January 6 Committee Subpoenas Social Media Giants In Probe of Capitol Attack (cnbc.com) 119
The House select committee investigating the deadly Capitol riot has subpoenaed social media giants Twitter, Reddit and the parent companies of Facebook and Google, the panel's chairman said Thursday. CNBC reports: The select committee had asked a trove of records last summer from those and other social companies, but received "inadequate responses" from four of the largest platforms, according to a press release Thursday. The committee is once again demanding that Google parent company Alphabet, Twitter, Reddit and Meta -- formerly known as Facebook -- hand over a slew of records relating to domestic terrorism, the spread of misinformation and efforts to influence or overturn the 2020 election.
"Two key questions for the Select Committee are how the spread of misinformation and violent extremism contributed to the violent attack on our democracy, and what steps -- if any -- social media companies took to prevent their platforms from being breeding grounds for radicalizing people to violence," Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said in the press release. "It's disappointing that after months of engagement, we still do not have the documents and information necessary to answer those basic questions," Thompson said. "The Select Committee is working to get answers for the American people and help ensure nothing like January 6th ever happens again. We cannot allow our important work to be delayed any further."
"Two key questions for the Select Committee are how the spread of misinformation and violent extremism contributed to the violent attack on our democracy, and what steps -- if any -- social media companies took to prevent their platforms from being breeding grounds for radicalizing people to violence," Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said in the press release. "It's disappointing that after months of engagement, we still do not have the documents and information necessary to answer those basic questions," Thompson said. "The Select Committee is working to get answers for the American people and help ensure nothing like January 6th ever happens again. We cannot allow our important work to be delayed any further."
Who are they NOT going to subpoena? (Score:2)
Seems like a stretch to drag some Reddit exel in front of Congress. That'll be a laugh.
Re: (Score:2)
exec, not exel
Re: (Score:2)
Did you mean one of the execl, execlp, execle, exect, execv, execvp, or execvP, perhaps?
Re: (Score:2)
It's execl, execle, execlp, execv, execve, execvp, or fexecve, you non-POSIX swine!
Re: (Score:2)
I take your non-POSIX swine, and double it to domestic terrorist.
Seriously, the execve and fexecve are simply documented in a separate man-page on FreeBSD. And Slashdot didn't like multiple < tt > — one for each function-name — rejecting the message. (More than two such, and you get "Filter error: Invalid HTML tag usage").
Back to the topic at hand, execvp seems most appropriate, since the summoned executive will be, at least, a Vice President.
Re: (Score:2)
Whichever. Pick one, none of them will have anything useful to say other than to duck behind Section 230.
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of hard to hide behind section 230 when it doesn't apply to answering questions before a select committee.
Re: (Score:2)
I can almost guarantee they won't be subpoenaing you or me or billions of other people around the world.
If the Reddit exec has information on the Jan. 6 protest/riot/insurrection then I would hope that they subpoena him/her to get the information on the record.
Congressional priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
Oddly, even though BLM riots damaged billions of dollars in property and resulted in dozens of killings, there's no Congressional investigation into that.
Oh, right. I'm sorry, I forgot. Those are the little people. I've heard everything will be okay, because they should have had insurance.
Once again, Congress has confirmed who it really serves, and it's not us.
Re: (Score:1)
Say their names! (Score:4, Informative)
> except how many people have BLM killed (zero)
David Dorn was murdered by looters, David McAtee fired at cops and was shot in return, Chris Beaty was saving two women from muggers, Italia Kelly was shot while leaving a protest & Marquis Tousant was near where a lot of other shooting happened and an officer was shot in the leg. Patrick Underwood was shot protecting a CA courthouse and another officer was critically injured. Calvin Horten Jr. was shot outside a pawn shop during the riots.
And this ignores CHAZ which was literally supposed to be separate from US jurisdiction and where several people were shot.
I can go on for a long time, but you either get the point or you never will. Of course if you go look this up, they'll say they only cover "political violence" which is convenient to just ignore a lot of shooting & looting going on during mass riots. Or they'll tell you that the riots were 93% peaceful, a standard so ridiculous even most serial killers could do better, if only you used the same standard and considered them "peaceful" whenever they were not actively murdering someone.
