Let’s be Honest. If BLM stormed the Capitol, we would be silent.
It astonishes me how unwilling people were to denounce the rioting, looting, and arson during the BLM protests vs. how quick they were to denounce the Trump supporters storming the Capitol (which I agree was wrong btw). Why didn’t people do the same for BLM? Couldn’t our esteemed President-elect denounce the violence in our cities and urge the BLM founders to do the same? Why is the breaking windows of Capitol Hall an “insurrection” but burning down half a city is a “mostly peaceful protest”? Of course Capitol Hall represents our democracy at work, but the small business in our cities are the source of people’s income and livelihood, so they’re not any less important. Both Trump supporters and BLM did something deplorable, but one group is obviously held to a higher standard than the other. I know some of you are tired of these kinds of posts, but I couldn’t help but notice/rant about this.
Edit: I apologize. It looks like Biden did, in fact, denounce violence from BLM protestors, but that doesn't take away from the fact that dozens of high profile politicians and prominent leaders stood by or justified the riots, while the mainstream media called them "mostly peaceful."
Black Lives Matter, as well as the clergy, were gassed in front of the White House by non-identified federal agents for Trump to have a photo op with an upside down Bible.
These idiots stormed the capital building in an effort to terrorize legislators and disrupt the certification of an election.
The police response is beyond hypocritical and your post is completely in bad faith. This website used to have intelligent discussions on it.
You’re right about the police response being hypocritical. Trump should not have gassed a small group of peaceful protestors and there should have been more security at the Capitol. I’m talking about the inconsistency between what is and isn’t socially acceptable to admonish. Everyone, including Trump, denounces what happened at Capitol Hill. The same unanimous admonishment should have taken place for BLM’s violence, but instead most people stayed silent while the media spun the the riots into “mostly peaceful” protests. A lot of damage could have been stopped had the same unequivocal rebuke of the events yesterday been used a few months ago.
You do realize that a huge proportion of those doing damage over the summer were not BLM supporters but people who wanted to release their anger about Covid, ACAB psychopaths or teenagers who wanted to cop some new shit?
BLM is at least about protesting for equity, not desecrating a federal building and threatening congresspeople’s lives over conspiracy theories
How many days of unrest preceded the clergy / BLM incident? Do you think these people could’ve stormed the Capitol a week after protests and riots across the country?
Let’s stop making disingenuous comments. This entire sort of discourse is just meant to inflame and radicalize people. It’s working so far as we saw yesterday.
In my opinion, everyone has been given too much leverage in political protests these days from all sides. We need more arrests across the board at both BLM and Trump events.
However, let's think about this for a second. Trump supporters went to protest Congress and the electoral process....not the police...in fact they like the police. BLM went to protest the police. I can't tell you how many scenes played out this year of maskless BLM protestors screaming into the faces of police officer in the middle of covid, threw projectiles at them, and screamed all kinds of derogatory terms at them. Every protest had spray painted ACAB (All Cops Are Bad).
In my opinion, treatment of all riots has been too loose. But to ask, why does a police officer treat someone, who spits in their face, different from someone protesting politics is beyond stupid? A kindergardener could explain to you why the reaction is going to be different.
You have got to ask the question why. I think it was allowed to happen. To allow protesters to enter the capitol. Think about it. Why wasn't there more police yesterday than the blm event? Wasn't yesterday's event known to be one of the largest protests in our nation's history?
I think the goal was to allow them to enter to cause bullshut to slander the republican party. Just my take
Well, yeah. Herd mentality and mob tactics have created a toxic social dynamic where everyone is afraid to say anything negative about BLM out fear of being labeled a racist. People have too much at stake personally to risk stating an opposing view. It’s easy to denounce a group of loud rednecks because America loves to make fun of and degrade them anyway, as well as there being little to no social consequence for doing so. Not that any of this is “right”, but it personally doesn’t surprise me in the slightest.
yeah, no
ETA: Malta just explained the (extremely obvious) differences between the two below
Lots of people denounce the rioting regardless of cause. BLM actually had mostly peaceful protests, but there were quite a few that got a lot of attention because the scenes were great for capturing an audience. People click on police cars on fire and stores looking like a hurricane went through them, not people marching and chanting.
