is it because you would run and hide rather than to protect your rights? Or rather, since you on the left, to destroy other people's rights?

No one, its just a game, pretend that by mentioning it you are promoting it.....most people grow out of such petty behaviors.

[sderk 1,040]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

No one, its just a game, pretend that by mentioning it you are promoting it.....most people grow out of such petty behaviors.

Exactly like those who state on various radio stations that if you voted for or support Trump, you are unequivocally a racist. No ifs, ands, or buts.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

9 minutes ago, sderk said:

Exactly like those who state on various radio stations that if you voted for or support Trump, you are unequivocally a racist. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I thought it was that all racists are Trump supporters but not all Trump supporters are racist.  This gets confused a lot.

[MDC 5,877]

How dare you even suggest that Donald J Trump would say something so reckless and stupid!  

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

9 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I thought it was that all racists are Trump supporters but not all Trump supporters are racist.  This gets confused a lot.

I've had people say to my face, "Well, you voted for Trump, so you're obviously racist."  Whether Democrats specifically said that or not, it's the message they want out.  The reason the politicians leave ambiguous quotes out there and don't specifically say it, is because they don't want to make enemies of the people they can sway.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I've had people say to my face, "Well, you voted for Trump, so you're obviously racist."  Whether Democrats specifically said that or not, it's the message they want out.  The reason the politicians leave ambiguous quotes out there and don't specifically say it, is because they don't want to make enemies of the people they can sway.

If anyone says that they are either trying to get under your skin or they're just morons.  Could be both.

[sderk 1,040]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I thought it was that all racists are Trump supporters but not all Trump supporters are racist.  This gets confused a lot.

I wish all racists were Trump supporters, because he would have his base plus all the racists from the left. Landslide victory in 2020.

[cbfalcon 824]

2 hours ago, RLLD said:

No one, its just a game, pretend that by mentioning it you are promoting it.....most people grow out of such petty behaviors.

It’s not black and white like everyone wants to pretend everything here is. Clearly, not everyone that mentions a Civil War is hoping for it. It’s reasonably obvious who is and isn’t hoping for it to occur. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

2 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

It’s not black and white like everyone wants to pretend everything here is. Clearly, not everyone that mentions a Civil War is hoping for it. It’s reasonably obvious who is and isn’t hoping for it to occur. 

If there is a Civil War, it won't last very long.  The Socialists and Marxists (what is considered the American Left) will get crushed.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

2 hours ago, sderk said:

Who is rooting for a civil war? And how would you know that if there was one that noone here would stand up for themselves? Is it because you would run and hide rather than to protect your rights? Or rather, since you on the left, to destroy other people's rights?

I think its a defense mechanism.  If civil war breaks out, he will blame me for it somehow in his deluded mind, instead of seeing me as trying to warn that we need to change course before war breaks out.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

27 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

It’s not black and white like everyone wants to pretend everything here is. Clearly, not everyone that mentions a Civil War is hoping for it. It’s reasonably obvious who is and isn’t hoping for it to occur. 

What's with this passive aggressive behavior?  Who exactly do you think is hoping for a civil war around here? You're making some pretty fed up allegations so at least be a man about it.  Who the f wants civil war?

[JustinCharge 2,397]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/civil-war-2-is-trending-on-twitter-after-president-trump-quotes-pastor-suggested-what-might-occur-if-he-is-impeached/

"Civil War 2" trends on Twitter after Trump quotes speculation that impeachment would spark "civil war"
By Caitlin O'Kane
Updated on: September 30, 2019 / 2:29 PM / CBS News

President Trump said in a tweet that if he is removed from office, a "civil war" might erupt in the United States. Mr. Trump was quoting Pastor Robert Jeffress, a Fox News contributor and host, who suggested that impeaching the president would lead to "civil war."  

"If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal," Mr. Trump tweeted, attributing the quote to Jeffress.

Jeffress did more or less say that on "Fox & Friends" – with Mr. Trump adding his thoughts in the parenthesis of the tweet, saying he will never be removed from office. The president's repetition of the quote received widespread backlash – including from his own party.