> compared to how many people died on Jan 6 from right-wing militias?
Meanwhile, on Jan 6th these people died, and I note you did limit yourself to that day explicitly. I know that there were some random cop suicides and whatnot some want to shoehorn into the "insurrection" to... delay a formality related to an election that was already over months prior for a couple of hours. But despite months of gaslighting us about Sicknick's supposed death at the hands of rioters, it was proven that he died of a stroke and no one has been charged for his death and most other stories I've seen were just as absurd, blaming any random suicide with no info on this event for... reasons. Somehow that's not an "unsupported conspiracy theory" though... go figure. But on to the list:
Ashli Babbitt - 35, an Air Force veteran from Southern California, was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer as she clambered through a broken window https://archive.ph/YLP2Q#selec... [archive.ph] - archive of nytimes.com
Brian Sicknick - ... suffered two strokes and died of natural causes a day after he confronted rioters at the Jan. 6 insurrection, the District’s chief medical examiner has ruled. https://archive.is/LgYvj#selec... [archive.is] - archive of washingtonpost.com
Kevin Greeson - Kevin D. Greeson, 55, of Athens, Ala., ... suffered a heart attack and fell to the sidewalk. He was talking on the phone with his wife at the time. https://archive.ph/YLP2Q#selec... [archive.ph] - archive of nytimes.com
Rosanne Boyland - 34-year-old ... died of acute amphetamine intoxication according to medical examiners. https://archive.ph/8g5qA#selec... [archive.ph] - archive of wusa9.com local Washington DC
Benjamin Philips - Mr. Philips died of a stroke in Washington, those who accompanied him to the Capitol told the newspaper. - archive of https://archive.ph/YLP2Q#selec... [archive.ph] nytimes.com
Re: (Score:2)
Counting those numbers is inherently biased. There *is* no unbiased way to count them. Zero is a fine number, and you can define membership in BLM to justify that number. But it's just as valid to use a much wider definition, and find several, up to hundreds, of people killed. Because it's not a unitary group, it doesn't have a membership list, and you can count lots of rather unsavory characters as members.
OTOH, the mirror image statement is also correct. The deaths attributed to BLM under the wide de
Re: Congressional priorities (Score:2)
Us meaning what exactly? White people? Nailed it.
Well for starters BLM protesters (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're being disingenuous please stop we see right through you. If you're not being disingenuous for the love of God please find New Media sources. Either way you're being lied to. Don't you ever get tired of being lied to?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That "93% peaceful" figure is a complete fabrication. The people who made it up did it by counting the entire murderously violent CHAZ insurrection, where armed terrorists seized and occupied an entire downtown area for almost a month while enforcing their rule at gunpoint, as a dozen separate "peaceful" protests.
Over two billion dollars done, overwhelmingly to poor and minority neighborhoods, and 50+ people murdered is not "peaceful". Entire cities do not wind up boarded up with people literally begging th [twitter.com]
I'm not going to debate (Score:2, Interesting)
What I am going to point out is that those billions of dollars weren't done to poor neighborhoods. That's because poor people don't own anything in their neighborhoods anymore. This isn't the 1990s Rodney King riots. It was mostly chain stores owned by mega corporations. Yes there were a few high profile small businesses they were devastated. And that's terrible. But the vast majority of the damage done was the things like Walmar
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I did look it up. That's how I was able to quote you exactly the sort of fraud they engaged in when making up that number. That wasn't a hypothetical, they literally fraudulently counted CHAZ as ~13 separate "peaceful" protests instead of the single month long terrorist insurrection that resulted in numerous cold blooded killings that it was.
If you actually looked this up yourself you could see it with your own eyes [archive.is] too. But that would require you to either admit you've been utterly lied to by people you ha
Re: (Score:2)
Unnn ... when you say "it wasn't the Democrats" you're wrong. It sure wasn't only the Democrats, and possibly not even largely the Democrats, but they sure did their part. It's the Democrats that pushed through the extended copyright legislation, and various other things that benefited the centralized large technical and entertainment corporations. You don't own anything? Part of that is on the Democrats. They favored different businesses than did the Republicans, but neither side was on the side of th
Re: (Score:2)
'twas the Republican's or maybe just Trump who put all the IP stuff including extending copyright in the new NAFTA, it was basically the only change in the relationship with Canada, but after Trump stupidly left TIPPS (from America's viewpoint), Republican's had to do something
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.radcliffe.harvard.... [harvard.edu]
Here is what we have found based on the 7,305 events we’ve collected. The overall levels of violence and property destruction were low, and most of the violence that did take place was, in fact, directed against the BLM protesters.
