Anyone has seen the video and texts in question and can tell me?
EDIT: mass downvoting people, seriously? I didn't even defend Trump (or Biden), I asked a question, I am from Brazil and wanted to know what happened.
> What exactly Trump said to spark this?
> an eventual reiteration that the elections were rigged, they should be furious, but now they should go home and that he loved them very much and were very special people
"please respect the police"
and then
"you are completely right to be angry, it was stolen. i love you and you're special"
the first comment is def a calming attempt, followed by an immediate call to action.
But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt. It’s a very tough period of time.
There’s never been a time like this where such a thing happened where they could take it away from all of us — from me, from you, from our country. This was a fraudulent election.
But we can’t play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens. You see the way others are treated — that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel, but go home and go home in peace."""
please be peaceful, please respect our police, we had a beautiful landslide victory that was taken from us, it was stolen i know, but you have to go home now, you're special and we love you but you have to go home.
I'm specifically not using quotation marks because I'm recalling it from memory. I'm sure you can find a backup of it somewhere.
If you're asking about what sparked the actual attack, Trump specifically told a crowd at a nearby rally to march on the capitol before the event. He's also been saying the election was stolen for the past two months every time he's gotten in front of a microphone.
I believe during the same speech, he also criticized the Vice President for following his Constitutional obligations instead of (as the President would prefer) taking unilateral decisions to throw the vote to Trump instead.
[1] To be clear, the test in Brandenburg v Ohio is a test of whether or not the government can make the speech outright illegal to speak. This is necessarily a very high bar, and it is much higher in the US than most countries in the world. The bar for whether or not private individuals and organizations should feel compelled to disassociate from an individual is clearly lower. That one can seriously entertain that the President's speech is surpassing the high bar of outright illegal speech should indicate how reasonable it is for others to consider it beyond the pale.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-07/how-donald-trump-rall...
I don't know if the Facebook posts were the same though.