"I have visited nations ravaged by civil war," Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger tweeted. "@realDonaldTrump I have never imagined such a quote to be repeated by a President. This is beyond repugnant." Kinzinger is a veteran and serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He often criticizes the president on Twitter, although he is one of the only Republicans to publicly criticize the Mr. Trump's call with the Ukraine leader.

Democratic Rep. Ted Leiu supported his colleague across the aisle, tweeting: "I agree with Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger that @realDonaldTrump's tweet about a civil war over impeachment is beyond repugnant."

Mr. Trump's civil war tweet went viral, and by Monday #CivilWar2 was trending on Twitter, as was #CivilWarSignup.

While some made fun of the potential of another civil war, many Twitter users pointed out that inciting civil war could encourage violence.

Oath Keepers Militia, which is identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as "one of the largest radical antigovernment groups in the U.S. today," embraced Mr. Trump's civil war suggestion. "This is the truth. This is where we are. We ARE on the verge of a HOT civil war," the group wrote.

"Like in 1859. That's where we are. And the Right has ZERO trust or respect for anything the left is doing. We see THEM as illegitimate too," continued the tweet, which appeared to be signed by Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes.

Other Twitter users also suggested that inciting a civil war should be an impeachable offense.

As of Monday, over 90% of the 235 Democrats in the House of Representatives either support impeachment proceedings against President Trump or have signaled they are open to supporting them.

The formal impeachment inquiry was announced by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi soon after the president admitted he had asked the Ukrainian president to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son. Pelosi said Mr. Trump's actions represent a betrayal of his oath of office, of national security and of the integrity of U.S. elections.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

https://www.newsweek.com/david-burbach-military-expert-trumps-tweets-civil-war-1462011

Military Expert Slams Trump's Tweet Quoting 'Civil War-like Fracture' Warning: 'A Terribly Irresponsible Thing for the President to Say'
By Rosie McCall On 9/30/19 at 6:49 AM EDT

President Donald Trump's tweets denouncing Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff were "terribly irresponsible thing" according to a military expert.

On Sunday, Trump lashed out against Schiff, who heads up the House Intelligence Committee, accusing the Californian Congressman of "Fraud & Treason."

The attack follows a speech Schiff made in front of the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday, in which he parodied the president during his now-infamous phone call with the Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky on July 25.

During that phone call, Trump requested "a favor" involving the launch an investigation into the business dealings of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's son, Hunter—despite no actual evidence of wrongdoing by either the 2020 hopeful or his son.

"His lies were made in perhaps the most blatant and sinister manner ever seen in the great Chamber," Trump said of Schiff on Twitter.

"He wrote down and read terrible things, then said it was from the mouth of the President of the United States. I want Schiff questioned at the highest level for Fraud & Treason....."

David Burbach, an associate professor in international relations at the US Naval War College in Rhode Island, retweeted Trump, highlighting the threatening use of language used by the President.

"You can not brush it off as 'he just talks that way,'" said Burbach. "This is a real head of state with great legal authority in charge of US Marshalls and FBI agents and an awesome military machine. This. Is. For. Real."

Burbach responded to a second tweet that Trump posted less than three hours later, quoting a contributor on Fox News, Pastor Robert Jeffress, invoking the Civil War. Jeffress said that a successful impeachment would create the conditions for a "Civil War like fracture."

"A quote vs his own words, but this is still a terribly irresponsible thing for the President to say," said Burbach, whose specialisms include civil-military relations in addition to international relations, national security and the politics of U.S. foreign policy.

Burbach told Newsweek Trump's tweets are "inflammatory" and display "dangerous rhetoric for a President," adding these words could inspire violence against the whistleblower. Trump supporters have already issued a $50,000 "bounty" for "any information" about their identity, lawyers have revealed.

"This is chilling to any federal employee—and likely meant to be chilling," said Burbach, who made it clear he was speaking personally and not on behalf of the Naval War College.

"Trump hinting, even obliquely, that violence would result if Congress lawfully impeaches and convicts him is grossly inappropriate for the head of state—but it is consistent with Rudy Guiliani tweeting earlier that "domestic tranquility" will not be maintained if the Democrats move forward with impeachment."