First, police made arrests in 5% of the protest events, with over 8,500 reported arrests (or possibly more). Police used tear gas or related chemical substances in 2.5% of these events.
Protesters or bystanders were reported injured in 1.6 per
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, that's the original link to the fraudulent disinformation piece that I literally just debunked. That example I gave wasn't a hypothetical, they literally fraudulently counted CHAZ as ~13 separate "peaceful" protests instead of the single month long terrorist insurrection that resulted in numerous cold blooded killings that it was.
Here, see for yourself with your own two eyes [archive.is] just how utterly fraudulent and dishonest that paper is. Look at the actual data for yourself, with your own two eyes, and it's i
Re: (Score:2)
Also they were 93% peaceful.
That's a lot less peaceful than I expected, tbh
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody tried to overthrow everything, unless there's some way to have a revolution WITHOUT WEAPONS.
I saw pictures of the 'insurrection' where the 'invaders' were literally standing in queues behind ropes. I don't remember that from Trotsky's advice on revolution "be sure to stay orderly in queue if you want to tear down the government!"
LOL
93% peaceful...does that sound like a statistic pulled from one's ass? It does!
"Fiery, but mostly peaceful!"
So Kyle Rittenhouse wasn't physically attacked?
Re: (Score:2)
of course there is a way to have a revolution without weapons... that is EXACTLY what India did with Gandhi in the 1920s, started a revolution of non-violence and civil disobedience, supported by poets and writers.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you trying to argue that some violence at protests was a threat to American democracy itself?
Re: (Score:1)
By your own standards what would you call a member of the government explicitly leading a violent mob to violently attack the Supreme Court, resulting in actual physical violence against sitting justices such as RBG?
Anything you want to say about the january 6th riot is hoisting yourself by your own petard because your own favorite politicians and radical groups have done worse.
Re: (Score:1)
What I find funny is everyone comparing this to 9/11. Reasonable people laugh and dismiss them as crazy, but I think it's important to take them at their word: they are admitting that they think people protesting and making them feel uncomfortable for a few hours is worse then 3000 of us commoners dying in a terrorist attack. It reveals a lot about their character.
Re:Congressional priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
What I find funny is everyone comparing this to 9/11. Reasonable people laugh and dismiss them as crazy, but I think it's important to take them at their word: they are admitting that they think people protesting and making them feel uncomfortable for a few hours is worse then 3000 of us commoners dying in a terrorist attack. It reveals a lot about their character.
No, they think that people attempting to violently overturn democracy in the United States are as bad as a terrorist attack.
I disagree, I think it's far worse.
Re: (Score:2)
As someone who watched both happen on live TV, 1/6 would have been a lot scarier if they weren't so obviously disorganized. It never looked like it had a chance of any kind of success, even when delaying the national guard and other LEOs that should have been called out there faster.
It seems pretty obvious to me, that Trump was sitting back hoping for a Beer Hall Putsch situation [wikipedia.org], I would love for his stupid ass to be in jail and I'm not sure how the fuck he's not already, but those were hardly the brown [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
people attempting to violently overturn democracy in the United States
Absolutely laughable. You think a crowd of people are going to "violently overturn democracy" by pushing their way in a building?
Then what? Hold votes and elect themselves? Enact laws? lmao
That's hilarious.You're a clown if you think that.
It was a bunch of gullible idiots led by a grifter who threw them under the bus the moment it was convenient for him.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to claim that it was too disorganized to create a successful government, I'll agree. But they *were* attempting to overthrow the government by force of arms. If the constitution didn't define treason so narrowly I would say they were clearly guilty of treason.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to form your own government to overturn democracy. All you need to do is invalidate the votes of 80 million Americans. If the protesters weren't there to stop congress from accepting the legitimate votes of those 80 million Americans (in the form of the Electorate) then what were they there for?
