Democrats are supporting riots? Can you provide a source to this claim?
Supporting protests is not supporting riots.
That would be like saying Republicans support police brutality if they support the police.
Which Democrats supported which criminal?
Which Democrats support violent revolutionary communists?
Not to mention all the Democrat politicians that have allowed the riots to expand by pulling back the police and not calling in the National Guard. Not to mention all the Democrat DAs who have made a deliberate decision not to charge rioters for their crimes. Not to mention the media reports that gaslight the nation calling the protests "mostly peaceful" even as scenes of arson, destruction, and violence are on the screen for all to see.
Y'know, that sort of supporting.
Tons of people were reportedly arrested (and assaulted) by police for simply being there, including reporters live on camera, and they even pepper sprayed and arrested their own senator.
Many of those people may not be able to afford bail. A system that favors the rich and punishes the poor.
And police have been caught on camera hundreds of times during BLM protests instigating violence and/or committing police brutality.
Here's a defense attorney compiling over 400 videos back in June:
I saw instances where as soon as the police stopped showing up, everything calmed down, people started dancing and there was no violence.
There may be cases where the opposite happens. But that doesn't mean that easing up on police presence automatically means they want things to be violent. It can, and some times does, result in the opposite.
Regarding mostly peaceful protests, most people/protests probably are. But the media wasn't in question here.
I don't know what DA you're referring to, but that's a dishonest generalization of "The Democrats" at best. And that's assuming you can prove that they did it on purpose as you claim. Like I said before, you have a habit of acting like you know what someone else is thinking.
Last edited by Hiku - on 27 September 2020
You think it's ok if people say that "The Republicans support rape", and when someone asks them why, they post this?
Or that "The Republicans support criminals" and when someone asks why, you post a link to Trump pardoning convicted criminals?
Either way, at the very least people have to explain their reasoning before they post some outlandish claim about these parties. And the generalizations need to stop stop, because it always turns out to be false equivalences, dishonest framing, arguable circumstances, etc. And people waste their time having to ask what they mean, only to get a reply that doesn't affirm the claim but turns into arguments instead.