Q: Why Make A Big Deal About Jan. 6? A: Stealing Nikes Is One Thing, Stealing The Presidency Is Another
[guest post by Dana]
It seems pretty obvious, but Kevin D. Williamson believes the question demands an answer because too many don’t seem to understand. Sadly, he is correct.
He sets the stage:
Sean Hannity, radio host and off-the-books Donald Trump adviser, demands to know. After all, Hannity points out, there have been scores of riots, some of them deadly, over the past couple of years. Why fixate on that one?
Sean Hannity apparently believes that he has the dumbest audience in America.
In answer to Hannity (and Trump supporters everywhere), Williamson explains why Jan. 6 was different than other riots:
The sacking of the Capitol on January 6 by a gang of enraged Trump acolytes acting on the president’s complaint that the election had been stolen from him is different from other riots because of its particular political character. Stealing Nikes is one thing, and stealing the presidency is another. Hannity knows this. Most of you know this.
…
What has been clear to some of us for a long time — and what is becoming more difficult to deny every day — is that the events of January 6 were part of an attempted coup d’état, one that proceeded on two fronts: As the rioters occupied the Capitol and disrupted the process of certifying the Electoral College votes, Trump’s legal minions sought madly for some pretext upon which to nullify the election. Meanwhile, Trump allies occupying several points on the far-right tail of the bell curve of glue-sniffing madness hatched all kinds of supplementary schemes, some of them involving the military.
A riot that is part of a coup d’état is not very much like a riot that is part of a coup de Target.
It is true that some of the disorder of the past few years has had a distinctly political — revolutionary— character. The CHOP/CHAZ episode in Seattle is one example. But planting your flag on a Seattle sidewalk is a very different thing from having the president of the United States and his official allies make a serious effort at an autocoup — an effort that is, we should very much keep in mind, ongoing, with Trump-aligned Republicans working to take over election-management offices and to continue their effort to delegitimize the 2020 election through lies and conspiracy kookery.
At the very least, if one believes that every effort must be made to identify, arrest, and prosecute the masterminds and looters behind the ongoing smash-and-grab crimes or those who wreaked havoc and destruction during the 2020 summer riots, then consistency demands every effort be made to identify, arrest, and prosecute those who attacked the U.S. Capitol or had any part in the events of Jan. 6. This would naturally include those who incited the riot, the rioters themselves, anyone who tried to impede Congress’s official proceedings at the time, and especially those who had the responsibility to tell rioters to go home but remained silent out of self-interest. This, at the very least…
–Dana
Good morning.
Dana (5395f9) — 12/16/2021 @ 7:57 amExcellent point. And US Code provides the tools to deal with these traitors:
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:16 am>> Stealing Nikes is one thing, and stealing the presidency is another.
Typical ploy – painting extremes that don’t bear any perspective in reality.
This isn’t about stealing Nikes. I live in an extremely upscale area of the eastside of Seattle. Microsoft is two miles away. Google is a mile or so away. As we had boarded up shops less than a mile from my home. Armed guards and citizens patrolling downtown Kirkland (it may not mean much to you but Kirkland being boarded up is simply unfathomable). Bellevue Square – THE premier shopping center in the Puget Sound being completely looted. Neighbors wondering if rioter were going to come to their neighborhood.
Stealing Nikes my arse. The fear was real. We had a complete breakdown of civil society that was enabled, encouraged, and defended.
Likewise, the presidency wasn’t going to be stolen. There was no coup d’etat.
>> planting your flag on a Seattle sidewalk
Yeah, no. Do you even understand what happened at CHOP/CHAZ? This was no planting a flag.
lol – this is honestly funny. It’s amusing. But please do keep it up. I need my daily entertainment at your hand wringing.
yaddamaster (b27ef3) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:20 amDana,
Folks who haven’t figured out what you outline in your post will not do so. They may get tired of Trump beating the same drum day after day. They may wish he would shut up about it and move on. But they will believe this stupid lie for as long as they want to do so. It validates their stance towards members of opposing political tendencies.
As Lincoln says, you can fool some of the people all of the time. Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
Appalled (1a17de) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:22 amHere is another one that would not be used in a coup de Target but most definitely be dropped on the heads of hundreds of Trumpinistas that were part of a
:
Hopefully they fry the b@stards.
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:23 amStealing Nikes:
https://www.nypost.com/2020/08/17/blm-mob-beat-white-man-unconscious-after-making-him-crash-truck
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:31 amMore stolen Nikes:
https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/watch-man-tries-to-help-victim-gets-knocked-out-kicked-in-the-head/
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:32 amThe ‘insurrection’ was over in a few hours.
The rioting and lawlessness of Summer 2020 continues to this day. Democrats are destroying cities across the country and there’s no end in sight. Anyone thinking they’re only stealing Nikes is a moron. And oh yes murder numbers are way up too.
But sure, keep saying Jan 6 was worse
Obudman (fbc353) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:37 amIs manipulating texts and emails a common practice?