I think a lot of the disgust for yesterday was because it’s original intent was to somehow stop the thousandth confirmation that Biden won (showing a complete disregard for our voting process) and how far they went inside a seemingly protected government building with hardly any resistance from law enforcement/ National Guard until much later. Nobody can be certain, but if it was a BLM riot storming into the same building it begs the question if they would have gotten that fire with that little resistance.
Agree with what a lot of you said. Truthfully, think there are agent provocateurs on both sides (at this event and at the other protests over the past year) causing a monkey see - monkey do type of mindset resulting in destruction. The thing that I am confused about... is the benefit for, what seemed like, the mob practically being ushered in? It strikes me as odd, I don’t see any upside for law enforcement to let that happen. Did you see an “allowance” of the mob to proceed forward?
I saw that too, I bet we even saw the same video. Police taking selfies too.. why? Even if they agreed with the mob (which should be alarming), they should realize that’s a career killer photo.
I’m not sure if it’s gross incompetence, rent-a-cops just too fearful and not managed well, or just absolute corruption. Who knows? I doubt we will ever know.
The resistance or lack thereof is a function of preparedness. Police didn’t anticipate this action and protests are typically met with minimal force necessary. Once the situation became clear more forceful action was used.
You can’t compare this to protests and riots that have been going on for days and weeks.
Solid points there. I saw photos of NG and FBI HRT teams going in and they seemed to take control quickly. I commented above that it could’ve just been the rent-a-cops realizing their fear is greater than the $30k a year or whatever they make salary
So, what? 99.9% of Trump rallies have been peaceful. That in no way excuses what happened yesterday in the 0.1% of the time. It was terrible.
In fact, I find this argument the exact opposite of what BLM is even trying to say. Guess what? 99.9% of the time, a black man pulled over by a white police officer will not get shot. The whole point of the BLM movement is that this is not acceptable even 0.1% of the time.
I think you and I agree on the exact same thing here. The question is right and wrong. George Floyd is no hero, but he didn’t deserve to die. Congress is no hero, but people shouldn’t storm the Capitol building like that.
Most protests on both sides are peaceful. I hate Trump, but in Beverly Hills down the street from me there’s people with MAGA and Trump signs all the time. Good for them, it’s their right to peaceful assembly. Same with most BLM protests. It’s the most American thing you can do.
I always wonder if with people like OP what they would have been like for some of the worst events in history. "Yea 9/11 was bad, but we shouldn't have been bombing the middle east!" "Yea, the liquidation of the landed and educated classes in cambodia was bad, but the wealthy shouldn't have been so oppressive". "Yea Maduro shouldn't oppress voters, but US imperialism has driven him to this position".
I am genuinely sorry for the hyperbole because I don't like when people resort to that (all trump supporters are not white supremacist).. but sometimes you just need to be fed up and say that something is bad. (Its just bad, whole stop nothing else needs to be said). Call it social cohesion, call it going with a crowd, but some things are too bad to put a positive spin on (shit, if Lindsay Graham can come around to condemning this shit wholeheartedly than I'm confident you can come around as well).
This was a shameful event in US history, and to be honest I don't agree with you on whataboutBLM spin. I think if it was BLM rushing the capitol they would have been dealt with much more brutally and I would have agreed with that treatment, you don't let rioters rush the fucking capitol. That is a giant security threat. The pipe bombs, not to imagine if the crowds were willing to use guns... this could have been a catastrophe.
Agreed. My point is that a lot of destruction over the summer could have been stopped if more of our leaders and the BLM founders stood up and unequivocally denounced the violence, the same way they denounce the Capitol Hill event. Instead, most people stayed silent while the media tried to spin these events as “mostly peaceful,” which hurts our country and honestly hurts the image of BLM.
I think its not completely fair to expect the same level of control from both mobs. BLM is not like the Civil Rights Movement 50 years ago - there is no central figure at the top a la MLK or Malcolm X. While there are organizers that are more senior/more respected, there is not a person with whom the buck unequivocally stops. However, with the Trump mob, it is clear that they follow Trump and only Trump. It would be significantly easier to control the Trump mob for this reason.