Then what? [Re:Congressional priorities] (Score:2)
people attempting to violently overturn democracy in the United States
Absolutely laughable. You think a crowd of people are going to "violently overturn democracy" by pushing their way in a building? Then what? Hold votes and elect themselves? Enact laws?
Good question, then what?
I don't know. Why don't you ask them? At a guess, I'd say that if they had successfully stopped the vote count they would have claimed that the final step in the presidential election (per the 12 amendment to the constitution) did not happen, and therefore Biden's election was not valid, and therefore Trump will remain president until it was sorted out (in some unspecified way.)
lmao That's hilarious.You're a clown if you think that. It was a bunch of gullible idiots led by a grifter who threw them under the bus the moment it was convenient for him.
I don't necessarily disagree with that. But the fact that they were disorganized and in the end were not
Re: (Score:1)
Yes: attempting to overturn democracy (Score:2)
No, they think that people attempting to violently overturn democracy in the United States are as bad as a terrorist attack. I disagree, I think it's far worse.
You have a great career in politics ahead of you.... "violently overturn democracy". Reminds me of those who equate a health care services cut of any sort to "literally killing babies". Actually, I think you can come up with much better hyperbole if you really try.
The fact that they were badly organized and unable to do it does not alter what they were trying to do.
They broke into the Capitol while the electoral votes were being counted in an effort to stop the vote count from being done, and thus attempting to stop the Senate from confirming the election of Joe Biden as president. This process is in the constitution.
Yes, they were attempting to overturn democracy in the United States. Badly, sure, but that was their goal.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/01... [cnn.com]
https: [apnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
According to the seditious conspiracy indictment, the defendants conspired through a variety of manners and means, including: organizing into teams that were prepared and willing to use force and to transport firearms and ammunition into Washington, D.C.; recruiting members and affiliates to participate in the conspiracy; organizing trainings to teach and learn paramilitary combat tactics; bringing and contributing paramilitary gear, weapons, and supplies – including knives, batons, camouflaged combat
Re: (Score:1)
It's almost as if the overwhelming majority of congress including republicans are perfectly happy to see poor and minority neighborhoods razed to the ground and small businesses eradicated, paving the way for a handful of multinational corporations to move in and buy everything up dirt cheap.
Re:Congressional priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
Oddly, even though BLM ...
Whataboutism at its finest.
Re: (Score:2)
Whataboutism?
You are better than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What were BLM protests about?
What were the Jan. 6th protesters protesting about?
Hint: One group was protesting a legitimate problem with police killings and the other was protesting because of a lie by a sore loser.
I'll leave it up to you to determine how equivalent the two events were.
Re: (Score:1)
State backed media... Also known as propaganda. That's what makes the difference in the narrative.
(Your username is a little ironic in this context.)
Re: (Score:1)
not a Double Standard (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I think the fascists in power have preemptively begun to attack their opposition before it grows into a movement since their increased influence provides the impetus for antifascists to activate (most the world was/is antifa.) If you've been observant you'd have seen a hint of antifascist action beginning as significant moves towards the authoritarian right (upper right) have been happening.
Wouldn't you accuse/attack your future enemy before they strike? Especially, if you PLAN on becoming their a
Re: (Score:2)
When BLM groups were rioting, did the core organization demand government / police intervention? Did the core group force a hard separation or bifurcation? Did the core group work with governments and police t
Re: (Score:3)
Antifa isn't even real. The FBI director appointed by Trump says so. https://apnews.com/article/don... [apnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Since Antifa does not exist, they can't disavow anybody claiming to be them or rebut false characterizations and accusations.
Anybody can appropriate their name for their club; no lawsuits, no spokespeople, no volunteers will show up and claim fraud, trademark violation, etc.
It's a position that MOST the planet shared around WW2 and encompasses everything that is NOT fascist; 3 whole quadrants of the political plane and a good portion of the 1 quadrant that contains both US parties (which are sort of a diago
Ashli Babbitt Killer Cleared Without an Interview (Score:2)
https://www.realclearinvestiga... [realcleari...ations.com]
D.C. MPD spokeswoman confirmed that Byrd did not cooperate with internal affairs agents or FBI agents, who jointly investigated what was one of the most high-profile officer-involved shooting cases in U.S. history.
