Patterico's Pontifications

2/3/2021

How Donald Trump Won in 2020: Appealing to the Forgotten QAnon Voter

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am



As all patriots know, Donald Trump won in a landslide in 2020. He won by a lot, and it wasn’t even close. Even though the Fake News stole the election and handed it to Joe Biden, it’s worth a look back to think about how Mr. The Donald won such a compelling victory. I believe the answer can be found in this article, which shows how President Trump appealed to the forgotten QAnon voter:

She believed that even though Biden was declared the winner of the election, his inauguration would be thwarted.

First, Trump would declare martial law, then the Democrats (and some Republicans) and the Hollywood celebrities in Washington, DC for the inauguration would be rounded up and arrested. Trump had “opened back up Guantanamo Bay” (it never closed) and “increased the capacity to 200,000.”

. . . .

But on the morning of January 20th, 2021, Trump flew out of Washington to his new home in Florida and Biden became the 46th President of the United States.

“I was devastated,” Vanderbilt recalls. “Instantly, I went into panic mode.”

She called her mom who was at work. “I just told her it’s like we’re all going to die. We’re going to be owned by China. And I was like, I might have to pull my daughter out of school because they’re going to take her.”

. . . .

Vanderbilt reflects that she could perhaps have been pulled out of QAnon before inauguration day if Trump himself condemned it. Instead, he flirted with it and tacitly embraced it by retweeting prominent QAnon accounts and saying positive things about QAnon followers.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton failed to appeal to the voters who believe that she and Huma Abedin filleted a child’s face and took turns wearing it as a mask, capturing the moment on a video later found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Hillary just couldn’t find a way to connect with voters who say she drinks the blood of children in Satanic rituals of gory pedophilia.

With Mr. The Donald’s glorious victory in 2020, we can see that this failure to reach out to the Forgotten QAnon Voter was repeated by Joe Biden. When President Trump is re-inaugurated on March 4th as the 19th President, it will be a triumph of his ability to speak to these patriotic citizens.

80 Responses to “How Donald Trump Won in 2020: Appealing to the Forgotten QAnon Voter”

  1. Vanderbilt reflects that she could perhaps have been pulled out of QAnon before inauguration day if Trump himself condemned it.
    Meaning she couldn’t think for herself.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  2. I know, right? Part of me reads that story and thinks it’s sad and that Trump should have behaved better. Part of me says: SHE’S AN ADULT! and wonders how on Earth her child survives.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  3. In 2016, Hillary Clinton failed to appeal to the voters who believe that she and Huma Abedin filleted a child’s face and took turns wearing it as a mask, capturing the moment on a video later found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Hillary just couldn’t find a way to connect with voters who say she drinks the blood of children in Satanic rituals of gory pedophilia.

    I know where you are going with this, but it’s probably a bad analogy. Weiner is an actual pedophile. There was no face-filleting of course, but there was troubling evidence of him sexually interacting with underage children.

    Back to the gist of the article – sadly, one of the unfortunate side effects of the internet is its amplifying effect on certain people; in this case, the mentally ill. Before the internet brought us all together into one big human family, people with feelings of paranoia were marginalized from the rest of society. Now, they can enable, amplify, and interact with one another. They have no one pumping the brakes on their illness.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  4. Patterico, I’ve been trying to find a smooth way to string together the main nuttery of Qannon; Satanism, Pedophilia, and Cannibalism but it always felt clunky. This is just really well written.

    Hillary just couldn’t find a way to connect with voters who say she drinks the blood of children in Satanic rituals of gory pedophilia.

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  5. Back to the gist of the article – sadly, one of the unfortunate side effects of the internet is its amplifying effect on certain people; in this case, the mentally ill. Before the internet brought us all together into one big human family, people with feelings of paranoia were marginalized from the rest of society. Now, they can enable, amplify, and interact with one another. They have no one pumping the brakes on their illness.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:05 am

    No one to pump the brakes!? Trump encouraged it. Highly visible lieutenants; Powell, Lin Wood, Mike Flynn, openly endorsed it. The problem isn’t the internet.

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  6. No one to pump the brakes!? Trump encouraged it. Highly visible lieutenants; Powell, Lin Wood, Mike Flynn, openly endorsed it. The problem isn’t the internet.
    Time123 (d1bf33) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:08 am

    If you think the problem started with Trump encouraging them, you are sadly mistaken. And if you think Trump never utters another word in public means the problem is solved, you will also be mistaken.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  7. South Carolinian?!

    Lindsey Graham voter.

    ‘Nuff said.

    ____

    ‘”Obviously God’s will was to have President Biden come in for this country, so it’s going to be fine,” Vanderbilt says her mom told her.’

    A known plagiarist?!

    Yes, God’s got it in for us alright.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  8. How do you know who these people are though? And they vote? NeverTrump needs to work closely with the D’s to root out this cancer from the party. I think some steps will need to be taken. We need some sort of solution. But it can’t be a temporary solution or these people will just fade away and continue to vote for these nutjobs.

    Obviously, it’s safe to assume anyone who voted for Trump is in this group. So, we need a plan to deal with >70m ppl. But is that enough?

    frosty (f27e97)

  9. No one to pump the brakes!? Trump encouraged it. Highly visible lieutenants; Powell, Lin Wood, Mike Flynn, openly endorsed it. The problem isn’t the internet.
    Time123 (d1bf33) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:08 am

    If you think the problem started with Trump encouraging them, you are sadly mistaken. And if you think Trump never utters another word in public means the problem is solved, you will also be mistaken.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:09 am

    I think if leaders in the GOP, including Trump, had pushed back on this it would have stayed small and restricted to the incells who think D&D will let them summon demons who can make girls talk to them and their ilk.

    Time123 (52fb0e)

  10. “I was devastated,” Vanderbilt recalls. “Instantly, I went into panic mode.”

    None of her reaction to Trump losing the election is normal. Her reaction (above) is how people react when they’ve been terminated from their jobs and can’t pay this month’s rent or put food on the table. It’s how parents react when their kids have been diagnosed with a life-threatening disease or have made a stupid teenage decision with lifelong consequences. It’s how we react when we are caught off guard by a natural disaster or any one of the hits that life can bring when we are just living our lives, doing the best we can. This is not how a mentally healthy and stable individual reacts to the outcome of a presidential election. To have this much invested in a fallible person and chosen political party – as if your very life depended on its success – is simply not normal.