[JustinCharge 2,397]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/opinions/trump-civil-war-tweets-make-america-less-safe-hemmer/index.html

Why it's so scary when Trump tweets about civil war

Opinion by Nicole Hemmer

Updated 6:59 PM ET, Mon September 30, 2019
Trump says his impeachment would create civil war-like divisions

Editors note: "Nicole Hemmer is an associate research scholar at Columbia University and the author of "Messengers of the Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics." She hosts the history podcast "Past Present" and created the podcast "A12." The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. View more opinion articles on CNN. "

(CNN)President Donald Trump tweeted and retweeted 80 times between Friday and Sunday, a seemingly panicked flurry of activity that showed just how big a threat the Ukraine scandal and impeachment inquiry are. Among those tweets was a quote from Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress, an evangelical pastor from Texas, who warned that if Trump were successfully removed from office, civil war would follow.

Apocalyptic rhetoric often flows readily from preachers' pulpits and politicians' platforms. Yet this warning of a looming civil war takes on a different meaning when it appears on the President's Twitter feed -- not only because of the office he holds, but because he regularly packages his over-the-top doomsaying with specific calls for political violence. He is a president whose words and actions have helped inspire acts of domestic terrorism, like the mass shooting in El Paso in which 22 people were murdered. In an environment in which people have demonstrated a willingness to turn his words into "war," this is particularly reckless and threatening.

Much of the debate around Trump's tweet has centered on whether he is dog-whistling to violent groups who promote white supremacy or is just being sloppy. The burden of the presidency, though, is that it doesn't really matter. When the President invokes violence -- as in a civil war -- he sends encouragement to supporters already primed to perceive a coming apocalypse.

In the world of white power, where a civil war is a race war, the President's words have particular resonance. White power activists have long embraced a form of violent nationalism (or violent racism cloaked in nationalism), that is always on the lookout for enemies, from Vietnamese immigrants to black churchgoers to, at times, the federal government itself.

The idea of race-war-as-civil-war has a long history within the white power movement, most notably in "The Turner Diaries," a racist 1978 novel that imagines a race war in which white people defend themselves first through terrorism and militia violence, and then through wholesale war. The book helped shape Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh's terrorism, and remains a favorite among the movement and the alt-right, today.

Promoting the possibility of a civil war would be dangerous in any case, but at a time when white-power terrorism has re-emerged as a visible and organized domestic terrorist threat, it is even more irresponsible.

Presidents are not responsible for every act of violence that happens on their watch, even those carried out by their supporters.
But Trump presents us with something different: Over the past four years, Trump has woven calls for political violence into his speeches and tweets time and again. On the campaign trail, he said "Second Amendment People" could take action if his political opponent, Hillary Clinton, got to "pick her judges." He encouraged supporters to "knock the crap" out of protestors, then pledged to pay their legal fees should they get in trouble for assault. He even channeled his own desire to scrap with protestors, chiding his security guards for being too easy on a protestor before adding, "I'd like to punch him in the face."
At a rally a month later, a Trump supporter sucker-punched a protester.

Trump has continued to encourage violence during his presidency, as when he spoke before police officers in 2017 and told them "please don't be too nice" to the "thugs" they arrest.

Trump's exhortations to violence are not new, but they are almost certain to increase in the weeks and months ahead as the impeachment inquiry advances. Painted into a corner, his presidency under threat, Donald Trump will do what he has done in the past: double-down on appeals to his base and attacks on his enemies. And since those attacks are targeted and specific, they are especially dangerous.
In recent days, he has appeared obsessed with treason and spying. He charged the whistleblower in the Ukraine case with both, and Monday morning, suggested that Adam Schiff, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, should be arrested for treason.

That is not a neutral statement coming from the President of the United States. It is alarming on its own, given the seriousness of a treason charge. But it also does not exist in a bubble. Last week at a private event, Trump intimated that anyone who shared information with the whistleblower was a treasonous spy and alluded darkly to consequences: "You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right? We used to handle them a little differently than we do now."
We used to execute them.

President Trump may not explicitly be calling for the murder of his political enemies, but he has stepped right up to the line.

Calling for political violence is reason enough to remove Trump from office, though it's unlikely to appear in articles of impeachment. It is, in fact, why the impeachment inquiry is so serious, and why Congress must approach it with real focus and care: as the danger to his presidency grows, Trump will escalate his rhetoric, making America less safe every day he remains in office.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

Russia making some noise in support of Trump and against democrats.