“MPD did not formally interview Lt. Byrd,” deputy D.C. MPD communications director Kristen Metzger said. And, “He didn’t give a statement while under the U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation.”
Re: (Score:3)
Real Clear Investigations? Lol, what the fuck news site is that.
Re: (Score:2)
Babbitt was the one shot trying to crawl through the broken window of a barricaded door, right?
What's there to investigate?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Investigation? Are you BLIND? It's on video.
Usual dumb f*cks walking into a cop's gun get exactly what they deserve and paramedics come save them so they can create dumb f*ck kids like Ashli Babbitt.
Her comrades in their "protest" blocked access to the medical care she needed; figures.
News Flash! (Score:2)
News Flash! Jan 6 committee has subpoenaed all people who voted for Trump.
Why now? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't one Trumpist murdered a thing, too?
I get it, we are ignoring that little tidbit.
Re:Um (Score:4, Insightful)
I think he meant, "waiting in a building she escaped to, along with many other House/Senate members, that day." In related news, many people have noted that most House/Senate Republicans are *still* hiding from this event and their roles in it ...
The number of people killed by pro-Trump supporters at the January 6 Capitol riot is ... zero.
Could have been worse; I hear Mike Pence says he's happy he wasn't hanged that day -- especially given all the people chanting, "Hang Mike Pence" and the gallows built outside strung with a noose ...
Re: (Score:1)
You mean, something like this [zombietime.com]? Or this [zombietime.com], maybe?
Innocent fun, protected by the First Amendment, is not it? Is not it?!
Not protected speech [Re:Um] (Score:3)
right wing threats aren't protected by the first amendment
Correct, death threats are not protected by the first amendment.
And, yes, a mob chanting "hang Mike Pence" [timesofisrael.com] breaking into the building where Mike Pence was known to be is a death threat.
Re: Um (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So, is Mike Pence a Democrat?
I honestly can't tell if you're joking... He was Vice President in the Trump administration. Then-President Trump wanted Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out (enough of) the Electoral College ballots to hand Trump the 2020 election -- a power the Vice President does NOT have; his role is to simply announce the votes. From Trump defends Jan. 6 rioters' 'hang Mike Pence' chant in new audio [nbcnews.com]:
[January 6, 2021]
As the process unfolded on Capitol Hill, Trump was talking to his supporters at a rally near the White House where he said, “I hope Mike is going to do the right thing,” adding that “if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election.”
Pence did not have the power to overturn the election results.
[March 2021]
Asked if Trump was worried about Vice President Mike Pence’s safety during the Jan. 6 riot, Trump said, “I thought he was well-protected, and I had heard that he was in good shape.”
Karl then reminded Trump that some of his supporters involved in the violent attack were calling for Pence to be killed.
“Well, the people were very angry,” Trump said.
“They said, ‘hang Mike Pence,’” Karl told Trump.
“It’s common sense, Jon. It’s common sense that you’re supposed to protect,” Trump said.
Re:Um (Score:4, Informative)
That is the same number as the total of Americans who ... have been charged with inciting insurrection, sedition, treason or conspiracy to overthrow the government as a result of that riot one year ago.
That number is zero.
That number is now eleven.
US: Founder of far-right Oath Keepers arrested over Capitol riot [aljazeera.com]
Stewart Rhodes and 10 others face seditious conspiracy charges in relation to the deadly attack on January 6 last year.
Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group, and 10 others have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to their involvement in the attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Rhodes is the highest-ranking member of a far-right group to be arrested in relation to the deadly siege, and this is the first time the US Department of Justice has brought a seditious conspiracy charge in connection with the riot.
Off topic, but this is why I will vote Biden (Score:5, Insightful)
I want extremists to be investigated. It is established fact that Donald Trump's department of Justice cut back on investigations into extremist groups. I personally don't like the idea of these people running around unchecked. It's also an established fact that homegrown extremists committed more acts of violence and killed more Americans than foreign born terrorists have, even accounting for September 11th.