    Dana (fd537d)

  11. he was robbed mr p

    Dave (1bb933)

  12. The QAnon Delusion Has Not Loosened Its Grip
    ……
    Trump’s sprawling conspiracy theory is “being reborn as the new normal of the Republican Party,” Justin Ling wrote in Foreign Policy on Jan. 6.

    A Dec 30 NPR/Ipsos poll found that “recent misinformation, including false claims related to Covid-19 and QAnon, are gaining a foothold among some Americans.”

    According to the survey, nearly a fifth of American adults, 17 percent, believe that “a group of Satan-worshiping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics.” Almost a third “believe that voter fraud helped Joe Biden win the 2020 election.” Even more, 39 percent, agree that “there is a deep state working to undermine President Trump.”
    …….
    According to Joseph E. Uscinski and Adam M. Enders, professors of political science at the University of Miami and the University of Louisville, conspiracy theorists do not “hold coherent, constrained policy positions.” In “Who Supports QAnon? A Case Study in Political Extremism,” Uscinski explores what he identifies as some of the characteristics of the QAnon movement: “Support for QAnon is born more of antisocial personality traits and a predisposition toward conspiracy thinking than traditional political identities and motivations,” he writes……
    …….
    Uscinski found a substantial 0.413 correlation between those who support or sympathize with QAnon and “dark” personality traits, leading him to conclude that “the type of extremity that undergirds such support has less to do with traditional, left/right political concerns and more to do with extreme, antisocial psychological orientations and behavioral patterns.”

    The illogic of conspiracy theorists is clear in the findings of a 2012 research paper, “Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories,” by Karen M. Douglas and Robbie M. Sutton, members of the psychology department at the University of Kent, and Michael J. Wood, a former Kent colleague. The authors found that a large percentage of people drawn to conspiracy thinking are willing to endorse “mutually incompatible conspiracy theories.”

    In one study, for example, “the more participants believed that Osama Bin Laden was already dead when U.S. Special Forces raided his compound in Pakistan, the more they believed he is still alive.” In another study, “the more participants believed that Princess Diana faked her own death, the more they believed that she was murdered.” For those who hold such beliefs, the authors wrote, “the specifics of a conspiracy theory do not matter as much as the fact that it is a conspiracy theory at all.”
    …….
    Believers in conspiracies will often automatically dismiss factual claims disputing their beliefs. Jovan Byford, a senior lecturer in psychology at the Open University in England, makes the case that

    Conspiracy theories seduce not so much through the power of argument, but through the intensity of the passions that they stir. Underpinning conspiracy theories are feelings of resentment, indignation and disenchantment about the world. They are stories about good and evil, as much as about what is true.

    …….
    There are five common ingredients to conspiracy theories, according to Jan-Willem van Prooijen and Mark van Vugt, professors of psychology at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, in their paper “Conspiracy Theories: Evolved Functions and Psychological Mechanisms.”

    First, they write,

    Conspiracy theories make an assumption of how people, objects, or events are causally interconnected. Put differently, a conspiracy theory always involves a hypothesized pattern. Second, conspiracy theories stipulate that the plans of alleged conspirators are deliberate. Conspiracy theories thus ascribe intentionality to the actions of conspirators, implying agency. Third, a conspiracy theory always involves a coalition, or group, of actors working in conjunction. An act of one individual, a lone wolf, does not fit the definition of a conspiracy theory. Fourth, conspiracy theories always contain an element of threat such that the alleged goals of the conspirators are harmful or deceptive. Fifth, and finally, a conspiracy theory always carries an element of secrecy and is therefore often difficult to invalidate.

    Why, I asked, are Trump supporters particularly receptive to conspiracies? Van Prooijen replied:

    For one, the Trump movement can be seen as populist, meaning that this movement espouses a worldview that sees society as a struggle between ‘the corrupt elites’ versus the people. This in and of itself predisposes people to conspiracy thinking. But there are also other factors. For instance, the Trump movement appears heavily fear-based, is highly nationalistic, and endorses relatively simple solutions for complex problems. All of these factors are known to feed into conspiracy thinking.

    ………
    In their 2014 book “American Conspiracy Theories,” Uscinski and Parent argue that “Conspiracy Theories Are For Losers.” They write:

    Conspiracy theories are essentially alarm systems and coping mechanisms to help deal with foreign threat and domestic power centers. Thus, they tend to resonate when groups are suffering from loss, weakness or disunity.

    …….
    The “loser” thesis received strong backing from an August 2020 working paper, “Are Conspiracy Theories for Losers? The Effect of Losing an Election on Conspiratorial Thinking,” by Joanne Miller, Christina E. Farhart and Kyle Saunders, political scientists at the University of Delaware, Carleton College and Colorado State University.
    …….
    Throughout his presidency, Miller wrote (in an email),

    former President Trump pretty much governed as a “loser.” He continued to insist that he would’ve won the popular vote in 2016 had it not been for widespread election fraud. So it’s not surprising, given Trump’s rhetoric, that Republicans during the Trump presidency were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories than we’d have expected them to, given that they were on the winning side.

    ……..
    For those who wish for “unity” there is no unity to be found with QAnon believers or even extreme Trump partisans. If the Republican Party is to survive, they need to marginalize this part of the electorate, much as they purged the Birchers. You can’t compromise with conspiracy theorists. If Republicans do, they will consume the Republican Party.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  13. Now if millions of others can do the same and admit they were wrong about QAnon conspiracy theories and a “stolen” election. An apology wouldn’t hurt either.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  14. The authors found that a large percentage of people drawn to conspiracy thinking are willing to endorse “mutually incompatible conspiracy theories.”

    In one study, for example, “the more participants believed that Osama Bin Laden was already dead when U.S. Special Forces raided his compound in Pakistan, the more they believed he is still alive.” In another study, “the more participants believed that Princess Diana faked her own death, the more they believed that she was murdered.”