I see Clinesmith got reinstated to the DC bar before he even finished terms of probation.
Schiff is messing with texts and smearing people. For the 3rd time.
But it’s OK because it’s for the greater good?
If their case is so strong why put a finger on the scale?
If I was in the the jury talking back, I’d be ruthless towards these types of behaviors. It is politics, not a court, but principles should still apply, with prosecution, or in this case inquisitors, held to a higher standard.
steveg (e81d76) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:42 amAltering email and texts in front of me… they would be done, their case is compromised I no longer believe they are honest brokers of facts and truth.
My instinct would be to throw them all out with prejudice so hard they bounce
#8
The ‘insurrection’ is not over. That’s precisely why it is worse.
Appalled (1a17de) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:43 am“Insurrection” is an ongoing thought-crime…
Help! Help us!!
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:44 amThe closest recent parallels to the CHOP thing is really the Bundy crowd’s wildlife refuge takeover related to their business and arson habits.
I seem to recall there was sympathy around these parts for that, but folks ultimately saw it for what it was.
john (cd2753) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:49 amPersonally, I would not risk four years in prison for a pair of sneakers, but it sure is a heck of a lot better reason than for putting Trump back in the White House.
If Santa were to tell me, “nk, you have been a good boy, this year. Tell me, do you want me to bring you a pair a sneakers for your present or put Trump back in the White House?”, I would definitely say, “The sneakers, please, Santa. And can you split the sizes? 10 1/2 D for the right, and 11 1/2 D for the left?”
I mean, say what you want about the mugs, pugs, and thugs who loot Targets, they’re more sensible than the nitwits, dimwits, and halfwits who invaded the Capitol.
nk (1d9030) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:01 amBundy Ranch stuff:
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:03 amI think they comparison of stealing Nikes and stealing the Presidency intentionally minimizes the year long riots, burning buildings, looting, shootings done during looting. (I think the mall looting of todays is rooted in the “liberation of property” the looters engaged in)
A closer equivalent would be to compare other breaches in security in the Capitol to this one and how they were handled. Or people attacking the Supreme Court Building trying to intimidate Justices
I’m fine with drawing a hard line with people who attack the Capitol, I just think we made it look like it was OK, it was “patriotic” and applauded when done by the left, so of course some people thought that is how it would go 01-06-21.
Going forward, I’d like to see this type of behavior enforced with scrupulous evenhandedness from local Federal courts up to the US Supreme Court and the Capitol. Make all the noise you want on the sidewalk, but break anything, throw anything, sneak in, attack police (even if you were an invited Code Pink guest of the Speaker) you get arrested, held and prosecuted.
steveg (e81d76) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:04 amOne set of rules for everyone.
But it’ll never happen. No one in their right mind is going to prosecute a guest of the Speaker…
@Steveg – the shootings were false-flag operations perpetrated by the Boogaloo Bois.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/boogaloo-bois-member-charged-connection-shooting-minneapolis-police-station-during-n1244562
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/
john (cd2753) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:09 amBoogaloo Bois:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/03/us/david-dorn-st-louis-police-shot-trnd/index.html
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:13 amI think “sacking the Capitol” is a bit overstated. However, this was a bit more than exuberant fans running onto the field after a big win and pulling down the goalposts…..and it is has a different dimension than rioters taking advantage of social justice marches to rain down mayhem and loot. January 6th should disturb us….not just because Trump’s rhetoric leading up to the riot was grossly irresponsible…meaning it’s one thing to exhaust your legal challenges, it’s another to make charges that are simply not based on objective evidence…..but because Trump inscrutably waited to even speak out against the violence…..violence at the time that no one knew how far it would go and how many casualties would mount….and did nothing as the chief law enforcement officer to call in support. Why do people lurch for false equivalencies?
Now, one’s ultimate take is colored by one’s opinion of the President, opinion of Congress, and opinion of the integrity of the 2020 vote. I get that. But I get a sense that some would have loved the rioters to have actually confronted Congress…Pelosi….Pence….maybe for the sheer drama and to see them tremble, though it’s pretty clear that that would have resulted in shootings. People would likely have died. That’s the curious thing about Trump because that’s my read on his inaction. He loves to use other people to play the bully for him (usually lawyers but he does seem to relish the devotion…and seeing how far defenders will go)….and this was fundamentally about scaring Democrats and Pence….and it’s that sadistic side of this…not coming from a BLM rioter that has little political power…but from the leader of one of the major political parties. Someone we want to be balanced, measured, disciplined, and the leader for everyone.
And why many of us care….is that most in the GOP see absolutely no reason to even sanction Trump…and remarkably, seem willing to support his bid to run again in 2024. If supporters like Hannity and Ingraham could see the problem with Trump’s inaction, why can’t others? If there were good reasons for his inaction, why haven’t we heard them? If there were good reasons for his weak delayed comments, why not have him speak to the nation directly…rather than playing this stall, misdirect, and excuse game? The country needs better leaders than either Trump or Biden. But We the People must demand it. Step 1 is to not show a preference for Trump in 2024. Pick almost anyone as a new champion. Quit excusing the inexcusable….
AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:15 amif you feel the need to write a column/post about why jan6 matters, after beating the drum for months with the entire msm on your side, maybe there’s a problem and it’s not the 74 million
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:28 amThis countries cities smells like schiff and look like schiff. Please don’t squeeze the charmin.
mg (8cbc69) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:35 amRe:”Sean Hannity apparently believes that he has the dumbest audience in America.”
Actually, he relies on this.
As Mencken said, “Nobody ever went broke by underestimating the taste of the American public.”
John B Boddie (9efa1d) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:44 amThe other thing Trump’s enthralled want us to ignore is that ALL the 2020 violence happened under Trump’s watch. All the BLM and Antifa protests, rioting, and looting. And he did not do a single, darned, effective thing to prevent it.
Because he was not a strong leader who had control of his country. He was a weak loser who could only play golf and jerk off in-between talking tough at rallies. All bluff and bluster. All talk, no walk. All hat, no cattle.
And they want him back? Good grief!
nk (1d9030) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:50 am“stealing Nikes is one thing”
this kind of dismissiveness isn’t going to go far except with your true believers
there’s a real world out there
i ran across this random column a few days ago, by a lefty writer in a left wing news outlet:
https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2021/12/its-not-the-city-i-used-to-love-steve-duin-column.html
do you think this guy Parrilli should get amped up about jan6?
and if he doesn’t, should we wonder what’s wrong with him?
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:50 am19,
Unsurprisingly, you continue to avoid the real issue. And it’s not me posting about the events at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Moreover, you may look to the MSM as the authority on what is a newsworthy issue but I certainly don’t. And I don’t care whether we are in agreement. Partisan loyalty continues to dictate people’s responses to Trump and the events of Jan. 6. Sad!
Dana (a06e6d) — 12/16/2021 @ 9:51 amDana, great post, thank you for putting it up. I know a lot of people want to pretend this doesn’t matter/minimize, change the subject, or react as if someone else’s action justified this bad action and I appreciate that you’re keeping the point front and center.
Time123 (154dbb) — 12/16/2021 @ 10:08 amSince I live here, too, I well know what happened. Police on the Eastside tried to be understanding, and then they enforced the law after the lawbreaking and looting pissed off Eastside residents, with good reason.
Paul Montagu (5de684) — 12/16/2021 @ 10:30 amPolice in Seattle wanted to do that but were stymied by a milquetoast mayor who crumbled under a intolerant socialist/progressive city council. There was no doubt that the CHOP was going to be taken down, but Durkan only relented after a kid or two got murdered late at night and when one of the councilmembers organized a rally in front of Durkan’s house, a huge no-no. Durkan didn’t even have the power or use some chutzpah to kick that b!tch off the council. And Durkan’s weakness and the council’s belligerence forced a good police chief to bail.
While there were plenty of Antifa types who blended into the protests–and they’re the ones who are seeking a socialist revolution–they were mostly about police reform, not overthrowing city government.
Regarding the Riots of 2020, there’s a large swath of people (including our current president) that were clear that violence wasn’t part of lawful protest and that people who broke the law should be prosecuted. There are extremists (such as AOC, Omar, Waters, Trump, Hannity, McCarthy) who want to justify lawlessness if if meets their interest. But some (such as Dana) were very clear about their opposition to both. Throwing up “Antifa riots” as a justification to the Jan 6 riots ignores that, and ignorantly pretends that both can’t be objected to at the same time.
Time123 (154dbb) — 12/16/2021 @ 10:37 amPaul, part of the challenge is when people who have an justifiable idea (e.g. when police use excessive force the system does an inadequate job of providing justice or we like Trump) have their movement joined/co-opted by extremists who commit violent illegal acts.
One difference i see is that the leaders of the DEMs tried draw a line between OK and NOK while the leaders of the GOP actively support the bad actors with lies and justifications.
Time123 (154dbb) — 12/16/2021 @ 10:45 amdismissing the riots over the past two years as a “coup de target” ignores the fact that the damage wasn’t limited to target and mom and pop shops (i know — who cares anyway).
antifa targeted federal buildings, including a federal courthouse and ICE facility, attempting to set fire multiple times to the former and blocking employees from leaving the latter.
calls to the democrat run portland police were ignored, the federal response was called fascist, and eventually after several months of this nonsense the oregon state police had to be brought in after an agreement with the feds
surely williamson knows this, but he “apparently believes that he has the dumbest audience in America.“
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 10:54 amEven not sstealing the presidency is another. They weren’t close to stealing the presidency (not with the riot) but they were disrupting the work of Congress, and possibly exiling Congress from the Capitol (had they burned the building down or held out there)
Even if they had stolen the Electoral votes, which were in a mahogany box or three (maybe one was a leather box) in the Senate chamber…
https://19thnews.org/2021/01/the-women-who-saved-the-boxes-of-electoral-college-votes-during-a-riot-in-the-capitol
(actually three boxes and certification not anything original)
….that wouldn’t have stopped Joe Biden from being proclaimed the next president after a few days.