"People have a right to be, in fact, angry and frustrated. And more violence, hurting more people, isn’t going to answer the question.” - Joe Biden, May 29th
“Protesting such brutality is right and necessary. It’s an utterly American response. But burning down communities and needless destruction is not. Violence that endangers lives is not.” - Joe Biden, May 31st
“There’s no place for violence, no place for looting or destroying property or burning churches or destroying businesses […] we need to distinguish between legitimate peaceful protest and opportunistic violent destruction” - Joe Biden, June 2nd
“The deadly violence we saw overnight in Portland is unacceptable […] as a country we must condemn the incitement of hate and resentment that led to this deadly clash. It is not a peaceful protest when you go out spoiling for a fight." - Joe Biden, August 30th
No doubt there are more, but I'm not going to waste anymore time debunking the false narrative you are trying to create. And yes, peacefully protesting State-dictated police aggression is an eminently more worthy cause than all those incel losers who stormed the Capitol yesterday because they've been lied to by politicians they worship about a valid election.
It really would be great if we could look at a candidate's quotes to determine what they meant, but that's not what necessarily happens.
Trump can be quoted in just as many places denouncing white supremacists.
I think a fair question to ask of Biden as has been asked of Trump is "How sincerely did you mean those words and did you take any action to stop the conflict?" Trump doesn't hold up so well from that viewpoint and neither does Biden. It's easy to have your speech writer give you something to read. It's different to mean it and to take action.
Similarly, yesterday, I kept hearing that Trump can step in and make this stop at any point....which he eventually did (took too damn long). I've often wondered why political leaders like Biden and Obama didn't do the same during the BLM riots. As you state above, they put out a few press statements, made a few mentions in speeches, but I don't see any huge effort to quell the situation.
In particular, personally I think this could have been a great moment for Obama. Imagine if he showed up in Minneapolis after the first night of riots and told everyone to not do it this way? It could have prevented a lot of violence and division.
Biden was not sitting president when he made those quotes, nor was he in any position in government.
The media plan for Democrats regarding the 2020 riots went like this:
1. Complain in abstract fashion about the violence but fail to describe who is causing it (for example by using words like “rioters”, or “violence”).
2. Then continue by criticizing the police or Trump, as if vaguely to suggest they are the real and only problems.
3. Name check right-wing militias and white supremacists.
4. Then, make no mention of BLM or Antifa the actual sources of rioting and looting in American cities for several months.
5. In the case of Biden, Dismiss Antifa one time, but then later call it an “idea”: The one official reference I could find to Biden condemning Antifa by name was to NBC News affiliate WGAL months after cities burned to the ground. Asked by reporter Barbara Barr, “Do you condemn Antifa?” Biden responded, “Yes I do—violence no matter who it is.” But of course, Biden walked back that condemnation by saying Antifa is ‘an idea, not an organization’ during 2020 Presidential Debate.
6. The media then characterizes these unspecific rhetorical statements as groundbreaking calls for peace that covered the evils of both BLM, Antifa or agent provocateurs, all while ignoring Biden’s dismissive attitude about Antifa.
7. The media then continues to blame Trump.
Boiling it down, I have not read or heard one statement attributing any or significant culpability to both BLM or Antifa (as an organization or collection of affinity cells) from Biden or Harris for that matter. Likewise, the Democrat convention was void of any mention of the riots.
Shumer’s resolution follows the above 2020 riot playbook stating that “violence and looting are unlawful, unacceptable and contrary to the purpose of peaceful protests”, again never making mention of whom is doing the bad actions of rioting and looting and that Congress “condemns Trump” for the Lafayette Square event.
Nancy Pelosi to her credit in 2017 condemned Antifa in 2017. She said that the violent actions of “people calling themselves Antifa in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted.” Nothing in 2020.
James Clyburn seems to be very principled old-school politician that denounced “the violence”, but also the unlawful removal of statues at a speech in the House of Representatives. He gets an earned respect because of his recognition of the culture war issues at play.
Portland mayor Ted Wheeler called Antifa out by name for first time in a debate with Sarah Iannarone in October 2020.
Anyhow, please correct me if wrong, or in your words “debunk” but one will not find that any Democratic politician (other than the ones I mentioned) in 2020 that specifically, condemned BLM, Antifa, or possible agent provocateurs (not "the violence") for the looting, rioting, and property destruction.
.
People like you actually make me sick. BLM lives rent free in your head. Retard.
This is so dumb. When BLM does anything you guys say "if white people did this everyone would blah blah". But you are the people who aren't silent at all when BLM does something, because you're always saying shit like "if blah blah". So pretty much it goes both ways and neither way people would be silent, by you and half the country complaining about BLM there's no silence, so why do you guys always try to position your arguments as if there is.