    That would mean that they don’t fully endorse any one of the theories. I think we need to see the exact wording of the questions.

    They also contradict reality. For instance why do pedophiles need a ring to hold captives, and why should they worship Satan, and why should they do things the hard way, and how do they account for the known pedophiles? And how come the conspirators never slip up but also never really succeed?

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  15. Here’s a good summary of 193 of the arrested rioters who stormed the Capitol.

    First, the attack on the Capitol was unmistakably an act of political violence, not merely an exercise in vandalism or trespassing amid a disorderly protest that had spiraled out of control. The overwhelming reason for action, cited again and again in court documents, was that arrestees were following Trump’s orders to keep Congress from certifying Joe Biden as the presidential-election winner. Dozens of arrestees, court records indicate, made statements explaining their intentions in detail on social media or in interviews with the FBI. “I am incredibly proud to be a patriot today,” wrote a 37-year-old man from Beverly Hills, California, “to stand up tall in defense of liberty & the Constitution, to support Trump & #MAGAforever, & to send the message: WE ARE NEVER CONCEDING A STOLEN ELECTION.”

    Second, a large majority of suspects in the Capitol riot have no connection to existing far-right militias, white-nationalist gangs, or other established violent organizations. We erred on the side of inclusion; we counted an arrestee as affiliated with such an organization if any court documents or news articles describe the person as a member, refer to social-media posts expressing an affinity for a certain group, or attest to patches or apparel that directly indicate support.
    […]
    Third, the demographic profile of the suspected Capitol rioters is different from that of past right-wing extremists. The average age of the arrestees we studied is 40. Two-thirds are 35 or older, and 40 percent are business owners or hold white-collar jobs. Unlike the stereotypical extremist, many of the alleged participants in the Capitol riot have a lot to lose. They work as CEOs, shop owners, doctors, lawyers, IT specialists, and accountants. Strikingly, court documents indicate that only 9 percent are unemployed. Of the earlier far-right-extremist suspects we studied, 61 percent were under 35, 25 percent were unemployed, and almost none worked in white-collar occupations.

    In addition to prosecution to the full extent of law and jail, they owe me a retraction and apology, too.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  16. @10. Not really; recall the televised images of weeping women- even reporters; the glum stun and tears of disbelief as cameras panned the crowds when HRC lost.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  17. @15-

    Excellent point, especially the fact the insurrectionists weren’t unemployed demanding jobs (or a vaccine.) Of course, many of them are unemployed now.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  18. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/us/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-republicans.html

    Privately, according to a person familiar with their thinking, top Republicans hoped that outside groups would swoop into the primary race in support of Dr. Cowan and weaponize Ms. Greene’s incendiary comments against her, dooming her candidacy. But the outside effort never materialized.

    Instead, Ms. Greene’s campaign received an important boost when the political arm of the ultraconservative Freedom Caucus endorsed her, as did Representatives Andy Biggs of Arizona, the group’s chairman, and Jim Jordan of Ohio, a founder. She handily won the runoff in August and cruised to victory in November.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  19. In the meantime, Biden is engaging in full racial demagoguery and supporting discrimination in the name of favoring certain groups over others.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-drops-yale-university-admissions-lawsuit-11612370047?mod=djemalertNEWS

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  20. @10. Not really; recall the televised images of weeping women- even reporters; the glum stun and tears of disbelief as cameras panned the crowds when HRC lost.

    It definitely is a sentiment that appears in both parties and it’s problematic that both sides have way too many adherents that view everything through their respective parties’ lenses, but at least before now it seemed more like sadness and fear that policies would be enacted that are harmful. “It’s awful that I lost, but I’ll live to fight another day.” Dramatic, yes, but it left room open to start working towards winning the next election.

    This woman and the nutjobs like her are scarier. Not only do they literally panic and overreact to a political party loss, they are upset that other people are not being arrested and sent to Guantanamo Bay. It’s not “It’s awful that I lost, but I’ll live to fight another day,” but rather, “It’s awful that my opponents aren’t being sent to military camps.”

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  21. Paul Montagu quoting from The Atlantic:

    Dozens of arrestees, court records indicate, made statements explaining their intentions in detail on social media…

    Were any of those intentions made known in advance? If so, how could Trump’s speech that day have incited them?

    And were they the first to break through the barriers? Who had the bullhorns? (we know Alex Jones had one, but he and Ali Alexander were urging the opposite of breaking in, maybe as a cover.

    We had this:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/16/us/capitol-riot-funding.html

    Keith Lee, an Air Force veteran and former police detective, spent the morning of Jan. 6 casing the entrances to the Capitol.

    In online videos, the 41-year-old Texan pointed out the flimsiness of the fencing. He cheered the arrival, long before President Trump’s rally at the other end of the mall, of far-right militiamen encircling the building. Then, armed with a bullhorn, Mr. Lee called out for the mob to rush in, until his voice echoed from the dome of the Rotunda….What is clear is that it was driven, in part, by a largely ad hoc network of low-budget agitators, including far-right militants, Christian conservatives and ardent adherents of the QAnon conspiracy theory. Mr. Lee is all three…

    …By 10:45 a.m. the next day, more than an hour before Mr. Trump spoke, Mr. Lee was back online broadcasting footage of himself at the Capitol.

    “If you died today and you went to heaven, can you look George Washington in the face and say that you’ve fought for this country?” he asked.

    By noon, he was reporting that “backup” was already arriving, bypassing the Trump speech and rally. The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were among the groups that went directly to the Capitol.

    Was Keith Lee one of those arrested?

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  22. Were any of those intentions made known in advance? If so, how could Trump’s speech that day have incited them?

    If someone is predisposed to do something, they can still be incited to do it. Moreover, even if certain members of the group were not only predisposed but certain to do something, other people who didn’t share that mindset may be encouraged and incited to join in.

    If A, B, C, D, E, and F were to show up to the rally, with A, B, and C already having planned to break through no matter what Trump said that day–and here I’m ignoring the fact that A, B, and C may have formed that plan based on what Trump et al. had said in the past regarding a stolen election–D, E, and F can still be incited by a combination of (a) Seeing A, B, and C do their thing, and (b) hearing that Trump is egging on A, B, and C to do said thing. And that’s true even if D, E, and F had zero intentions to do that beforehand.

