Jump to content

US Politics: Dark Days at Parler


Fragile Bird

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

I must ask, why the 17th?? That’s a strange out of the air number for them to choose...

It’s a Sunday so they don’t need to ask for a day off? (And can sleep it off Monday, a holiday?)

Actually wonder whether a certain element might even prefer the 18th given the symbolism of the holiday. :stillsick:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

If I recall was pretty big on financial deregulation, civil asset forfeiture laws, and the war on drugs.

He wasn't any "bigger" on deregulation or the war on drugs than the median of the Democratic party at the time.  Honestly I don't know about his record on civil asset forfeiture laws.  The point in the aggregate, he was decidedly and consistently in the middle of the Dem caucus.  Particularly early in his career, calling him a "conservative Democrat" - as compared to some of his colleagues - is ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DMC said:

He wasn't any "bigger" on deregulation or the war on drugs than the median of the Democratic party at the time.  Honestly I don't know about his record on civil asset forfeiture laws.  The point in the aggregate, he was decidedly and consistently in the middle of the Dem caucus.  Particularly early in his career, calling him a "conservative Democrat" - as compared to some of his colleagues - is ludicrous.

It certainly is now, given that every Democrat is to the left of every Republican and moderate Republicans died when Lincoln Chafee left office.

Honestly I don't care. The Democrats could run a block of wood in the next election and I'd still vote for it twice (If I was able to vote in US elections).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

It certainly is now, given that every Democrat is to the left of every Republican and moderate Republicans died when Lincoln Chafee left office.

I don't know what your point here is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know trust has eroded not only in political institutions, but also law enforcement and the like. Still, I hope the FBI and other counter-terrorism orgs are taking a look at chatter on these conservative outlets and taking appropriate action. Members of Congress are one thing, but when it comes to the President (which is what Jan 17-20 would involve) I think it creates a new level of threat and the response will be far more serious than last week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also it should be pointed out that the FBI and others were very probably pushing for stronger security measures on the 6th, but were ignored by spineless republicans who didn’t want the optics of a heavy police presence in response to a Trump rally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, DMC said:

I don't know what your point here is.

That the political spectrum has shifted and the parties have become more balkanized in to "left" and "right"? I thought that was clear.

On Civil asset forfeiture:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2019/06/25/how-biden-is-responsible-for-the-appalling-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws/

 

3 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Pelosi'  Letter of how they will proceed.

 

This could have been eight words, "Don't you dare fuck with me on this."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That NBC report is so informative.  Thanks so much for the mention and the link.

The last paragraph says what so many of us have been saying for at least 3 decades.

Quote

"The challenge for FBI and DOJ is to assign a permanent priority to domestic white supremacist terror groups and treat them as seriously as they treat foreign terrorism," she said.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

That the political spectrum has shifted and the parties have become more balkanized in to "left" and "right"? I thought that was clear.

On Civil asset forfeiture:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2019/06/25/how-biden-is-responsible-for-the-appalling-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws/

 

This could have been eight words, "Don't you dare fuck with me on this."

Not to be a downer, but cannot overstate how disappointing it is to read shit like this that necessarily starts out with all the god bullshit.   I get it, I really do, but doesn't make it any better.  I get that that's the fucking job, and that who ever is performing that role and function is going to be doing things I personally find to be distasteful.  So let this not be a personal condemnation of the Speaker, but a general lament about the shit expected of our leaders.  It's gross 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is also somethin that needs to be changed right this minute, this business of domestic (white) terrorism not being something the FBI is empowered to study. The rethugs have blocked this sort of thing repeatedly in order one has to believe to protect the NRA among other groups, and individuals.

Quote

 

The FBI is also under scrutiny. Its top investigative priority is terrorism, foreign and domestic. Had this been an al Qaeda plot to storm the Capitol, some experts said, it is likely that the FBI would have arrested the participants before they left their home airports on the way to Washington.

One difference, however, is that there is no domestic terrorism statute, which gives the FBI fewer avenues to legally monitor suspects, including their postings on the dark web, said NBC News contributor Frank Figliuzzi, a former assistant director of the FBI.

Outside a criminal investigation of a specific person or group, Figliuzzi said Saturday, "the FBI is not permitted to look and monitor the very same things that you and I can look at on Twitter and Parler."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

That the political spectrum has shifted and the parties have become more balkanized in to "left" and "right"? I thought that was clear.

Oh.  Um, yes.  Still, to use your Chafee standard, Biden was still a Senator for one session after he left office in 2006.  In the that session (110th), here are the list of Senators that were more "conservative" than Biden based on DW-NOMINATE, from more "liberal" to "conservative:"  Byrd, Feingold, Cantwell, Conrad, Klobuchar, Reid, Feinstein, Dorgan, Bingaman, Kohl, Tim Johnson, Salazar, Tester, Baucus, Lieberman, Landrieu, Pryor, Bill Nelson, Carper, Webb, Lincoln, Bayh, McCaskill, Ben Nelson.

Now, a whole hell of a lot of those seats have been replaced by Republicans, but frankly the fact Biden was more "liberal" than the majority leader is all you need to know that referring to Biden as a "conservative" Democrat is not a valid assertion.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Myshkin said:

So it seems Parler can’t find anyone who wants to host them, and also they’ve been dropped by the law firm that was representing them.

But surely this is a clear First Amendment violation and SOMEONE will want to take up their righteous cause and win this for THE PEOPLE!

 

*crickets*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...