I saw a bunch of pics of mid-written emails on unlocked computers on 4chan. I gotta believe at least one of them went around forwarding a bunch of shit or knew some tech shit and stole all their emails or whatever. Some real joocy shit might be yet to come!
I can’t tell if this is sarcastic, but I was wondering the same thing. People broke into the offices of prominent Senators, House Speaker Pelosi, and god knows who else. Did they search through their documents? Who knows what they found?
I don't know where the sarcasm would be. I was scrolling Reddit while pooping last night and saw a post on /offmychest from some whiney liberal talking about how he wants to leave the US. I thought it was the usual crybaby nonsense, but then I realized some real shit was going down. And I thought, 'Let's go on 4chan and see what some real men have to say about this.' And then I saw a bunch of pictures of some manchildren in costumes freezing their gyno titties off while doing I'm not sure what. But I also saw pictures being posted by those same guys. And I saw pictures taken from behind political big shots' desks who had clearly fled the scene without bothering to lock their shit. Like mid-sentence emails still on the screen. And they were there for a longass time. I turned on the actual news for the first time in years because I thought any minute now these fools were gonna get mercd. I hate BLM lefties, but I hate these neckbeard losers even more. I heard they were giving them a curfew? The fuck? Like a kid who stayed out too late? Why is that building not filled with gas yet? Why are there not blackhawks in the air? Are you fools letting our country look like a joke to the world? First our bond rating and now this? Whatever. I'm gonna watch a youtube and tube back in 5 minutes to 6 to see these chumps lose eyes to rubber bullets. 6 comes around. 6:10. Nothing. Fucking disappointment. The news is boring as fuck. I had to go watch some fucked up shit on Livestream just to get my fix. What a letdown
Uh...BLM did similar shit this summer and even occupied a whole neighborhood of Seattle. Authorities didn't do shit to them, though the Floyd rioters did kill close to 40 people over the course of their violence.
Police actually killed four of the Trump supporters.
Fake news! Do your research. Police only killed one of the traitors. The other 3 suffered unrelated medical emergencies, probably heart attacks or something. That's what happens when Q sends in Meal Team 6 to storm the Capitol I guess.
What I'm particularly proud of is how many conservatives/libertarians have come out against the storming of the Capitol including lots of the most conservative members of this website.
I can't understand why others refuse to be mature and do the same thing in regards to BLM riots which continue to be defended over and over again. What happened yesterday was deplorable. Sometimes, you gotta be a grown up and say, "what my side did was completely fucked up and cannot be excused."
You are proud the conservatives in congress are not traitors. Terrific
I'm not talking about members of Congress in particular but just regular people like the many posters on this website and just about everyone that I've talked to since the storming.
Peaceful protests are central to a free democracy and should be protected in all cases.
Violent rioters should be charged for their crimes. If they burned down buildings, try them for arson. If they attemped to overthrow the constitutionally-elected president, try them for treason and sedition.
It’s not that hard guys, stop the fucking whataboutism.
To me, the actions of BLM mobs and the Trump mob are not the same at all due to both their intentions as well as their actions. First, lashing out and causing destruction due to frustrations over police brutality and racial injustice is fundamentally different from lashing out and causing destruction due to the baseless idea that the election was stolen. Second, BLM burning down your local Target and looting Gucci is COMPLETELY different from storming the Capitol Building to try and stop the certification of a Presidential election. Poor attempt at whataboutism, anyone with a brain (including many high-level Republicans at this point) knows that yesterday's events are unprecedented, much more insidious than your yearly BLM riot, and have completely crossed the line of what is good and decent.
Unlike Target or Gucci, the US Congress deserves to get looted. I hope they actually felt scared in there.
That's what I'm saying. I hope Pelosi was shitting bricks thinking her life might end 3 years earlier than thought.
The left stormed government buildings in Portland and Wisconsin, so the arguments being made here are moot. You would be taking the knee, making a social media post and apologize for your existence. Because liberals never apologize for their extremes, see this thread. Only conservatives do and this is why they lose, all the time.
The worst kind of people are the ones that use their intelligence to make wild, elaborate excuses to justify a behaviour they would not tolerate from the other side.
I have two statements:
1) as a resident WSO liberal, I have, and will continue, to denounce violent protests from any liberal-aligned group. I also fully support the right and reasons to peacefully protest racial inequality and police brutality (i.e. Colin Kaepernick taking a knee and watching the collective Right lose their minds)
2) you are an absolute clown of a human being
First one is a lie.
