It’s senators they need, I think.
It’s unbelievable that a general has to put out this message
Even now!!! 
You’re not missing much, although I did live in the same building as Amelia’s Trattoria and virtually in back of the Garment District (which, until I moved there, always thought people were referring to a particular place/neighborhood rather than a store).
Most pertinent, 3/4 of a mile walk from Phoenix Landing, the official LFC bar in the Boston area…I stumbled out of bed and down the street for a few 7:30 AM KOs. One particularly memorable one was the 2-1 win at Palace in 17-18 where Salah scored the late winner. Had some of my herbal remedy on the way there and then filled up with a pint for breakfast! Bleary eyes, full beer, can’t lose (and we didn’t, either).
Where did the democrats incite violence ?
They put up a challenger for the Presidential nomination, cunts.
“Dur hur hurr AN-TEE-FUH!”
The Republican argument is that the Dems excused the BLM violence of the summer and aided and abetted anarchists by allowing them “free zones” in western cities. There is more than a little truth in that sentiment.
However, that doesn’t excuse a sitting president inciting a mob to attack Congress. If we want to have a republic for a while longer, there must be accountability for that.
I can’t see anyone
There is no truth to that at all!
There is an issue of causation in law though.
Ha, a good demonstrative example of incitement.
So it begins, the great shitstorm of our time.
Nancy kicking things off right now…dressed all in black, like she’s on her way to a funeral…
Jim Jordan just invoked…
The Wright Brothers, Chuck Yeager, and Neil Armstrong…
Now that I think of it…Donald J. Trump is the natural end point of that chain…
‘A fiery speech to a crowd of partisans.’
Oh…rideo…
ABORT! ABORT!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA…some cunt just blamed BLM and ANTIFA going unpunished in the summer.
FMD
In the House Judiciary Committee report, the Democrats made this argument for why First Amendment free-speech protections is not a defense against this impeachment: “The Free Speech Clause guarantees that private citizens can engage in certain forms of expression without government regulation or prohibition. But it applies very differently to speech by government officials and public employees. … Simply put, President Trump has no free speech defense. President Trump is not a private citizen, free to say whatever he wants without accepting the consequences or recognizing the effects it might have on our system of government. As the head of the Executive Branch, his words can shake the nation—and so he is held to a higher standard than private citizens. Moreover, when it comes to the impeachment power, the question is not whether the President was free to say what he said. It is whether he has engaged in conduct that threatens the constitutional order.”
Higher standards
He’s going going gone.