And if they had stopped it, and no president or vice president had been qualified, that would only have made Nancy Pelosi acting president.
Trump’s hope really was that the total of 306 for Biden to 232 for Trump could be reduced to 232 for Trump and 227 for Biden – or, if 270 were still needed, dragging Biden below 270 without Georgia (16) and Pennsylvania (29( and one other state to 232 for Trump and then the House would vote by states with every single Republican voting for Trump.
Trump needed a positive, legal, win. He was not going to try a coup, like Ferdinand Marcos (as Mike Flynn advised – he wanted Trump to declare martial law and recount the votes – when Trump ascertained there was no color of legality to that he declined to consider it) nor was anyone going to duplicate what Mussolini did in Rome in 1922 when the legitimate government caved because of violence.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:06 amThank you, Time123 @ 25. Appreciate it.
Dana (5395f9) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:09 amIt is a big deal. But they are prosecuting the minions while letting the ringleader walk. My biggest complaint about the political trial in the House is that they intend to do nothing but generate headlines, mostly about the process, and drag things out through the midterms if not 2024.
Trump should be charged with incitement, at the very least. His actions leading up to this, and his inaction during the event itself show that this is exactly what he wanted. His only displeasure was that it did not succeed in overturning the election.
There are about 1000 people who would be happy to testify to this, as they expected a pardon that did not come, and were left holding the bag.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:10 amThe other reason to make a big deal about it is that Trumpist allies have been taking control of parts of state governments needed to ensure that their next attempt succeeds.
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:12 am* , if 270 were still needed, dragging Biden below 270 without Georgia (16) and Pennsylvania (20) would drag Biden down to 270 and then Trump needed to disqualify the votes of one more state to throw the election into the House of Representatives if 270 were still needed for a majority. Oteherwise he’d need 6, without losing any himself.
It really doesn’t matter. Whatever Trump did, he was checkmated, owing to the precise division of power between different people not to mention that at least one third or so of the Republicans wouldn’t follow along, and more when their duty was clearer..
No military would listen to him, if any part of it did, they’d be guilty of insurrection and be on the losing end of a very short civil war.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:12 amaphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:12 am
To try to ensure. It’s not actually succeeding in that many states.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:14 amDemocrats are destroying cities across the country and there’s no end in sight.
Please name an individual who has been inciting these actions to the degree that Donald Trump incited Jan 6th. You know, like weeks and weeks of rallying the troops, getting then to DC on the Day-of, speaking to them and talking about action and saving the country and then pointing them at Congress. That kind of thing.
Please, give us names and some links.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:15 amTaking control!!! Ack!! Through violence? A corrupted ballot box??
How are they “taking” control?
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:15 amDurkan didn’t even have the power or use some chutzpah to kick that b!tch off the council.
Should have had her arrested for incitement to riot and insurrection. Then thrown the book at her.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:18 amIf the January 6 riot were really an insurrection, wouldn’t the rioters have had guns and used them? The riot was bad and certainly the ringleaders and provocateurs who were directing events should spend significant time in a federal prison to, as they say, reflect on their actions. But what happened at the Capitol, as bad as it was, doesn’t seem to have been organized enough to be called an insurrection.
For years, when those on the left have rioted, there have been attempts by some to, if not excuse, at least explain or soften their actions by saying we need to look at the “root causes” for them. So what were the “root causes” that seem to have led many on Jan. 6 to believe (wrongly) they were trying to save democracy? It’s a bit too facile IMHO to say it was merely the lies of an effective demagogue who wanted to retain power almost no matter what.
Many of those who protested and even rioted during the summer of 2020 were otherwise law abiding people who were sincerely upset by what they saw as injustice. Some of them went too far but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are bad people, probably almost all of them were decent people who made some mistakes. The same is true of many of those who rioted on January 6.
What I’d really like to see is more efforts at reconciliation and less at demonization of anyone, whether they’re on the right or the left. There’s way too much anger and division in this country. Sure, punish the ringleaders and cynical inciters and the people who commit the most violent acts, but try to recognize the pain or anger that has motivated the others, even if they’re on a different “side” or part of a different “tribe” as we use those terms nowadays. Vindictiveness against the Jan. 6 rioters, or those who were rioting in 2020, in the long run is not going to be good for the country. Or as someone far better than me once put it, act with malice toward none, and charity for all.
RL formerly in Glendale (fda61c) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:19 amRe:”Sean Hannity apparently believes that he has the dumbest audience in America.”
Half of the adults in America have an IQ of 100 or below. And that’s not counting the incels, drunks and other types that spend their evenings shouting at the TV.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:20 am@28: There’s a way to get rid of the terrible Harris and get a better VP. The Agnew method: Arrest her for conspiracy to foment insurrection and then offer her a deal.