    Additionally, you can have multiple concurrent causes of one thing. You seem to think Trump is responsible–morally or otherwise–only if he were a superseding and exclusive cause. Most people probably don’t share that view.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  23. JohnnyA, good explanation and comment.

    Time123 (52fb0e)

  24. JohnnyAgreeable (c49787) — 2/3/2021 @ 11:20 am

    b) hearing that Trump is egging on A, B, and C to do said thing.

    But he wasn’t.

    He was egging them to go to a demonstration at the Capitol which had a permit There is no evidence that Trump had any idea what some people intended.

    Now he didn’t explain how the demonstration would help, but if that is a call to riot, every demonstration before a critical vote that the demonstrators are likely to lose is a call to riot.

    It’s been noted the march didn’t have a permit.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  25. Four weeks have elapsed, and not the slightest bit of evidence has emerged that Donald Trump knew what was going to happen a the Capitol. He had no more advance knowledge of it than Richard Nixon did of the Watergate burglary – and this wasn’t even organized by people in his campaign. Nor can his words have been a new factor because some people not part of any conspiracy would have noticed he was inciting a riot.

    What I don’t like is Trump’s defense that his speech was a first amendment protected activity. That’s not very relevant. It simply was not the immediate cause of the storming of the Capitol at all.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  26. Time123 (52fb0e) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:26 am

    who think D&D will let them summon demons who can make girls talk to them and their ilk.

    This is just nonsense talk. You can just use a charm spell or find some magic item to increase your charisma.

    frosty (f27e97)

  27. Time123 (52fb0e) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:26 am

    who think D&D will let them summon demons who can make girls talk to them and their ilk.

    This is just nonsense talk. You can just use a charm spell or find some magic item to increase your charisma.

    frosty (f27e97) — 2/3/2021 @ 12:29 pm

    You can’t stack more then +12 on any singe attribute. So that gives them a Charisma of 13. Still not great given the situational modifies and negative rank in the relevant skills.

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  28. Sammy Finkelman (5b302e) — 2/3/2021 @ 10:36 am

    For instance why do pedophiles need a ring to hold captives … and how do they account for the known pedophiles?

    I could be misunderstanding this part. Child sex trafficking is a thing and it’s part of a larger sex trafficking industry. They need a ring for the same reason a lot of other criminals organize, e.g. drugs don’t distribute themselves.

    frosty (f27e97)

  29. But he wasn’t.

    He was egging them to go to a demonstration at the Capitol which had a permit There is no evidence that Trump had any idea what some people intended.

    Now he didn’t explain how the demonstration would help, but if that is a call to riot, every demonstration before a critical vote that the demonstrators are likely to lose is a call to riot.

    I don’t think the last quoted paragraph is true at all, and you’re playing rather loosely with “critical vote.” The certification wasn’t a “vote” in how that term is understood for democratic processes; the “vote” was a fait accompli based on the actual votes.

    You’re pretending that Trump’s rally was no different than a rally that would have taken place the night before Election Day.

    To steal something I saw on Twitter (which I’m assuredly butchering in terms of description since it was a cartoon), you’re acting as if the guys holding the match (protestors) are solely and 100% responsible while ignoring the guys who doused the building in gasoline (Trump).

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  30. Dana (fd537d) — 2/3/2021 @ 9:36 am

    This was so common after 2016 it was named Post-election Stress Disorder [1]. [2], [3] [or use google].

    frosty (f27e97)

  31. Were any of those intentions made known in advance? If so, how could Trump’s speech that day have incited them?

    What difference does it make, Sammy? You don’t accept that Trump fomented insurrection prior to 1/6, and I think that’s a ridiculous proposition, pretending that one speech was the singular event at hand.
    Trump made it clear since Biden was declared the winner on November 8th (if not before) that he refused to accept the result and would pull out all stops to overturn it. His Twitter invitation was of a piece. If he hadn’t asked them to show up with the tease that it would be “wild”, together with the totality of all his other statements, there would’ve been no domestic terror attack on our Capitol. Trump is primarily responsible, and he deserves to be convicted, disqualified and then criminally prosecuted.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  32. JohnnyAgreeable (c49787) — 2/3/2021 @ 12:42 pm

    To steal something I saw on Twitter (which I’m assuredly butchering in terms of description since it was a cartoon), you’re acting as if the guys holding the match (protestors) are solely and 100% responsible while ignoring the guys who doused the building in gasoline (Trump).

    The problem here is intent needed for incitement to insurrection. If some kids were playing on a railroad turntable and got hurt you wouldn’t say whoever built it, or left it unlocked and unguarded, are guilty of anything requiring intent. Negligence yes but not intent.

    Assuming “doused with gasoline” is begging the question. It asserts intent w/o proving it.

    frosty (f27e97)

  33. Love the hypotheticals, if it starts with something like “If some kids were…” it didn’t happen.

    Meanwhile, in the real world all of this was done right out in the open where you can read and see for yourself what actually happened, beginning with speeches from insurrectionist #1 starting before the election, to the acts on the 6th.

    I know, it’s hard to argue with reality, so just try to obscure with a blizzard of sh!t. Reality still exists.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (1367c0)

  34. To steal something I saw on Twitter (which I’m assuredly butchering in terms of description since it was a cartoon), you’re acting as if the guys holding the match (protestors) are solely and 100% responsible while ignoring the guys who doused the building in gasoline (Trump).

    So you agree the liberal media and Democrats were responsible for the shooting at the Republican softball game?

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  35. NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/3/2021 @ 11:03 am

    In the meantime, Biden is engaging in full racial demagoguery and supporting discrimination in the name of favoring certain groups over others.

    Since the Yale student body is approx. 40% White and 20% Asian, it’s hard to see how Yale discriminated against Whites and Asians. If anything, the DoJ should sue Yale for discriminating against Blacks (6%) and Hispanics (9%).

    Also, the government’s loss against Harvard over the same issues probably figured into their decision.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  36. Colonel Klink (Ret) (1367c0) — 2/3/2021 @ 1:18 pm

    I know, it’s hard to argue with reality, so just try to obscure with a blizzard of sh!t. Reality still exists.