So whatever your party affiliation is you want somebody in the White House who you know isn't going to give these people a pass or whatever reason.
Re: (Score:2)
some of his biggest sycophants backed out, or it could have been A LOT worse. Pence, Bar, etc. Also, thank fuck the military doesn't swear allegiance to any specific office or people.
I wouldn't count 100% on the military (Score:2)
There are a lot of checks and balances in place, but there's only so much you can do with folks who follow orders for a living. We need to remember that and be very careful. Especially with all those voter suppression laws being passed.
Re: (Score:2)
No matter what in 2024. Or Harris in the unlikely event that Biden cannot serve (he's old, but given the level of healthcare he has access to and that he's fit and trim I expect him to live another 8 years or so at least).
I want extremists to be investigated. [b]It is established fact that Donald Trump's department of Justice cut back on investigations into extremist groups.[/b] I personally don't like the idea of these people running around unchecked. It's also an established fact that homegrown extremists committed more acts of violence and killed more Americans than foreign born terrorists have, even accounting for September 11th.
So whatever your party affiliation is you want somebody in the White House who you know isn't going to give these people a pass or whatever reason.
This was done so they could spend more time trying to dig up dirt on Trumps rivals and reporters he felt slighted by.
And after all that, they still didn't find anything on Biden or Jim Acosta.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
None of the charged have killed anyone...
That's not the bar for seditious conspiracy.
Charged with Rioting While Republican — a federal crime.
while the comparison has been described as absurd [go.com], I think I'd rather be charged as a republican than be black at a riot. Because I'm statistically far more likely to live with an encounter with the police.
Re:Rioting while Republican (Score:5, Informative)
Charged with Rioting While Republican — a federal crime.
Stewart Rhodes and ten others were charged with seditious conspiracy.
None of the charged have killed anyone...
Seditious conspiracy [wikipedia.org] does not need to result in anyone's death.
Seditious conspiracy is a conspiracy to commit sedition. It is a federal crime in the United States per 18 U.S.C. 2384:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know, who was charged for that [nypost.com] sedition? Where people were killed [bbc.com], even if that's not required...
CHAZ was horrific. A complete breakdown of functional society. But it was not sedition [wikipedia.org].
And there are on-going investigations and charges being brought. [kuow.org] Note that the scoping of the investigations are correct: the King County Prosecutor, the Seattle City Attorney, and the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington.
Well, now we wait for a jury trial.
That is correct. A jury trial is the next phase of the due process. Note that this investigation was done by the FBI and US DOJ [go.com], and is not part of the current Congressional investigation into the
Re: (Score:1)
You bring the donuts, and I'll bring the horde of 9398 invisible oompa-loompas.
You see, this doesn't count, because of its absurdity.
Additionally, the law as written only counts if the overthrow is unsuccessful.
Number is 11 [Re:Rioting while Republican] (Score:3)
None of the charged have killed anyone...
But what the quote being responding to said was that the number "charged with inciting insurrection, sedition, treason or conspiracy to overthrow the government as a result of that riot one year ago" was zero.
Parent post was accurate. That quote is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
>
None of the charged have killed anyone...
The Narcissist's Prayer:
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal. (You are here)
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Rioting while Republican (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If we compare the Intercept from the days when he was there to amorphous crappy blob it is today... Oh well, all things come to pass.
It is quite entertaining to watch the same people who scream about the violation of rights of protesters elsewhere around the world treat their own protesters. To put things into perspective - this morning the Bulgarians nearly stormed their parliament and the members of the parliament had to pile up desks against the doors. A couple of ar
An attempt to overthrow democracy [Re:Um] (Score:4, Informative)
It is quite entertaining to watch the same people who scream about the violation of rights of protesters elsewhere around the world treat their own protesters.
These were not "protesters". These were people breaking into the Capitol with the explicit goal of trying to stop the vote counting.
These people were attempting to overthrow democracy in the United States.
To put things into perspective - this morning the Bulgarians nearly stormed their parliament and the members of the parliament had to pile up desks against the doors.
To put things in perspective, the Bulgarian protesters "stopped short of breaking in, and called on lawmakers to come out and address their demands. [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this marked as a troll? I would expect people to care about the narrative, but maybe it is the wrong kind for them?