Of course, this would tear the Democrats apart like Trump tears apart the GOP. Maybe that’s why they tolerate it.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:23 amBut what happened at the Capitol, as bad as it was, doesn’t seem to have been organized enough to be called an insurrection.
I blame incompetence at the top. Again.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:24 amThe other reason to make a big deal about it is that Trumpist allies have been taking control of parts of state governments needed to ensure that their next attempt succeeds.
In my state the governor and legislature have already voted to steal the next election where they don’t like the result. But they’re Democrats so you don’t see it.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:25 amHere is one way to “take control,” aphrael:
https://capitalresearch.org/article/breaking-new-irs-disclosures-confirm-flood-of-private-money-to-elections-offices-from-zuckerberg-grantee/
BuDuh (4a7846) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:32 am33. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:10 am
Trump didn’t incite it.
He might have secretly planned it, without the knowledge of people in the government, or his family BUT HE DIDN’T INCITE IT WITH HIS SPEECH.
His totally unjustified challenge to the results, and his creating a high stakes vote in Congress (which he was doomed to lose) did, of course, set the stage.
During the riot, I think Trump was concerned he might, as a result, lose the ability to challenge electoral votes. He needed at least one Senator to start the process and Mitch McConnell was dead set against this. Donald Trump called up Tommy Tuberville to try to make sure he still would object.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tuberville-stands-by-account-of-jan-6-trump-phone-call-on-pence-01613226664
Trump was making excuses for the position Mike Pecce found himself in.
If Pence had done what Trump wanted, then that could have switched the default. Instead of needing amajority of both houses to reject a state’s electoral votes, Trump probably expected, you would then needa majority of both houes to overrule the chair and accept the state’s electoral votes. Now Trump didn;t atually have a majority in either house anyway, even though the Senate was, at the time, 51-48 in favor of the Republicans (David Perdue’s term had expired, but Kelly Loeffler was still serving some of Johnny Isaakson’s unexpired term.
The election in Georgia had taken place – or been completed I should say – the previous day, but Trump was not disputing the results, and so Jon Ossoff would be seated and Raphael Warnock would replace Kelly Loeffler in around two weeks. But on January 6, 2021 the Senate was not yet 50-50.)
Trump was dreaming and being assured by some people, including Giuliani, who was also dreaming and/or being lied to, that they could pull out a win. And maybe all they needed was a little bit more time.
His actions leading up to this, and his inaction during the event itself show that this is exactly what he wanted. His only displeasure was that it did not succeed in overturning the election.
There are about 1000 people who would be happy to testify to this, as they expected a pardon that did not come, and were left holding the bag.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:33 amAll Trump needed to do to win in 2020 was to not be such a dick. He only needed fractional percentages in a few states.
He could have not shown up at the first debate like an agressive drunken loudmouth who would get thrown out of any bar. It was repulsive to anyone not on Team Trump already.
He could have encouraged his stalwarts to cast their vote in advance (it’s not like they were going to change their minds). Instead he actively discouraged it, to the point of making such a vote disloyal.
He could have spent the 90 days prior raining money down in swing districts like any president does. But he didn’t know, as usual.
He could have made a huge issue about the vaccine timetable being delayed until after the election by “Deep State conspirators.” True or not, it would have been believed by many.
But he basically was so sure that he’d win in a landslide (as his sychophants continuously reassured him) that he thought he could mail it in.
Too bad. So sad.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:33 amBUT HE DIDN’T INCITE IT WITH HIS SPEECH.
When Trump says “Now, I don’t mean you should hang Pelosi from the nearest tree” he means that you should do exactly that. Trump is not a hard man to decode.
Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:35 amIf the January 6 riot were really an insurrection, wouldn’t the rioters have had guns and used them?
Here’s Every Weapon The Capitol Rioters Are Accused Of Having On Jan. 6
On Jan. 16, FBI agents executed a search warrant at the Wylie, Texas, home of alleged Capitol rioter Guy Reffitt. In his bedroom, agents found a holster with a Smith & Wesson semiautomatic handgun that they suspected he’d brought to Washington.
Reffitt wasn’t immediately charged with weapons offenses, but prosecutors argued to keep him in jail on the grounds that he’d traveled with the pistol and an AR-15 rifle “to participate in an armed insurrection.” In June, a federal grand jury returned an indictment that charged him not only with bringing firearms for a “civil disorder” on Jan. 6, but also specifically with carrying the pistol on Capitol grounds. Late last month, prosecutors disclosed a photo of the gun for the first time, along with images from the Capitol that they said would support their case at trial.
At least 85 people are charged with carrying or using a weapon during the Capitol riots, according to BuzzFeed News’ analysis of court records……..
……….
Reffitt is one of three people charged with carrying a gun onto Capitol grounds; no one is charged so far with having a gun inside the building. Two others are charged with bringing guns and explosives to Washington. …….
…….[T]o focus only on guns is also to ignore the many other objects that rioters brought with them, stole from police, or improvised on the scene that could be used to hurt someone or break something……..
