US Politics- One Flew over the Cuckcoup’s Nest

[Lollygag]

Just now, Fury Resurrected said:

Well they voted for the guy telling them to insurrect- who said the whole election he would not accept results where he lost. So, how are they NOT pro insurrection?

No, he told them the election was subverted by the deep state. They were overthrowing the overthrowers and setting it back to rights. Totally different than telling them he lost fair and square so lets overthrow it anyways which wouldn't have gotten the same reaction which is why Trump didn't go with that.

[Mindwalker]

1 minute ago, Mudguard said:

There's essentially zero chance that they'll identify and arrest every person who illegally stormed the capitol building.  Plenty of them were masked up.  Video evidence isn't going to help you much with those people.  It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

If they want to, they can: I bet that almost every single one of them had their cellphone with them (and not turned off). So far, the FBI seems to be looking only for thhose who displayed (additional) violence.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Who cares where Murkowski caucuses, I care how she votes.

Well, it'd be a boon on procedural matters and also dissipate Manchin's position as the pivotal vote, which would be welcome.  Plus a nice safeguard in the case of an unexpected vacancy, and I'm sure Harris would welcome not having to trek to the Hill for so many tie-breaking votes.  Lord knows what can happen to VPs when they preside over the Senate these days.

[Fury Resurrected]

Just now, Lollygag said:

No, he told them the election was subverted by the deep state. They were overthrowing the overthrowers and setting it back to rights. Totally different than telling them he lost fair and square so lets overthrow it anyways which wouldn't have gotten the same reaction which is why Trump didn't go with that.

Before any votes were cast he said he would only accept a winning result. You’re rewriting history on that. Yeah he blamed it later on unsubstantiated fraud claims but believing that AFTER he said he would not accept a losing result is just an excuse. He announced his plans like a year ago.

[Mindwalker]

1 minute ago, Lollygag said:

No, he told them the election was subverted by the deep state. They were overthrowing the overthrowers and setting it back to rights. Totally different than telling them he lost fair and square so lets overthrow it anyways which wouldn't have gotten the same reaction which is why Trump didn't go with that.

They decided to not believe the courts or Republican SoS or anyone qalified to judge but their dear leader. And Q.

[Mudguard]

2 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

If they want to, they can: I bet that almost every single one of them had their cellphone with them (and not turned off). So far, the FBI seems to be looking only for thhose who displayed (additional) violence.

Ah, that's a good point.  Cell phone data would be really helpful, but if they argue that they lent their phone to a friend, then you're probably going to need something else.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 minute ago, Mudguard said:

There's essentially zero chance that they'll identify and arrest every person who illegally stormed the capitol building.  Plenty of them were masked up.  Video evidence isn't going to help you much with those people.  It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

Masks are no longer the safeguard they used to be tho.

Facial recognition software developed quite a bit (whether you or I like it or not). I just assume the FBI has access to quite advanced pieces of software there. Anyway, my point is, I would underestimate teh technical abilities of law enforcement to indetify the masked guys. Whether they are accepted in court as evidence, well, time will tell, but if they can prove the software works.

[Zorral]

8 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

As I said, he was failing to distinguish between the average voter and the ones who stormed the Capitol. I agree with the motives of the ones who did the storming. They were clear about that with their clothing choices. Don't project the insurrectionists onto 74 million people.

I can't believe I have to write that.

What about the elected figures who were part of this? One might fairly count those who voted for them as in favor of insurrection.  Where do you make the cut-off?  How many million xtian evangelicals can be counted as in favor of insurrection?  There sure were a lot of them with their flags there on Wednesday. 

Quote

In the crowd of insurrectionists who seized the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Christian imagery was rife. Alongside Confederate flags and white supremacist symbols, protesters shouldered crosses, waved “Jesus Saves” signs, and hung oversized “Jesus 2020” banners. One rioter who made it inside the building carried a “Christian flag.” Outside, on the National Mall, people chanted, “Christ is king.” As the reporter Jack Jenkins noted, some in the crowd referred to the neo-fascist Proud Boys as “God’s warriors.”

Anyone who voted for him and those other elected people present voted for hatred: racism and sexism, and murder.

And They will not wear masks.

[Fury Resurrected]

1 minute ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Masks are no longer the safeguard they used to be tho.

Facial recognition software developed quite a bit (whether you or I like it or not). I just assume the FBI has access to quite advanced pieces of software there. Anyway, my point is, I would underestimate teh technical abilities of law enforcement to indetify the masked guys. Whether they are accepted in court as evidence, well, time will tell, but if they can prove the software works.

Your whole argument here just shows why if you want convictions an arrest on the spot is what will deliver. Using facial recognition software as primary evidence in court is also a very very bad precedent to set.