 

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-bc-eu--russia-trump-20190930-story.html

Russia: Our approval is needed to publish Trump-Putin calls
By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV
Associated Press | Sep 30, 2019 | 5:00 PM | MOSCOW

The Kremlin said Monday that transcripts of calls between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin can only be published by mutual agreement.

The White House has severely restricted the distribution of memos detailing Trump's calls with foreign leaders, including Putin.

Asked about Congress' push for the publication of Putin-Trump calls, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded that "the publication is possible only on mutual accord."

"If we receive some signals from the U.S., we will consider it," he said in a conference call with reporters.

Peskov noted that the "diplomatic practice doesn't envisage such publications," adding that the issue is U.S. internal business.

The rough transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, which was released by the White House, is now the focus of a U.S. impeachment probe. It showed Trump urging Ukraine to "look into" his Democratic political rival Joe Biden.

The publication of the call, in which the presidents made critical comments about German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron, has hurt Ukraine's efforts to forge closer ties with the European Union and drawn acerbic comments from other Russian officials and lawmakers.

Speaking Sunday on state television, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that the release of Trump-Zelenskiy call by the White House should put other heads of states on guard in conversations with the American president.

"Everyone understands after this scandal that it's dangerous to make calls and conduct talks with Washington," she said.

The Democrats ' push for the publications of Trump-Putin calls comes amid a bitter strain over Russia's meddling into the U.S. 2016 presidential election, which the Kremlin has squarely denied and Trump has sought to play down.

Putin and his lieutenants derided U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller 's investigation of Kremlin interference in the 2016 presidential election, casting it as a failure and shrugging off Mueller's exposure of evidence of Russian meddling in the vote.

Mueller found that there wasn't enough evidence to establish a conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russia, but he charged 12 Russian military intelligence officers with breaking into Democratic Party computers and the email accounts of officials with Hillary Clinton's campaign.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,566]

I just took every firearm I own out to the range yesterday to make sure they are all working properly. Let’s just say I was there 6 hours and none of them caused any mass shootings except at paper dolls

[cbfalcon 824]

1 hour ago, riversco said:

I think its a defense mechanism.  If civil war breaks out, he will blame me for it somehow in his deluded mind, instead of seeing me as trying to warn that we need to change course before war breaks out.

Why would I blame you?

Sure, you may fantasize about it occurring if things don’t go Trump’s way.....But (as far as I know at least) you aren’t influential enough to actually inspire anyone to go to battle. Nor is anyone else on a lightly trafficked low rent message board..........and you won’t be on the front line of any battles. 
 

So no, if we end up in a Civil War....with members of my family dead, friends shooting and stabbing other friends, me fighting to keep my daughter safe....no I won’t be saying “That Riversco guy is responsible for all this death and the ruining of all of our lives”. You have my word. But the amount of arrogance for you to think I’d believe you responsible is actually somewhat charming. I mean that. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

4 hours ago, cbfalcon said:

Why would I blame you?

Sure, you may fantasize about it occurring if things don’t go Trump’s way.....But (as far as I know at least) you aren’t influential enough to actually inspire anyone to go to battle. Nor is anyone else on a lightly trafficked low rent message board..........and you won’t be on the front line of any battles. 
 

So no, if we end up in a Civil War....with members of my family dead, friends shooting and stabbing other friends, me fighting to keep my daughter safe....no I won’t be saying “That Riversco guy is responsible for all this death and the ruining of all of our lives”. You have my word. But the amount of arrogance for you to think I’d believe you responsible is actually somewhat charming. I mean that. 

I got harassed and then banned over at FBGs for wanting to discuss the horrific implications of an impending civil war.  When I see you start trying to start sh1t by insinuating people are rooting for civil war over HERE, that's obviously gonna piss me off.  I don't think anyone is rooting for civil war.  I gave you an opportunity to stat ejust exactly who you think is rooting for it, and you ignored the request and then turned into a smart ass.  So I'm done with you.  You should just be banned forever off this forum, just like I was at FBGs.