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:39 am………
Below are the main categories of weapons that prosecutors have identified in the more than 650 cases filed so far, with most defendants charged not yet convicted.
……….
Guns are not a requirement to attempt an insurrection. See the article for photographic evidence of guns, knives and axes, chemical sprays, flagpoles, electroshock devices, fire extinguishers, baseball bats, “Trump 2020” signs, fencing, crutches, crow bars, hockey sticks, and whips wielded by the insurrectionists.
It wasn;t what he wanted, but once it happened, maybe he hoped he could capitalize on it But right away he was concerned about his plans being derailed.
If anyone told them they would get a pardon, which is possible, they were being lied to and I don;t know that anybody has said that. Maybe they expected a pardon to occur in the natural course if events once Trump was re-elected.
They were being lied to later in January, about pardons,
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/01/12/fact-check-false-claim-pardons-those-involved-capitol-riot/6615362002/
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:40 am48. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 12/16/2021 @ 11:35 am
How come then nobody at the Capitol decoded him? Nobody warned anybody.
No one at all who was opposed to the storming of the Capitol decoded anything as calling for an attack.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:18 pmNow here there is something very interesting:
There are two versions of a text message from Donald Trump Jr. to Mark Meadows, that changes its meaning, It’s a text message! It can’t be misheard.
Version A:
https://news.yahoo.com/donald-trump-jr-led-text-161600608.html
The meaning of this is that Donald Trump couldn’t just turn the riot it on or off. The way, his son, Donald J. Trump Jr., wanted him to turn it off was by giving up his challenger to the election results. He needs to give an Oval Office address saying he is leaving the presidency. That would deflate them.
You know, like Nixon did in August 8, 1974.
But Version B goes:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/13/politics/trump-jr-text-mark-meadows-january-6/index.html
He has to lead now.
In this version Trump is inspiring the crowd.
Now who changed what? And which is the authentic version?
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:25 pmHas anyone been charged with attempting to overthrow the government of the united states? Sedition? Insurrection?
asset (023ea1) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:27 pmNo. They disagree with you about the fair way to allocate votes and feel a national popular vote would be more democratic. I think it’s bad policy, but equating it to stealing an election is a mischaracterization.
Time123 (f941c5) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:42 pmBuDuh — through legitimate procedure, they are placing people in positions of power (to do what they say they want to do) who have openly indicated their belief that the 2020 election was stolen through fraud, and who openly state that they will use the power of the state to overturn the will of the voters based on spurious fraud charges, if the voters don’t do vote the way the officials want.
It’s the biggest threat to our system since the civil war: people in positions of power arguing that elections cannot be trusted and promising to use their power to overturn decisions of the people with which they disagree.
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:47 pmBuDuh — i’m happy to support limits on campaign contributions. Or a requirement that the source of every dollar be accounted for. Or, better yet, complete public funding of elections. But without one of those things, how do you stop the wealthy from trying to buy election results?
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 12:50 pmLooking now at the actual text of the article, it seems to complain that Zuckerberg and his allies spent a small fortune providing grants to elections offices for the putative purpose of making voting safer (implicitly during the pandemic), that the money primarily went to left-leaning jurisdictions, and that it was used in nefarious ways that are generally not actually spelled out in the article — aside from (a) providing drop boxes and (b) paying for a mobile voting precinct.
I’m open to the possibility that the money was used in abusive ways, but … providing drop boxes and a mobile voting precinct are, IMO, decently good ideas *in that they make it easier for people to vote*. My county, for example, provided drop boxes as required by state law, and I (and most people I know) used them rather than the mail — they were cleared by the elections department daily and you could track online where in the process the ballot was, while the mail was just a black hole that might or might not get there.
One of the things your article links to says that the money came with strings attached and the threat of losing the money if the conditions weren’t complied with, which sounds *perfectly normal for a grant of any kind*, and utterly impossible to base a judgment on without a description of what the strings were (which the article doesn’t provide).
Another one complains about last minute changes to election law. *In general* I thought these changes were reasonable and good — going to a poorly ventilated public space filled with strangers waiting for the opportunity to vote (and voting) was *dangerous* in 2020 in a way it had never been before, and the danger presented by the emergency justified short-term fixes so that people were not forced to choose between a new-and-unacceptable-to-them-risk-of-death, on the one hand, and not voting, on the other. In many states, procedural rules make it impossible for the legislature to react within a six month window; this is *exactly* the situation for which executive discretion was designed. From 2022 onward I think it’s reasonable to expect the legislature to weigh in and to abide by their decision, but that’s after giving the legislature an entire term of office to react to the emergency. (And in my state, notably, the legislature *confirmed* all of the pandemic-related election law changes).
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:03 pmSammy — I cannot imagine that Trump Jr tried to convice his dad to *leave*. I think ‘he has to lead now’ is the natural thing to say in that circumstance. Hell, it’s what *I* was saying.