    In this reality you speak of it’s possible for different people to see the same thing and come to different conclusions. In that sense, it’s easy to argue about reality.

    I’m not sure why you argue with reality though. Does it argue back with you? Do you go on long walks in the woods and have deep discussions?

    frosty (f27e97)

  37. Speaking of nutjobs:

    ‘I would leave my House seat; I would leave my home’ to defend Trump in Senate trial, Rep. Matt Gaetz says
    ……..
    Gaetz, one of the former president’s most vocal allies on Capitol Hill, made the remark in an interview with Trump’s former chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, on the “War Room: Pandemic” podcast.

    Gaetz told Bannon that he and other unnamed House members asked the House Ethics Committee whether they could defend Trump during the Senate trial, “because we would be honored to,” but that they were told that they were barred from doing so as sitting members of the House.

    Bannon then asked Gaetz whether he would be willing to step down to be part of Trump’s defense team.

    “I love my district,” Gaetz replied. “I love representing them. But I view this cancellation of the Trump presidency and the Trump movement as one of the major risks to my people, both in my district and all throughout this great country.”

    He added: “Absolutely, if the president called me and wanted me to go defend him on the floor of the Senate, that would be the top priority in my life. I would leave my House seat; I would leave my home; I would do anything I had to do to ensure that the greatest president in my lifetime … got a full-throated defense.”
    …….
    In Wednesday’s interview, Gaetz said that if Trump called on him to be part of his team, he would make sure that the former president received a defense “that wasn’t crouched down, that wasn’t in fear of losing some moderate Republican senator, but that was worthy of the fight that he gave to the great people of this country for four years.”
    >>>>>>>>>>
    Please do.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  38. The reason Trump lost is they didn’t count every vote. As he had suggested, his followers voted several times, but they only counted one of them.

    So when these Democrats say “Count every vote” they are just lying hypocrites.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  39. In the meantime, Biden is engaging in full racial demagoguery and supporting discrimination in the name of favoring certain groups over others.

    Wait a second. I thought that it was corruption when the DoJ withdrew a case from a court due to political pressure. I’m sure there’s a difference, just wonder what the apologists will use.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  40. Also, the government’s loss against Harvard over the same issues probably figured into their decision.

    Yeah, that’s the ticket!

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  41. Since the Yale student body is approx. 40% White and 20% Asian, it’s hard to see how Yale discriminated against Whites and Asians. If anything, the DoJ should sue Yale for discriminating against Blacks (6%) and Hispanics (9%).

    Also, the government’s loss against Harvard over the same issues probably figured into their decision.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/3/2021 @ 1:39 pm

    That’s pure BS and your racism is duly noted. We have equality of opportunity, not equality of result. It is proven fact that Yale and other racist universities discriminate against Asians and Whites and choose other racial groups with lower stats and performance to achieve some nonsensical form of diversity yet are 100% in lockstep when it comes to diversity of thought.

    NJRob (1406dc)

  42. JohnnyAgreeable (c49787) — 2/3/2021 @ 12:42 pm

    To steal something I saw on Twitter (which I’m assuredly butchering in terms of description since it was a cartoon), you’re acting as if the guys holding the match (protestors) are solely and 100% responsible while ignoring the guys who doused the building in gasoline (Trump).

    The problem here is intent needed for incitement to insurrection. If some kids were playing on a railroad turntable and got hurt you wouldn’t say whoever built it, or left it unlocked and unguarded, are guilty of anything requiring intent. Negligence yes but not intent.

    Assuming “doused with gasoline” is begging the question. It asserts intent w/o proving it.

    frosty (f27e97) — 2/3/2021 @ 1:01 pm

    The part in bold is true. I hope the senate calls witnesses to help us establish intent. We know trump was attempting a lot of ‘questionable’ actions to get the election turned his way; the call with GA, the plot with the leadership of the DOJ, having Pence not count electors for Biden. We know that Trump wanted to keep the vote from being certified. We know that he wanted to put a lot of pressure on VP Pence and others. We know that he did nothing to stop the violence for several hours after it started.

    That could be sufficient evidence of his intent.

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  43. Since the Yale student body is approx. 40% White and 20% Asian, it’s hard to see how Yale discriminated against Whites and Asians. If anything, the DoJ should sue Yale for discriminating against Blacks (6%) and Hispanics (9%).

    Also, the government’s loss against Harvard over the same issues probably figured into their decision.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/3/2021 @ 1:39 pm

    That’s pure BS and your racism is duly noted. We have equality of opportunity, not equality of result. It is proven fact that Yale and other racist universities discriminate against Asians and Whites and choose other racial groups with lower stats and performance to achieve some nonsensical form of diversity yet are 100% in lockstep when it comes to diversity of thought.

    NJRob (1406dc) — 2/3/2021 @ 2:02 pm

    There’s that noting things again. Is there some sort of score card or permanent record for this place that I’m just not aware of?

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  44. That’s a good question. If, under normal rules, blacks and Hispanics qualify at 2% and 5%, so they alter the rules to admit more blacks and Hispanics, and decline admission to others who would qualify under the normal rules, is it discrimination on the basis of race?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  45. Hoi Polloi — obviously the problem didn’t start with Trump and won’t end with Trump.

    But Trump did the equivalent of taking a low-grade cold and turning it into Covid-19.

    —————

    Dana, at 10 — the national body politic is no longer healthy and stable.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  46. NJRob (1406dc) — 2/3/2021 @ 2:02 pm:

    We have equality of opportunity, not equality of result. It is proven fact…..

    Then prove it.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  47. An alternate approach would be where they let it be known that they really want black and Hispanic applicants and therefore get a larger portion of qualified students to apply. This might ALSO get a larger number of black and Hispanic students admitted, and fewer white and Asian students, but without bending any rules.

    This has been done in the past more successfully with gender outreach, where a STEM school wants to increase its dismal female/male ratio and tries to make the school more attractive to female applicants and engages in outreach to that effect.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  48. My problem with them dropping the suit is not the suit itself, but the appearance of dropping it due to political commands.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  49. Dana, at 10 — the national body politic is no longer healthy and stable.

