A commentator argues January 6 was a "selfie insurrection" where participants took photos, not an armed uprising. He claims the former president did not incite the event and that questioning the 2020 election is not treason.
They are claiming that what happened was an insurrection. It's a gigantic lie. Okay, first, I guess, unarmed insurrection where people take selfies at the desks of people they oppose politically. It's the selfie insurrection. All right. So that's the first lie. It's based on that. If it wasn't an insurrection, then there's nothing to really talk about. The second is that the president incited the insurrection, even though they can produce— the only thing they could produce is he says you got to fight for what you believe. As everybody knows, that incites riots. The Democrats never say fight for what we stand for. And it just continues along those lines. Third, they equate believing that the election was illegitimate with treason and, and being an insurrectionist and so on. I don't care what you believe. I don't care what my side believes or your side believes. I care the way people act. How many Democrats believe that the election was not, uh, was not stolen from Hillary Clinton? The whole point of the Russian collusion lie was to prove that it was an illegitimate election. Putin won, remember? Putin, not Trump. Telling all Americans over and over and over police are racist does not lead to fatal riots, the burning down of businesses and police cars. That does not lead to that. This is a cover-up for the violence of the left. That's the way it should be regarded. Mm-hmm.
Life, Legacy, and a Dangerous Mission in the Soviet Union | Sunday Fireside Chat