Second one, dude, you advocate collective racial punishment and discrimination on the basis of white privilege. You are the equivallent of a Nazi. Gtfo.
No we would not be “silent.” We’d be talking about it here on WSO like we did a few months ago. Spare us all the mental gymnastics. What happened yesterday is an embarrassment for the party of “law and order.”
Yes, it is embarrassing. My point is if BLM did it, most prominent leaders would stay silent and the media would spin it into a “mostly” peaceful protest. The rebuke would not be as unanimous and unequivocal as it is now.
Yes but that’s already well known. I think the way you wrote it made people think you were (at least partly) justifying the act. Like you made a comment that was so obvious it caused people to overthink.
Does any of this really matter though
No, that’s why it’s on an online forum.
I disagree with what you said to a considerable extent. As you have completely ignored, the vast majority of black lives matter protests have been peaceful. And honestly, they have a justifiable reason to be mad due to the number of police related incidents that happen throughout the country. Obviously the violence in Seattle, Minny, and Portland is bad. Nobody has turned a blind eye to that, and Biden condemned the violence and looting multiple times in the two weeks following the death of George Floyd while supporting the right to protest and organize peacefully. Trump falsely claimed (what else is new) that Biden waited until like August to do so, which a lot of people believed because people only see what they want to see. On the flip side, the protesters in DC were intentionally trying to interrupt the democratic election process that they, as rEaL AmErIcAnS, should be supporting, just like their right to bear arms. But I digress... I just really fucking hate people who don't look at facts, so I will lay just a few out for you here in the two weeks following Floyd's passing.
May 31th: Biden denounces violence in protests on a tweet linking to a lengthier post.
June 2nd: While speaking in PA, Biden denounces the violence again.
June 2nd: Pelosi says there is no place for violence and says it needs to be addressed, but not necessary through deploying the military in a call with NPR.
June 2nd: Chuck Schumer and other democrat congress members move to pass a resolution that, among other things, blatantly calls the violence and looting "unlawful, unacceptable and contrary to the purpose of peaceful protests"
June 3rd: James Clyburn denounces the violence when speaking to WaPo.
While others stayed silent for longer, it is foolish to say that democrats did not speak out against the looting and violence during BLM protests following the death of George Floyd and the ANTIFA violence that followed in later months. To reference Jon Stewart, just because you choose not to see something does not mean it did not happen, just how the earth isn't getting hotter even though it snows where you live.
First of all, I agree that most of the BLM protests have been peaceful, but that doesn’t make the violent riots and arson any more right. This is similar to how majority of the pro-Trump protests have been peaceful, but the Capitol Hill storming should be condemned.
For your other points, you could probably name dozens of moments where people made a statement saying “violence bad” but you also had dozens of influential politicians and prominent people looking the other way or even saying “who said protests have to be peaceful?” You then had hundreds of articles and videos sent out by the media to the public that spun these violent riots into “mostly peaceful” protests. In other words, the rebuke of the event yesterday was far more unanimous and unequivocal than anything that was said during the BLM riots. A lot of violence and destruction could have been prevented had we taken this approach for the BLM rioters
I don't disagree that it could be handled better. 100% right. I also said that many other influential dems stayed silent. But I do reiterate that most major protests were peaceful, which is just factually correct. I think it is tough to compare the BLM protests with the recent Trump thing because the Trump thing bordered on attempted insurrection against a democratic process, while the drivers for BLM were very different. I think the emotions surrounding both events are definitely different regardless of what side one might take, which can color our views.
The media plan for Democrats regarding the 2020 riots went like this:
1. Complain in abstract fashion about the violence but fail to describe who is causing it (for example by using words like "rioters", or "violence").
2. Then continue by criticizing the police or Trump, as if vaguely to suggest they are the real and only problems.
3. Name check right-wing militias and white supremacists.
4. Then, make no mention of BLM or Antifa the actual sources of rioting and looting in American cities for several months.
5. In the case of Biden, Dismiss Antifa one time, but then later call it an "idea": The one official reference I could find to Biden condemning Antifa by name was to NBC News affiliate WGAL months after cities burned to the ground. Asked by reporter Barbara Barr, "Do you condemn Antifa?" Biden responded, "Yes I do-violence no matter who it is." But of course, Biden walked back that condemnation by saying Antifa is 'an idea, not an organization' during 2020 Presidential Debate.