    I would argue that the People are pretty much just fine, but the political parties have both lost the plot pretty badly.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  50. Rep. Lauren Boebert’s mileage reimbursement “raises red flags,” ethics experts say

    U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert paid herself more than $22,000 in mileage reimbursements from her campaign account last year. Boebert’s campaign defends the reimbursements but three ethics experts who reviewed the money transfers for The Denver Post say they raise questions.

    Candidates for federal office can legally reimburse themselves for miles driven in personal vehicles using the Internal Revenue Service’s mileage rate, which was 57.5 cents per mile for 2020. The Republican congresswoman from western Colorado wrote two checks totaling $22,259 from her campaign coffers for mileage between January and mid-November.

    To justify those reimbursements, Boebert would have had to drive 38,712 miles while campaigning, despite having no publicly advertised campaign events in March, April or July, and only one in May. Furthermore, because the reimbursements came in two payments — a modest $1,060 at the end of March and $21,200 on Nov. 11 — Boebert would have had to drive 36,870 miles in just over seven months between April 1 and Nov. 11 to justify the second payment.

    “This highly unusual amount of mileage expenses raises red flags and the campaign should feel obligated to provide answers,” said Kedric Payne, a former investigator for the Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body in Congress that examines misconduct allegations.
    ……..
    Boebert’s reimbursements to herself in one year eclipse her predecessor’s reimbursements over 10 years. Republican Rep. Scott Tipton reimbursed himself $9,797 from campaign coffers for all travel expenses — including airfare — during a decade representing the same district. He also reimbursed himself $9,575 from his office account for mileage in that time period.

    For further comparison, U.S. Rep. Don Young, who represents the largest district in the country — the entire state of Alaska — reimbursed himself $9,965 for all travel, including airfare, from his campaign account last year.
    …….
    Qanon grifters are going to grift.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  51. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 2/3/2021 @ 2:00 pm

    That movie is both dated and timeless, Kevin.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  52. More Than 10,000 Arizonans Left the GOP in January
    ……
    According to records maintained by the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, 10,174 registered voters switched their political affiliation from Republican to another party during January.

    Most former Republicans — 6,750 — chose to forego any party affiliation, while 1,374 switched to the Democratic Party and 1,108 opted for Independent. The Libertarians gained another 485 members from former Republicans and two individuals changed their registration to the Green Party. Another 554 voters opted for what the Secretary of State’s Office describes as a “non-recognized political party.”

    In contrast, 2,484 people left the Democratic Party during the same timeframe.
    …….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  53. Is there some sort of score card or permanent record for this place that I’m just not aware of?

    Yes:
    Facts and intellectual honesty: 1,234,987

    NJRob’s opinion: 0

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  54. My problem with them dropping the suit is not the suit itself, but the appearance of dropping it due to political commands.

    Kevin, the corruption involved the DoJ’s Flynn shenanigans was much different (even if we ignore the additional little detail of Flynn having already pleaded guilty).

    Flynn was a personal close and high profile personal associate and advisor of the person pulling the strings, his guilt was a political liability, and he had been in a position to provide derogatory information to prosecutors. In other words, there were glaring personal and political conflicts of interest involved with Flynn which are entirely absent in the Yale case.

    I think the Supreme Court cases on racial preferences in admissions are wrongly decided (going back to the abominable Grutter decision), but they are the law of the land.

    Dave (1bb933)

  55. Time123 (d1bf33) — 2/3/2021 @ 2:07 pm

    There’s that noting things again. Is there some sort of score card or permanent record for this place that I’m just not aware of?

    I’ve asked this a couple of times. From what I can tell each player is supposed to update their own character sheet. I don’t think the DM is tracking it.

    frosty (f27e97)

  56. @Time@44

    Generally when I use “noted” I mean “I am acknowledging that I have heard your opinion and I am not impressed.” It sometimes placeholds for a very much ruder thing I would like to say about the level with which I am not impressed but know I should not.

    Nic (896fdf)

  57. Parler CEO Says He Was Fired by Conservative Political Donor Rebekah Mercer
    …….
    John Matze, the former CEO, said he was fired on Friday by the company’s board. He said the board is currently controlled by conservative political donor Rebekah Mercer.

    “Over the past few months, I’ve met constant resistance to my product vision, my strong belief in free speech and my view of how the Parler site should be managed,” he said in a statement. “For example, I advocated for more product stability and what I believe is a more effective approach to content moderation.”
    …….
    “Over the past few weeks, I have worked endless hours and fought constant battles to get the Parler site running, but at this point, the future of Parler is no longer in my hands,” Mr. Matze said.

    Ms. Mercer, daughter of hedge-fund investor Robert Mercer, is among the company’s financial backers, the Journal reported in November. The Mercers have previously financed a number of conservative causes.

    Ms. Mercer said in a post on the platform that she “started Parler to provide a neutral platform for free speech, as our founders intended.”
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    Ms. Mercer is following the Golden Rule: “He who has the gold, makes the rules.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  58. @Time@44

    Generally when I use “noted” I mean “I am acknowledging that I have heard your opinion and I am not impressed.” It sometimes placeholds for a very much ruder thing I would like to say about the level with which I am not impressed but know I should not.

    Nic (896fdf) — 2/3/2021 @ 4:54 pm

    To me it comes across as somewhat passive aggressive, vaguely threatening or officious. Like Snape might say ‘your such and such is noted’ or ‘your response is noted’ as if at a later date something might be done about it. NJRob going to act on this notation at a later date. He has no power here other then whatever respect others give him. I think I’ve seen Patterico use it, but since he makes moderation decisions, and is an organized man, it might mean something there.

    Ppl are free to communicate as they like, but this is the only place I see that formulation used much and it strikes me as odd.

    Time123 (52fb0e)

  59. Huh. I hadn’t realized that parler was a Mercer project. They seem to have a lot of fingers in any number of far right projects.

    Nic (896fdf)

  60. @Time@60 My use comes out of a military cultural context. It’s used with my meaning a lot there.

    Nic (896fdf)

  61. > your such and such is noted

    I HOPE YOU KNOW THAT THIS WILL GO DOWN ON YOUR PERMANENT RECORD.

    that’s the vibe i get from it.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  62. @Time@60 My use comes out of a military cultural context. It’s used with my meaning a lot there.

