Forum Topic

No, it is not justification for an egregious error. It is merely pointing out that, even if the key words "peacefully and patriotically" are taken into account, Trump's intention was clearly to incite violence. The weasel words were his get-out, if subsequently impeached. They were designed to give an insincere emphasis on peace, and distract attention from his otherwise inflammatory rhetoric. Consider his reaction to the scenes of violence, and his reported comment on the mob's calls to hang Vice-President Pence - "maybe Mr Spence should be hung". Consider also that he departed from the draft of the Rose Garden speech which had been prepared for him, and from which he omitted the words "I am asking you to leave the Capitol region NOW and go home in a peaceful way". Anyone who thinks that the general tenor of Trump's words on that day was not an incitement to violence is either naive or wilfully blind.Trumps' threat of a defamation suit is hot air, and should be contested vigorously by the BBC. He is out of time for filing a claim in London, where he might have had a slightly greater, but still only an outside, chance of success. In the US, as a public figure, he'll need to prove actual malice. And the $1000,000,000 claim has no basis in any actual reputational damage. He has done so much damage to his own reputation with his pronouncements on the day, his inflammatory lies about the election steal (which he repeated in the pacifying statement he was supposed to make in the Rose Garden) and his pardoning of the insurrectionists, that the BBC's clumsy editing can't have made a lot of difference.

Robert Fish ● 11d

Except he did say we need to fight like hell and then a few seconds later we need to march to the Capitol. Have a look at the last minute of his full speech.I think one of our great achievements will be election security because nobody until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9:00 in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life, but I said, “Something’s wrong here. Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happened.”And we fight. We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children and for our beloved country, and I say this, despite all that’s happened, the best is yet to come.So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give... (the Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote.) But we’re going to try and give our Republicans... (the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help), we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.I want to thank you all. God bless you and God bless America. Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Tom Pike ● 12d

Who the Establishment is changes over time. It's the people and groups with power and influence. I read an article some time ago about the tussle then ongoing in the Conservative party and beyond, but particularly noticeable in the Conservatives between the two "establishments". These were described as Liberal v Conservative. Both economically liberal so believing in free markets, small government, low taxation etc. The Liberal establishment was socially as well as economically liberal, supporting gay marriage, women priests, immigration, human rights, some green issues, LTNs etc. The Conservative establishment was concerned with protecting British identity, traditions and pushing back against the socially Liberal views that had became part of the mainstream. The Conservative tendency was represented within that party by Liz Truss and there was great excitement at getting her into Office and frustration, disappointment when it all went wrong. Interestingly there was no mention of a socialist or left wing establishment. That would be one believing in wealth redistribution, the power of government to intervene to deliver a better country / society, public ownership of key infrastructure and services etc. The BBC was identified as being part of the Liberal establishment, so economically and socially Liberal.The sources of power that existed when there was socialist or left wing influence, mainly the Trade Unions, Labour MPs who came up from the Unions, don't exist anymore. With the demise of any socialist influence, many of the things that the post war generation or baby boomers enjoyed has gone. Decent pensions, employers paying to train you, cheap housing, cheap utility costs and fares, well maintained public realm.When ordinary people couldn't vote and had no power or influence, life for most was grim. Power and money was concentrated at the top.When ordinary people could vote and acquired some power and influence they used it initially to get a fairer share of the Country's wealth, particularly after the second world war. By the 60's and into the 80s it felt like a process that would go on and on and couldn't be reversed. We were better off than our parents, surely that would continue down the generations. Seems the saying about power conceding noting without demand can be extrapolated to, when you no longer have the power to demand, they'll take it all back.

Kathleen Healy ● 16d