Why would I blame you?  I don't know why.  I don't know why I was banned off FBGs either.  But I do know people twist words and try to crap on people on these forums. You're just nuts.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

FBGs btw has a thread going actually kinda talking about the prospects of a second civil war, but they miss all the points I brought up in the past.

1.  They try to say it won't happen because the economy is good.  That's wrong.  What sets it up is loss of trust.  And in this case, the loss of trust among republicans.  You pair this collapse of trust with what they will view as a partisan action in impeaching and removing trump (even if republicans in the senate vote for it) and you will get revolt.  The collapse in trust didn't occur until 2016, yet the people at FBGs try to talk about how we never saw unrest during Obama's terms.  For almost all of Obama's terms, this was a different America. 

 

2.  it won't be guys taking up arms in cul-de-sac's or HOA's either.  I've repeatedly said its always the underemployed and unemployed.  For example, in the american revolution in 1776, well to do people didnt fight that war - - they just went along with the winners in the end.

3. its sad that some are upset at the tweet because he has influence yet aren't mad at someone like Madonna who talked about blowing up the white house, or maxine waters talking about confronting republicans in the streets, or Biden threatening to punch Trump out.   That double standard is a terrible look. 

[sderk 1,040]

Trump 2020. Let the left start something. Let em cry, whine, moan, and not work towards anything else in life other than crying, whining, and moaning. Keep it up lefties, you fvcking whiners.

I'll go get myself a 1861 Sringfield and shine that puppy up. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

21 minutes ago, sderk said:

Trump 2020. Let the left start something. Let em cry, whine, moan, and not work towards anything else in life other than crying, whining, and moaning. Keep it up lefties, you fvcking whiners.

I'll go get myself a 1861 Sringfield and shine that puppy up. 

The left is destroying trust.  Madonna can threaten to blow up the white house and nothing happens to her.  Maxine Waters can threaten to confront republicans in the streets and nothing happens to her.  Biden can threaten to punch out Trump and nothing happens to him.  The liberal media can try to scare everyone that what trump does can cause markets to crash, but the liberal media also says we cannot impeach bill clinton because trying to do can cause markets to crash.  Obama can bomb Libya for 7 months without the US being provoked and not ask congress for approval and nothing happens to him.  Trump posts about civil war and suddenly the democrats go bananas and says its impeachable. 

All of these events must be taken together and looked at as part of the whole.  These events together form a society where republicans no longer trust the system.  Republicans see a nation where the rule of law is a joke.  If you are a democrat, you are protected.  If you are republican, they turn everything against you. 

People wonder how can we be at the verge of civil war, just look at the big picture, look at everything going on.

[cbfalcon 824]

5 hours ago, sderk said:

 

I'll go get myself a 1861 Sringfield and shine that puppy up. 

  

[cbfalcon 824]

6 hours ago, riversco said:

.  I gave you an opportunity to stat ejust exactly who you think is rooting for it, and you ignored the request and then turned into a smart ass.  

Tubby...you....I’d have to go back and read to recall who else is obviously rooting for it. 
 

Of course, you will claim that you are just trying to warn us, and even if everything goes the far Left’s way, you are very very much against a Civil War.......But let’s be honest. As much as you’ve posted about it, you are kinda known as Civil War Guy now. At this point, if it doesn’t happen, you’ll look pretty stupid. So you and Tubby for sure. Probably a few more as well. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

I'm done with cbfalcon.

Anyway, the thing to watch for now is Russia making a move.  You can obviously see from troop positioning that Russia is planning some type of massive blitz from the arctic into the US.  Its like Hitler blitzing Europe in WW2 but just much bigger.  Obviously Trump is confident he is ready to move on the democrats and wipe them out since he is pushing all the buttons now. 

 

My best guess at this point is you get waves of renegade alt right groups moving on washington DC to march.  Outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMGs) like Rolling Thunder which number in the hundreds of thousands seem set to roll into DC at some point during the impeachment process in a show of force.  A lot of ex military in there and they have been recruiting for a long time.  With their strong ties to current military members they should be able to convert a healthy chunk of the military to their cause.  Those that stand in their way, that's when Russia sweeps in with a blitz to places like DC, NYC, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc.  Trump will bivouac them at his HQ and just establish his own government.  Trump can do it.  He is strong enough.