    Nic (896fdf) — 2/3/2021 @ 5:24 pm

    I never served and i don’t know that context. what’s it mean there?

    Time123 (52fb0e)

  63. @55: They would have dropped the suit even if Yale had offered to settle.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  64. I HOPE YOU KNOW THAT THIS WILL GO DOWN ON YOUR PERMANENT RECORD.

    My permanent record must be pretty confusing by now.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  65. Why “they” storm the Capitol: “Climate czar John Kerry said that traveling by private jet is the “only choice for someone like me,” and he pointed to his record on climate activism as a way to justify taking one to Iceland to receive the Arctic Circle award for his work on climate change in 2019.”

    John Kerry truly is an asshole.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  66. I believe Harvard and Yale, as private institutions, have the right to decide how they admit students, using any criteria they see fit. However, if those criteria abridge the civil rights of other applicants, then Harvard and Yale should not receive federal money. Not like they even need the money – both institutions have billions in their endowments.

    But hey, even the rich and famous like to suck at the federal teat…

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  67. There’s that noting things again. Is there some sort of score card or permanent record for this place that I’m just not aware of?

    Time123 (d1bf33) — 2/3/2021 @ 2:07 pm

    The exact phrase is “duly noted” which means taken record of and remembered. On grammarist they use the meaning as “In official contexts, duly noted implies that the thing being noted will get appropriate consideration when the time comes.” which is correct. In my case it means that every time Rip tries to tar someone with a racist brush, I will always remember he has no problem with racism as long as it is against groups in disfavor.

    NJRob (cdab76)

  68. @time@64 er. You quoted it in the post I was answering? But here it is again anyway. “I am acknowledging that I have heard your opinion but I am not impressed.”

    Nic (896fdf)

  69. He was egging them to go to a demonstration at the Capitol which had a permit There is no evidence that Trump had any idea what some people intended.

    Now he didn’t explain how the demonstration would help, but if that is a call to riot, every demonstration before a critical vote that the demonstrators are likely to lose is a call to riot.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787) — 2/3/2021 @ 12:42 pm

    I don’t think the last quoted paragraph is true at all, and you’re playing rather loosely with “critical vote.” The certification wasn’t a “vote” in how that term is understood for democratic processes; the “vote” was a fait accompli based on the actual votes.

    Trump had made that normally routine procedure into a critical vote, which he was going to lose, however. Trump may not have realized it, but even if Mike Pence had gone along with what he wanted, there still would have been a vote (to overrule him) which he still would have lost, and Mike Pence had already told him he wouldn’t do it.

    It was something illegitimate and unconstitutional he was asking for, and merely creating that critical vote is grounds enough for impeachment, but it has all the elements, of being a critical vote, as far as that applies to creating a disturbance.

    You’re pretending that Trump’s rally was no different than a rally that would have taken place the night before Election Day.

    No, no. The key point is Congress was going to vote to make Joe Biden president. (it’s not supposed to be a choice, of course, at that stage.) This crowd was interested in preventing that.

    But you could have the same thing about a Declaration of War or a presidential impeachment of a sitting president, or maybe a very controversial issue. The illegitimacy of Trump’s position really is not a factor as far as it inciting a riot is concerned.

    To steal something I saw on Twitter (which I’m assuredly butchering in terms of description since it was a cartoon), you’re acting as if the guys holding the match (protestors) are solely and 100% responsible while ignoring the guys who doused the building in gasoline (Trump).

    He created the (totally unnecessary) critical vote, where his side was something that would go against the constitution, but doing that didn’t create the riot. And again, I don’t think the protesters did it because of the high tension.

    And if Trump did it by creating the sense of high stakes, he did it without that speech and it would have happened if he had never given a speech that day. But in reality, some people went out of their way to create the assault.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  70. In my case it means that every time Rip tries to tar someone with a racist brush, I will always remember he has no problem with racism as long as it is against groups in disfavor.

    As far as I know I have never called anyone a racist, either here or elsewhere. I merely pointed out that the groups that the Trump DOJ was supporting constituted nearly a two-thirds majority of the current Yale student body, and the Trump DOJ lost a similar case against Harvard. I’m sorry you felt so threatened.

    Rip Murdock (328795)

  71. The Justice Department’s complaint demonstrates the magnitude of Yale’s race-based disfavoring of Whites and Asians. According to the complaint, which is based on the DOJ’s lengthy investigation of Yale’s undergraduate admissions process, Blacks in the tenth decile (the top one) are admitted to Yale at a rate of 60 percent. By contrast, Whites are admitted at a rate of 20 percent and Asians at a rate of only 14 percent.

    Because Yale is a highly selective college, few applicants of any race or ethnicity are admitted from the third decile or below. However, in the fourth decile, Blacks are admitted at a rate of 12 percent — about the same rate at which Asians in the tenth decile (the top one) are admitted. The admission rates for Whites and Asians in the fourth decile are just 2 percent and 2.5 percent, respectively.

    In the fifth decile, Blacks are admitted at a rate of 21 percent — about the same rate as Whites in the tenth decile. For Whites and Asians in the fifth decile, the admission rates are just 4 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively.

    In other words, Blacks with slightly below average credentials in relation to other applicants stand about the same chance of being admitted to Yale as Whites and Asians whose credentials place them in the top 10 percent of the applicant pool.

    That’s blatant racial discrimination. It’s also fine with the “moderate” Biden administration. By contrast, nearly three-fourths of Americans believe that race shouldn’t be a factor in college admissions, according to a Pew Research survey.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/02/biden-doj-dismisses-discrimination-suit-against-yale.php

    The facts speak for themselves.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  72. @73-
    Then I expect the Students for Fair Admissions and the Asian American Coalition for Education will no doubt succeed in their forthcoming lawsuit against Yale, though it will be tough getting the USSC to overturn their precedents on affirmative action in education. The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected efforts to end affirmative action in college admissions, which the court has said can be justified, if narrowly tailored, to achieve diversity in student bodies. I guess we will find out in a few years.