[Mindwalker]

One reporter also said someone wore  a "Camp Auschwitz" t-shirt. Or, as Fox say: People are just scared because they lost!

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Just now, Fury Resurrected said:

Your whole argument here just shows why if you want convictions an arrest on the spot is what will deliver. Using facial recognition software as primary evidence in court is also a very very bad precedent to set.

No arguments on either point. Merely meant to point out, if the FBI really wants to, they can probably identify a whole lot of htem, despite them wearing masks.

[Mudguard]

Just now, A Horse Named Stranger said:

No arguments on either point. Merely meant to point out, if the FBI really wants to, they can probably identify a whole lot of htem, despite them wearing masks.

To the best of my knowledge, facial recognition software isn't that good yet.  Certainly not close to the level where such evidence would be introduced in court.

[Mindwalker]

 

[Fury Resurrected]

1 minute ago, Mindwalker said:

One reporter also said someone wore  a "Camp Auschwitz" t-shirt. Or, as Fox say: People are just scared because they lost!

Tons of photos of the guy, I actually saw that same hoodie on a Nazi who came into the shop several years ago to ask if he’d be bounced out the shop if a different tattoo he got made him show nearby hate tattoos. So, that design isn’t new and isn’t a joke, it’s a real thing for the white power set

[Hereward]

While my reaction was also that these fuckers deserved to be shot and any survivors pursued with maximum prejudice, allow me to raise an historical precedent. The Irish nationalists who stormed a government building in Dublin in 1916 were not popular even amongst the broader Irish nationalist community. It was the British reaction that turned everyone on that side of the spectrum into die hards. Sometimes, justice needs to be tempered with political good sense.

[Lollygag]

1 minute ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Before any votes were cast he said he would only accept a winning result. You’re rewriting history on that. Yeah he blamed it later on unsubstantiated fraud claims but believing that AFTER he said he would not accept a losing result is just an excuse. He announced his plans like a year ago.

You want to know where the whole elections results "feel" wrong bs comes from? It's not new.

They're so isolated that almost everyone they know is Republican. The nearest big city might as well be on the moon. Then add social media algorithms. Then add the maps where the state/country is mostly red except for some blue spots. Add delusions like Trump even won CA because he's messianic. Add Trump's constant polls are wrong brainwashing.

Now if you want to accuse them of reverse-engineering any explanation which will get them to the result they want and they really believe that, then that's much more spot on. If you want to add that Gingrich/Bannon/Trump etc know that they're prone to this, know what rationalizations work and won't work and manipulate that to their advantage, that's even more accurate.

 

[Mindwalker]

This is from 3 hrs ago, but as many don't know:

Good ole optimist Glenn Kirschner on Trump's potential criminal liability:

 

[Fury Resurrected]

1 minute ago, Lollygag said:

You want to know where the whole elections results "feel" wrong bs comes from? It's not new.

They're so isolated that almost everyone they know is Republican. The nearest big city might as well be on the moon. Then add social media algorithms. Then add the maps where the state/country is mostly red except for some blue spots. Add delusions like Trump even won CA because he's messianic. Add Trump's constant polls are wrong brainwashing.

Now if you want to accuse them of reverse-engineering any explanation which will get them to the result they want and they really believe that, then that's much more spot on. If you want to add that Gingrich/Bannon/Trump etc know that they're prone to this, know what rationalizations work and won't work and manipulate that to their advantage, that's even more accurate.

 

This is like if your kid asked you if they could stay home from school tomorrow because they didn’t wanna go, and you said no. The next morning they get up and say they can’t go, they’re sick. No reasonable person would believe it without an even larger burden of proof than they’d originally need.

I do not believe most of these people truly think there was actual voter fraud that changed the result of the election- Trump himself least of all. I believe these people didn’t get their way and are happy to do what they can to change that and can tell themselves it was for the best to avoid “socialism”

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

If you haven’t seen this Slate article... it’s chilling:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/was-there-a-plan-for-hostages-or-killings-at-the-capitol.amp

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

26 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Well they voted for the guy telling them to insurrect- who said the whole election he would not accept results where he lost. So, how are they NOT pro insurrection?

 

29 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

As I said, he was failing to distinguish between the average voter and the ones who stormed the Capitol. I agree with the motives of the ones who did the storming. They were clear about that with their clothing choices. Don't project the insurrectionists onto 74 million people.

Chalmers Johnson made a point about this in dealing with Al Qaida and the "war on terror" at the time I'd have to find the interview.

Paraphrasing: You make the distinction between the true believers and the passive supporters.  You address the legitimate grievances of the passive supporters. Make them your allies. Delegitimize the true believers. they're done.

I agree there are a lot of scumbags involved. We need to avoid being overly reductionist here.