JFK Assassination Forum

Alleged? No indictment. No trial. No conviction. But that won't stop the TDS crowd from swallowing the story hook, line, and sinker.

How did he encourage his followers to overthrow the government? By telling them to go to the Capitol and protest peacefully? I thought that was a constitutionally protected right.

Do you think poor victim Donald was framed in the E. Jean Carroll case, too?


ME: Did Donald Trump do or say anything that encouraged or motivated the attendees of the January 6th protest to storm the Capitol?

GROK: Yes, Donald Trump took actions that motivated and directed many attendees of the January 6, 2021, "Save America" rally to march to the Capitol, though whether this legally constituted incitement remains highly disputed.

Trump's Speech and Key Statements

Trump spoke for over an hour at the Ellipse rally. Relevant excerpts (from transcripts):

He repeatedly claimed the election was stolen: "We won in a landslide... This is a coup... They rigged it."

"We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore." (He used variations of "fight" ~20 times.)

"We’re going to walk down to the Capitol... We’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."

Trump did not explicitly call for violence, breaking windows, or assaulting officers. Supporters emphasize the "peacefully and patriotically" line as evidence against incitement. Critics note it was one brief phrase amid an hour of fiery rhetoric targeting Mike Pence, Congress, and election officials, delivered to an already angry crowd that had been primed for months with "Stop the Steal" messaging.

He tweeted during the riot (after it began) criticizing Pence for lacking "courage," which some saw as further inflaming the situation. Trump later released a video telling rioters to "go home" and that "we love you," while still repeating stolen-election claims.

Broader Context and Motivation

Trump promoted the rally (e.g., tweeting "Be there, will be wild!").

He spent months alleging massive fraud (claims rejected by courts, his own officials, and audits).

The Democrat-led January 6 Committee concluded Trump was the "central cause," citing his pressure on Pence, fake electors efforts, and the speech.

Some charged rioters cited Trump's words as motivation in court statements.

In short, Trump's speech and months of rhetoric did motivate a large portion of the crowd to march on the Capitol with the goal of pressuring Congress/Pence to delay or reject Biden's certification. Whether this crossed into illegal encouragement of violence is a matter of intense partisan disagreement—courts, historians, and the public remain divided. The "peacefully" disclaimer exists, but context, repetition of fighting language, and direction to the Capitol were key factors for many attendees.

ME: How much later?

GROK: Trump released the "go home, we love you" video at approximately 4:17 p.m. ET on January 6, 2021.

Key Timeline Context

Trump's speech at the Ellipse: Began around 11:57 a.m.–noon and ended around 1:10–1:15 p.m. He finished urging supporters to march to the Capitol shortly before or as the first groups were already heading there.

Initial perimeter breaches at the Capitol: Started around 12:53 p.m. (while Trump was still speaking), with surges past barriers by ~1:00–1:30 p.m.

Rioters entered the Capitol building: Around 2:10–2:13 p.m.

Trump's tweet criticizing Pence: 2:24 p.m. (after he knew violence was underway).

"Go home" video posted: 4:17 p.m. — roughly 3 hours after his speech ended, ~2–3 hours after major breaches began, and ~2 hours after rioters had entered the building.

This period is often called the "187 minutes" in discussions of Trump's actions that afternoon (from the end of his speech to the video). He was at the White House during this time, aware of events via reports and TV (per testimony and records). The video was recorded in the Rose Garden after aides urged him to respond; it condemned violence but still repeated stolen-election claims and expressed sympathy for the crowd.

"You keep going down every Soviet rabbit hole you come across."

That's a suggestion I refuse to accept.

Regardless, the reason I do "go down" some of them is because "former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin did install "useful idiot" (or worse) Donald Trump as our "President" on 20 January 2017 as the culmination of the Kremlin's 1959-on deception-based Master Plan to get us to tear ourselves apart, and because there are a few Oswald-related JFKA "anomalies" that far-left CTs take to signify that the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil Military Industrial Intelligence-Community Complex or the evil, evil Deep State (not to be conflated with Steve Bannon's evil, evil Administrative State) killed JFK, which I think bear looking into to determine whether they were, instead, part-and-parcel of said highly successful Master Plan.

Is that okay with you?

Your unhinged fantasies are not OK with me.

Unless you can show evidence Oswald conspired with elements of the Soviet government or intelligence aparatus, all this crap is nothing but white noise.

I understand your zeal for the LN narrative, but I think you're grasping here. Reid (she says) encountered Oswald after she came back from watching the horrific JFKA. She was surprised to encounter Oswald (and only Oswald) on her floor and addressed him about the assassination. These were not ordinary circumstances. Unlike you, I have a difficult time believing she would not have recalled what Oswald was wearing by the time of her first (handwritten) statement THE NEXT DAY and her second one a couple of days later. Recalling an Oswald who was wearing a brownish jacket (or shirt) as wearing only a white t-shirt and specifically as neither wearing nor carrying a jacket would be a remarkably faulty memory.
"Wearing a lt. brown jacket" was one of the few details Baker noted in his handwritten affidavit that was apparently written THE DAY OF THE EVENT: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338819/m1/5/. He was not having to do much in the way of "trying to remember."

If we're honest, LNers and CTers alike "have a problem" with the reliability of eyewitness and earwitness testimony when it doesn't mesh with what they want to hear and "have no problem" when it fits what they want to hear. There is no reason to think that either Baker or Reid would be unable to remember accurately in these circumstances, yet there is a definite disconnect.

This episode illustrates why I have little faith in eyewitness accounts. Minutes apart Baker said Oswald was wearing a light brown jacket over some type of white shirt, then Reid said he was wearing a white t-shirt with no jacket or shirt over it. Both were partially right but got important details wrong because they simply didn't take note of what Oswald was wearing at the time. Why would they? This is typical of eyewitnesses. Are we supposed to believe that after his encounter with Baker, Oswald took his tan shirt off, walked past Reid with just the white t-shirt, then put it back on when he got on the bus and was spotted wearing the tan shirt by his former landlady. Or does it make more sense that Baker and Reid sort of got it right and sort of got it wrong. Putting it ALL the evidence together I conclude that Oswald was wearing both the tan shirt and white t-shirt when he shot JFK, with the tan shirt either partially or completely unbuttoned and that is what he was wearing when arrested and at all points in between. I also know that conflicts with what several witnesses along the way said and I don't care.

I will never understand why people put so much faith in eyewitnesses and accept what they tell us as established facts. When I see somebody start and argument with "So-and-so said that......", my reaction is STFU. Prove to me that what so-and-so said was accurate. Without corroboration, preferably by hard evidence and not another so-and-so, I'm just not going to buy it.

Donald Trump is alleged to have raped young girls provided to him by Jeffery Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Whether or not that’s true, he’s now figuratively raping American taxpayers by having his DOJ and IRS set up a slush fund of $1.8 billion to be dispersed to his allies, some of whom are the Jan. 6 zombies he encouraged to overthrow our Constitutional Federal Republic and keep him in office after he lost the 2020 election fair-and-square.

Alleged? No indictment. No trial. No conviction. But that won't stop the TDS crowd from swallowing the story hook, line, and sinker.

How did he encourage his followers to overthrow the government? By telling them to go to the Capitol and protest peacefully? I thought that was a constitutionlly protected right.

I didn't change the title.

Duncan must have.

-- Tom

After a a complaint (not from Lance) i changed the thread title to "This is for Nosenko lovers"