    Your ad hominem attack against me (every time Rip tries to tar someone with a racist brush…..) has been duly noted and certainly weakens your argument. I never done so, and certainly not to you personally. It was completely uncalled for, and reflects very poorly on you.

    Rip Murdock (a217ed)

  73. Nic, Thank you for repeating yourself, sorry for the reading comprehension fail.

    Time123 (441f53)

  74. I wonder how people even know that there was a legal demonstration scheduled for the Capitol on January 6?

    Alex Jones tried, or pretended to try to get the crowd to come to order, even telling them that Trump was coming over there to address them.

    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/what-conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-said-in-the-lead-up-to-the-capitol-riot

    Once outside the Capitol, Jones was filmed, bullhorn in hand. “We’re not antifa; we’re not BLM. You’re amazing. I love you. Let’s march around the other side, and let’s not fight the police and give the system what they want. We are peaceful, and we won this election. And as much as I love seeing the Trump flags flying over this, we need to not have the confrontation with the police. They’re gonna make that the story. I’m going to march to the other side, where we have a stage, where we can speak and occupy peacefully.”

    Jones continued: “Trump is going to speak over here. Trump is coming.”

    Just before the siege, President Trump had incited the crowd, saying, “if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore,” and said he would be marching with them to the Capitol. But he never showed up.

    And now I remember, Trump said at the earlier rally he was coming there:

    https://factba.se/transcript/donald-trump-speech-campaign-rally-the-ellipse-january-6-2021

    Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down — Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the capital and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.

    Another transcript:

    https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6

    Now he never showed up.

    Trump said he was going to be at the Capitol about 18 minutes into his speech, at 12:17 pm.

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/15/us/trump-capitol-riot-timeline.html

    [The 17 or 18 minutes (based on rev.com) starts counting before the audio comes in or gets reliable The New York Times has the the speech starting at 12:03 pm and the rev transcript starts at 2:44 into the speech. It seems like the beginning did not audio recorded, or it was coming on and off, but he was anyway slow getting started because the crowd was cheering.]

    When was that second speech cancelled, or was it ever really on his schedule? In other words, what did he know about the riot, and when did he know it? Did he know in advance, or did he only learn about it after it started, and only then cancel his appearance? (when Trump says “We’re going to walk down” that should not be understood as he himself walking with the crowd. He would have gone by bulletproof limousine.)

    If Trump knew the second speech would never take place then he is probably guilty of approval in advance of the riot (although not of inciting it with his words); but if the cancellation was unexpected, the statement he would be there would not be a lie (unlike his claim in the same speech that he was addressing hundreds of thousands of people but the media wouldn’t show it because their cameras are pointed in the wrong direction – in other words at him and not at crowd)

    And in that case (that it was a surprise to him that he did not show up) he would be innocent, and no more guilty of inciting the crowd than Ted Cruz was.

    Who is investigating these questions?

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  75. That story about the dead Capitol Hill police officer being killed by being hit on the head with a fire extinguisher seems to be a made up story, and maybe it wasn’t even murder at all. (Others were hit but didn’t die. He was pepper sprayed twice)

    https://nypost.com/2021/02/03/noxious-nancys-cynical-timing-devine

    The cause of Sicknick’s death in hospital at 9:30 p.m. the day after the Capitol riot still has not been publicly confirmed, despite ­Pelosi’s efforts to pin it on Trump supporters.

    At the time, Capitol Police said in a statement that he was injured “while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed.”

    Police union chair Gus Papathanasiou told reporters Sicknick ­suffered a stroke after returning to his office.

    Unnamed sources told ABC that Sicknick’s death “was driven by a medical condition.”

    Ken Sicknick told ProPublica his brother had texted him the evening of the riots to say: “ ‘I got pepper-sprayed twice,’ and he was in good shape.”

    Sicknick’s family issued a statement: “The direct causes of Brian’s injuries remain unknown and our family asks the public and the press to respect our wishes in not making Brian’s passing a political issue . . . Brian is a hero and that is what we would like people to ­remember.”

    But it was too late. Malicious ­actors were determined to politicize the death of a hero.

    Unsourced media reports claimed Sicknick had been beaten over the head with a fire extinguisher wielded by Trump supporters. A snippet of video was produced as evidence, with a fire extinguisher being tossed at a group of police, but it was later confirmed that Sicknick was not among them, so that was a red ­herring.

    Homicide police and the FBI opened a murder investigation but so far have come up empty-handed.

    So I have too revise my earlier conclusion.

    It’s not that they don’t have the video of Officer Sicknick being hit over the head by a fire extinguisher. There’s plenty of video. It’s that it probably never happened (it was only a Metropolitan Police Department officer who was hit on the head by a fire extinguisher – actually 3 were but one had no head protection)

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  76. When Donald Trump said:

    Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you,

    the talking point, or the assumption was that he was lying, bu it could have been his true intention.

    And when Alex Jones said to the crowd

    : “Trump is going to speak over here. Trump is coming.”

    if anybody knew it, they assumed he was making it up.

    Butt maybe (even if Alex Jones knew that it would never happen – that depends on Alex Jones’ involvement in the planning of the assault) maybe Alex Jones said that because it was on the schedule.

    Now somebody has to ask the Secret Service.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  77. @Time@75 No worries.

    Nic (896fdf)

  78. 56. 78. I stumbled upon an exact quote from Alex Jones . I had read in the New York Times, I think, that Alex Jones had addressed the crowd with a bllhorn telling them to go the place they were supposed to be, and that there was video of him with Ali Alexander dong that, but only when I looked for video did I discover that he had claimed that Donald Trump was going to address them. Since Donald Trump also claimed that he would there it is most likely true that it was scheduled. Which creates a responsibility test – because if Trump really intended to go there and his people had issued instructions to take him there ,then he had no idea that the rally would not in fact happen and there’d be people breaching barricades and trying to make their way into the Capitol, to, at a minimum, force Congress to recess the Joint Session.

    And if Trump did not intend to go most likely he did not bother with making arrangements.

    News is that the House prosecutors want Trump to testify, Trump is refusing, and they will argue that Trump declining to testify means every accusation against him is true to the littlest detail and he did incite the crowd and was the cause of the storming of the Capitol.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2145 secs.