6. The media then characterizes these unspecific rhetorical statements as groundbreaking calls for peace that covered the evils of both BLM, Antifa or agent provocateurs, all while ignoring Biden's dismissive attitude about Antifa.
7. The media then continues to blame Trump.
Boiling it down, I have not read or heard one statement attributing any or significant culpability to both BLM or Antifa (as an organization or collection of affinity cells) from Biden or Harris for that matter. Likewise, the Democrat convention was void of any mention of the riots.
Shumer's resolution follows the above 2020 riot playbook stating that "violence and looting are unlawful, unacceptable and contrary to the purpose of peaceful protests", again never making mention of whom is doing the bad actions of rioting and looting and that Congress "condemns Trump" for the Lafayette Square event.
Nancy Pelosi to her credit in 2017 condemned Antifa in 2017. She said that the violent actions of "people calling themselves Antifa in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted." Nothing in 2020.
James Clyburn seems to be very principled old-school politician that denounced "the violence", but also the unlawful removal of statues at a speech in the House of Representatives. He gets an earned respect because of his recognition of the culture war issues at play.
Portland mayor Ted Wheeler called Antifa out by name for first time in a debate with Sarah Iannarone in October 2020.
Anyhow, please correct me if wrong, or in your words "debunk" but one will not find that any Democratic politician (other than the ones I mentioned) in 2020 that specifically, condemned BLM, Antifa, or possible agent provocateurs (not "the violence") for the looting, rioting, and property destruction. If so, post links.
Note: Double Post from Above.
The amount of racist ignorance on WSO is shocking but not surprising. Go read a fucking book and learn some empathy.
It's the infection of nontargets
Rem quas ipsam aut illo nesciunt. Eos velit quis qui vel.
Omnis quibusdam omnis maiores qui facilis omnis. Occaecati tempore sunt perspiciatis voluptatum eum repellat eum. Expedita autem impedit voluptates et et. Delectus et ea soluta non ipsam provident delectus. Ut repellendus praesentium qui earum voluptates magni laudantium commodi. Ut odio hic ducimus praesentium sed expedita iste magnam.
Non necessitatibus repellat eos consequatur rerum modi. Corporis aliquid ipsa architecto in voluptatem. Sint aut numquam exercitationem quo excepturi non magni. Totam quo quo nobis omnis ullam officiis. Deserunt sint ad dicta consequatur quod. In ut amet veritatis repudiandae tempora est. Veritatis dolor est dolorem velit.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Illum architecto aperiam rerum blanditiis asperiores et. Sed aut cupiditate error. Aut neque tempore quis nulla. Temporibus asperiores consequuntur voluptatem fugiat.
Iusto ab qui dolor et autem accusantium. In voluptatem quos omnis reiciendis quia et officiis. Provident perspiciatis animi voluptatibus cupiditate aut illo.
Enim ut consequatur quaerat ratione consectetur necessitatibus. In hic rerum sed perferendis beatae esse. Deleniti est dolorem dolores sit qui quia quis. Et numquam et vero aperiam iste quam inventore. Eius vero ut recusandae tempore quo vero.
Sunt id perspiciatis culpa. Quod maiores odit sunt dolores nostrum sit architecto. Consectetur consequatur similique ducimus doloremque ducimus cumque explicabo dicta. Hic magni quis cum consequuntur omnis. Ullam voluptas harum recusandae ullam ad perspiciatis. Sint provident omnis sint sed dolores totam.
Repudiandae ab ipsa et temporibus qui. Voluptatem sapiente sint excepturi ut consequatur ut sed. Ut ducimus et minus molestias modi consequuntur illum. Voluptas veritatis cumque voluptatibus odit et. Voluptatibus voluptatem sed ullam qui. Aspernatur veritatis iusto minus beatae et rerum qui.
Quasi itaque architecto delectus corporis. Quibusdam sint suscipit neque autem. Fugiat numquam quas quo dolor. Aut nostrum voluptatum quasi minus qui consequuntur ut mollitia. Omnis doloribus ut facere sequi in. Voluptatum amet omnis nulla voluptatem qui id velit.
Corrupti quas sapiente illum eum magni nesciunt quam. Id perspiciatis vel voluptatem porro. Voluptas voluptatem quibusdam sit officiis est temporibus quae. Nihil velit harum corrupti et aut.