Re:Um (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is this marked as a troll? I would expect people to care about the narrative, but maybe it is the wrong kind for them?
The narrative is Republicans who embraced white supremacy attempted to overthrow the U.S. government because they didn't like the outcome of the election. In response, they stormed the capitol in an attempt to capture and kill several elected officials including the Speaker of the House and the Vice President. It should be noted the Vice President had to hide in the loading dock [washingtonexaminer.com] of the capitol while the so-called president was admonishing him on social media for not overturning the election results.
Meanwhile, the insurrectionists were attacking police [cnn.com], including one who voluntarily went into the horde to protect someone who was having a medical emergency and was then in turn attacked and beaten.
This was on top of plans drawn up [nytimes.com] in an attempt to subvert the Constitution by lying about election results or claim there was "fraud" in the election or have states not allow elector votes to count, among other things. Not to mention, the National Guard was supposed to be ready to protect the insurrectionists [cnn.com] on orders of the so-called president, but were instead held up for over four hours before allowed to assist police in putting down the insurrection.
That's the "narrative" the cowardly Republicans and their white supremacist allies keep trying to deny.
Re:Um (Score:5, Insightful)
The traitor-in-chief spending two months feeding his cult the gigantic lie about his loss.
His 1/6 morning miniature Nuremburg Rally after which he sicced them on the capitol.
The mob at the capitol screaming "hang Mike Pence" because Pence refused to try and install loser Trump as dictator.
The endless looped clips of the Zip Tie Terrorist.
Seeing Officer Goodman leading the mob away from unlocked doors to the chambers and most likely saving multiple Senators' lives in the process.
Hearing the reports that the terrorists had planted bombs in Democratic lawmakers' offices.
Hearing that one of the terrorists had been shot after the mob corners lawmakers in a room, after the bodyguards REPEATEDLY screamed "if you enter this room you will be shot."
We saw every sordid, horrible moment of the lowest point our once-great democracy has ever reached, as a cult of moron terrorists disrupted the peaceful transfer of power for the first time in our nation's history at the behest of a psychopathic narcissist monster.
Then in the following days, weeks, months, we started seeing that it was far more than just an attack by a mob of angry dumbasses. We found out about how the preparations and response had been deliberately crippled and slowed down. We found out the obvious signs that there was an orchestrated plan to maximize the change that they would succeed at murdering our elected officials on live national TV, because this would give the traitor-in-chief his excuse to declare martial law and seize power. We found that the "advisors" visiting him had explicit plans to do this written down when they visited the White House.
There is only one thing you need to know to know who was responsible for this travesty: When it became apparent that the Capitol was being attacked, the President was not IMMEDIATELY evacuated to a secure undisclosed location.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You did have a guy in charge who could have said all that, and you would have lapped it up, but instead he said things like "I take no responsibility at all" and you lapped that up instead.
You might not like the result, but you'll get what you've asked for at some point anyway.
Re: Yay hypocrisy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When conservatives riot, it's an "attack", "coup", "insurrection", "threat to our democracy" and so forth, but when liberals riot, like the BLM riots that went on for months, causing vastly more deaths and property damage than January 6, it's a "peaceful protest".
Because attempting to overthrow the United States government through violent measures, aided by members of one political party, is the same thing as protesting people are being shot solely because of the color their skin.
Yeah, totally in the same ball park. It's like saying the British burning the capitol is the same as the civil rights marches.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't think these people would actually want a congressional investigation into the BLM protests because that investigation would also cover the law enforcement response...
And given the absolutely huge wealth of documentary video evidence of police brutality during those events, I don't think there would be any way to protect a lot of law enforcement from legal repercussions. Any congressional investigation would literally be tying the noose around the necks of the people that Republicans essentia
Re: (Score:2)
Because attempting to overthrow the United States government through violent measures
Can someone explain what they mean by "overthrow" "through violent measures"? Because at face value there is no way that is what happened.
Closer to the truth: these people, rightly or wrongly, thought there were problems with the election that were not getting properly investigated. There was a lot of testimony shown in all of the contested states (Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania) that if believed to be true would make the side who voted for Trump upset. The Trump supporters though