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:04 pm@55 “and promising to use their power to overturn decisions of the people with which they disagree.”
this is rich, coming from those who would still be trying to impeach trump had he won
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:05 pmJF — what’s the principled argument that it’s reasonable for the legislature of a state, *after* the state has voted, to decide to allocate electors to the loser of the popular vote?
Alternately, what’s the principled argument that it’s reasonable for executive officers to assert fraud with no evidence, and use that assertion as the basis for dismissing election results entirely?
These are the things *actively* being pushed by Trumpists in places like Michigan, Georgia, and Arizona.
Both of them represent a clear and present threat to our system of government.
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:08 pmNo, but he was obviously hoping that his rabid fans would scare legislators and Mike Pence into throwing out the votes of entire states and pronouncing him the winner.
It’s also obvious that fear of the Trump mob — either physical fear or just political risk — has influenced the behavior of many politicians.
It’s worrying that a profoundly self-centered man, who believes that whatever he does for his own benefit cannot possibly be wrong, has been turned into the moral center of a major political party, and that so many voters hold him to be the lodestar or patriotic virtue. As a consequence, too many in that party have embraced the view that whatever they do to win cannot be wrong.
Ah, so we shouldn’t be concerned about efforts to rig the next election so legislators can override their own state’s voters – unless perhaps they succeed in doing so. In which case the partisans will insist that it was the patriotic thing to do, and necessary to “save America.”
Radegunda (e7f153) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:08 pm@60 what was the principled argument for investigating an opposition campaign, and hamstringing an incoming administration by a two year fishing expedition?
or are we only interested in principled arguments starting from 2020?
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:37 pmThe IG of Trump’s own Justice Department concluded that there was “sufficient” evidence for the FBI to open in investigation into Russian meddling in 2016. The original tip came from a foreign government, and the target of the investigation was Russia. It turned out that people in the Trump campaign had an extraordinary degree of contacts with Russian operatives.
The Senate Intelligence Committee described several instances when Trump and members of his campaign were eager to accept help from Russia.
The Obama administration did not conspire with the Clinton campaign to prevent Trump from taking office. The Trump administration, on the other hand, did try to prevent the winner of the 2020 election from taking office, short of using force.
Trump’s fans think it’s glorious that he likes to trample on rules and norms. They think his clear deficit of personal virtue and integrity is an asset. Then they find it outrageous when their political enemies take note of his disregard for rules and his lack of integrity. “Our Great Leader would never try to cross the line or do anything dishonest!” they insist. “You just hate him for no reason at all!”
Radegunda (e7f153) — 12/16/2021 @ 2:15 pmThe stupid party couldn’t control a remote.
mg (8cbc69) — 12/16/2021 @ 2:32 pmTo me, more worrisome than Trump, who’s just a cheap grifter, are the gullible voters who, for some mysterious reason, have given up common sense and keep him on a pedestal. Without those voters, Trump would just be another powerless gas bag fouling up the air.
Dana (5395f9) — 12/16/2021 @ 2:39 pm> To me, more worrisome than Trump, who’s just a cheap grifter, are the gullible voters who, for some mysterious reason, have given up common sense and keep him on a pedestal.
The people they hate hate him, and he makes the people they hate furious. So he must be good.
aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 2:51 pm@63
My issue with this, was that “sufficient” evidence argument presupposed that there was actual, hard evidence that collusion was in the offering. Its the framing that was the issue, that politicized the whole thing.
Technically, yes, there was enough “there there” for the FBI to take a look. But that’s true for just about everything the FBI does. They just need a colorable reason to start an investigation, meaning you couldn’t trip over any obstacle if you tried to.
Frankly, it was recognized that the FBI should’ve closed the investigation early on, but it was the high-level leadership in the FBI who wanted to keep it going. That should send alarm bells in all of ya’lls heads.
There’s more than enough evidence that demonstrated that the Obama administration, and Obama officials continuing under Trump did everything they could to undermine the Trump administration.
Trump shouldn’t be anywhere near the Whitehouse, and he did some detestable things. Its fine to hate him and everything he has done. But what the Obama officials did to undermine a sitting President shouldn’t be ignored, and frankly, unfortunately, I fear that’s a precedent that’s going to happen again and again.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the next GOP President executes a purge throughout the executive branch to install “his peeps” throughout government, and I wouldn’t be surprised.
whembly (ae61f7) — 12/16/2021 @ 3:16 pmThe IG of Trump’s own Justice Department
the IG was an obama guy
JF (e1156d) — 12/16/2021 @ 3:19 pm@18. The Royalists keep reading the wrong message.
The near 82 year old, $15-a-pint-ice-cream-lady, third in line to the Oval, still doesn’t get it.
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 12/16/2021 @ 7:07 pmInsurrection is defined as “a violent uprising against an authority or government”. I don’t see a firearms requirement or established level of organization for the definition to apply. It was violent and it was an uprising against our federal government at its most vulnerable stage of transition. There are 125± criminally charged for assault and 50± charged with use/possession of dangerous weapons.
Paul Montagu (5de684) — 12/16/2021 @ 8:34 pmI don’t wish to demonize the rioters, lawbreakers though they were. I primarily blame Trump for starting this big fat lie, and for sticking to it, and for exerting his power and influence to try and throw out millions of popular votes. His adoring followers should’ve known better, and they’re responsible for allowing themselves to get chumped by this guy.
They were insurrections thousands of years before guns were even invented.
Jim Miller (edcec1) — 12/17/2021 @ 5:06 amAnother thing Trump’s enthralled want to be ignored — desperately want to be ignored — is that immediately before they went to the Capitol they went to Trump. It is a natural thing that they would not bring guns before The Presence. After Trump riled them up, they had no time to go and arm themselves before marching to the Capitol, and they relied on their numbers, the purity of their hearts, and God’s Will to grant them victory.
nk (1d9030) — 12/17/2021 @ 6:08 am58. aphrael (4c4719) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:04 pm
I can imagine that. Or maybe that’s right – he couldn’t try to convince his dad, because he was his son, but he wanted Mark Meadows to.
And what’s the practical effect anyway? Both words effectively mean give up, but “leave” means he has to acknowledge it, to himself.
And there is a difference between these two words in how DJT Jr sees the situation vs a vs Trump and the mob. “Lead” means he can direct them. “Leave” means that the only way to stop them is to withdraw his challenge to the election results.
Q. Was DJT Jr. one of those speaking about election fraud? I don’t think very many of Donald Trump’s people were. It was mostly or almost entirely Giuliani and people not previously acting as spokespeople. Did DJT Jr speak at all about this in public? I can find this on November 5 and Novebmer 6, 2020 – I found he was doing it Monday, November 9, 2020 but he goes at it obliquely
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8931713/Barr-OKs-election-probes-despite-little-evidence-fraud.html
The question is: Was he, at some point earlier than January 6, trying to discourage his father from pursuing this any more?
I think text messages and other communications that were not released could make things clearer.
You see one thing is that word “now” Trump needed to leave in two weeks, not “now”. But maybe he meant now that this has happened.
And why an Oval Office address? That’s addressed both to his supporters and his opponents. That;s a place to concede the election, not just for a press statement.
It’s a bit of awkward terminology. He has to “act” now a much better fit.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/17/2021 @ 11:30 amIt was a counterintelligence investigation, and some of the data it relied on was the result of a misunderstanding or false. There was no investigation of Trump until Andrew McCabe started one when he fired FBI Director James Comey and gave a false reason for it (false in obviously not being his motivation) calculated to appeal to Democrats, but it didn’t work. The firing was sudden. At first some Senators thought it was for misleading Congress in saying that Hillary’s emails were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop because they had been sent there for printing. Comey had to take that back, and the next thing anyone knew he was fired.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/17/2021 @ 11:37 amSammy, you’re talking about a text from a guy who invited a genuine, dyed-in-wool, undisputed, Putin agent, errand-runner and fixer, namely Natalia Veselnitskaya, to Trump’s New York campaign headquarters on the promise that she had dirt on Hillary. You know! A moron!
nk (1d9030) — 12/17/2021 @ 11:38 amnk (1d9030) — 12/17/2021 @ 11:38 am
He had some doubts whether it was true, and he must have told some people, and close to half a dozen people maybe wound up attending that meeting. It was touted to him as a leak from the chief prosecutor’s office.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 12/17/2021 @ 12:43 pm#16 Shootings and Bougaloo bois
I was talking an=bout looters shooting othe looters.
steveg (e81d76) — 12/17/2021 @ 6:16 pmEither robbing them for their reparations or else shooting rival gang members who showed up in a Target in disputed territoy.
Sorry I was not clear
Not a surprise that Kevin “small towns need to die” Williamson would make a dumb false dichotomy like this.
Factory Working Orphan (83e086) — 12/18/2021 @ 12:46 pm75.
I remember he let his father write an explanation of that meeting which was a half truth – what actully happened at that meeting more or less, but not what he had thought might happen – and then his father lied about that saying only that he had been consulted,
And then when that wasn’t working, he, probably acting on his own, maybe with some advice from someone, made public the email exchange that led to the meeting.
I had another rhought as to what “He has to leave now: means.
It means he has to LEAVE the residential area of the White House, or wherever he was, NOW and go to the Oval Office to make an address. It could mean he has to get going.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/18/2021 @ 6:03 pm“… Trumpist allies have been taking control of parts of state governments needed to ensure that their next attempt succeeds.”
SF: To try to ensure. It’s not actually succeeding in that many states.
And most of the states where they are, are anyway solidly Republican -almost as an ironclad rule. It’s still not good.
Radegunda (e7f153) — 12/16/2021 @ 1:08 pm
No we should be concerned – but they are a long way from succeeding.
I can’t imagine what would happen if they ever came close.
Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 12/18/2021 @ 9:09 pm