So now that DC riots are over ...

[Loren Pechtel]

It is not clear that the DC riots are over. There is some concern about the inauguration.

I suspect that Biden's inauguration would make the military deployment on September 11. 2002 look like small potatoes.

If Biden controlled it, yes. His Flatulence will be the one in charge, though.

 

[Jarhyn]

All participants are guilty of felony murder.

All Republicans will have to answer "yes" when asked whether they have been members of an organization promoting violent overthrow of the U.S. government.

The Civil War was started by Democrats.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that that's true. And let's grant, again, for the sake of argument, that the civil war was an attempt to violently overthrow the U.S. government.

The question isn't whether you are a member of an organization that has ever promoted the violent overthrow of the U.S. government.

In order to make sense, the question has to be about whether you were a member while the organization promoted the violent overthrow.

There's nothing wrong with being a member of an organization that promotes our violent overthrow after you quit being a member or before you join.

Two things: one, that the organization needs to recognize generally, that their overthrow was a problem and demonstrate that they are no longer interested in that. Which happened insofar as all the people who wanted the overthrow promptly became republicans.

Second, there is the issue of organizations which overthrew government for core ideological reasons central to their party, such as Nazis. Nazis don't get to "walk it back". They instead get to "walk to the end of the plank and then some".

But as I said, in the current situation, we're looking at a type 1.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We don't need the back-and-forth accusations of dishonesty!

 

[Swammerdami]

My question — Is the following post (#19) sincere? Or is it a sarcastic caricature? — is quite sincere. I will appreciate it if someone answers.

It's sincere.
He really does think he's supposed to think that the whole issue here is that no one has ever given The Right a chance to present the evidence for their cries of election fraud. In all, what, 56 court cases? No one ever listened to the evidence, ever gave them a chance to present it.
This is their story and they must stick to it in hte media.
They don't dare try to present it in court, or they'll be disbarred while jailed for contempt. But the Media narrative must be preserved, thus RVonse helps flog it. Else he must examine reality, and that'll be disconcerting.

Thanks. I'm relatively new here and trying to understand the players.

Obviously Rudy Giuliani, Ted Cruz, Alex Jones, etc. understand that they're full of shit, and are just lying to stoke the gullible masses. But that can't be RVonse's motive here at TFT. Does he actually believe the nonsense he's touting?

 

[TomC]

My question — Is the following post (#19) sincere? Or is it a sarcastic caricature? — is quite sincere. I will appreciate it if someone answers.

It's sincere.
He really does think he's supposed to think that the whole issue here is that no one has ever given The Right a chance to present the evidence for their cries of election fraud. In all, what, 56 court cases? No one ever listened to the evidence, ever gave them a chance to present it.
This is their story and they must stick to it in hte media.
They don't dare try to present it in court, or they'll be disbarred while jailed for contempt. But the Media narrative must be preserved, thus RVonse helps flog it. Else he must examine reality, and that'll be disconcerting.

Thanks. I'm relatively new here and trying to understand the players.

Obviously Rudy Giuliani, Ted Cruz, Alex Jones, etc. understand that they're full of shit, and are just lying to stoke the gullible masses. But that can't be RVonse's motive here at TFT. Does he actually believe the nonsense he's touting?

I'm not going to speak for another TFT member, but around here people who believe that are legion.
Tom

 

[Jarhyn]

Wait a goddamn second... Weren't these folks BAWWWing over Trump getting denied a platform by private businesses the same ones arguing for a right of private business to not make gay wedding cakes? That there will be free market solutions to the lack of straight bakers, and all that?

I guess that position aged like milk...

Then, deplatforming isn't incompatible with the argument that a cake shop owner should have a right to decide on messages they will not put on cakes, but that they must offer different customers the same service without respect to who they are.

 

[TomC]

It is not clear that the DC riots are over. There is some concern about the inauguration.

I suspect that Biden's inauguration would make the military deployment on September 11. 2002 look like small potatoes.

If Biden controlled it, yes. His Flatulence will be the one in charge, though.

I'm not sure Trump will have as much influence as he might have had prior to last Wednesday.
Tom

 

[TomC]

Let's say you get kicked out of five bars because you are black and the five owners are racist. Just because a government did not order them to kick you out does not make their behavior right.

Suppose you got kicked out of five bars for dealing drugs, starting fights, and not paying your tab.

Claiming that you got kicked out because you're black doesn't make the bar staff racists.
Tom

 

[Bomb#20]

The Civil War was started by Democrats.

Dang, you're swinging wildly.

It actually wasn't. Assuming that what you mean by Civil War was the War of Northern Aggression. That wasn't really a Civil War.
Tom

According to Wikipedia it was Jefferson Davis who ordered the attack on Fort Sumter, and he was a Democrat. Are you defining some other event as the start of the war?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

It is your side who has 'complete lack of empathy for people who are different'.

Demonstrate it. Because from the right wing all I see are accusations of Democrats being "communists and pedophiles".

 

[ideologyhunter]

Trump on the Caravan: "Can we shoot them? Can we shoot them in the legs?"
Trump on the Jan. Sixers: "We love you. You're very special."

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The Civil War was started by Democrats.

Dang, you're swinging wildly.

It actually wasn't. Assuming that what you mean by Civil War was the War of Northern Aggression. That wasn't really a Civil War.
Tom

According to Wikipedia it was Jefferson Davis who ordered the attack on Fort Sumter, and he was a Democrat. Are you defining some other event as the start of the war?

Does this mean the democrats today support slavery? What's the relevance of this?

 

[Bomb#20]

Does this mean the democrats today support slavery? What's the relevance of this?

I just thought it was a bizarre claim, and wanted an explanation. But its relevance is the same as the relevance of calling the Republicans an "organization promoting violent overthrow of the U.S. government", as though the rioters had been put up to it by a political party and not by one narcissistic jackass. So if you think it's a derail, that lies at post #84's door.

 

[laughing dog]

Does this mean the democrats today support slavery? What's the relevance of this?

I just thought it was a bizarre claim, and wanted an explanation. But its relevance is the same as the relevance of calling the Republicans an "organization promoting violent overthrow of the U.S. government", as though the rioters had been put up to it by a political party and not by one narcissistic jackass. So if you think it's a derail, that lies at post #84's door.

While it may not have been part of the GOP platform, there were plenty of elected Republican officials who enabled (and fostered) the malicious lie about a rigged or stolen election. There were 147 GOP members of Congress who voted to support Mr. Trump's lies.

 

[Bomb#20]

While it may not have been part of the GOP platform, there were plenty of elected Republican officials who enabled (and fostered) the malicious lie about a rigged or stolen election. There were 147 GOP members of Congress who voted to support Mr. Trump's lies.

And? Fostering malicious lies is pretty much a congressthing's job description. If it's seditious to vote the wrong way, why is the question up for a vote in the first place?

 

[laughing dog]

While it may not have been part of the GOP platform, there were plenty of elected Republican officials who enabled (and fostered) the malicious lie about a rigged or stolen election. There were 147 GOP members of Congress who voted to support Mr. Trump's lies.

And? Fostering malicious lies is pretty much a congressthing's job description.

Nope. More importantly, you missed the point that Mr. Trump had lots of help in spreading and fomenting that mob.

If it's seditious to vote the wrong way, why is the question up for a vote in the first place?

Straw man much?

e

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Trump on the Caravan: "Can we shoot them? Can we shoot them in the legs?"
Trump on the Jan. Sixers: "We love you. You're very special."

Yes. Also, he suggested executing leakers.

And during his rallies, he endorsed violence against protestors who snuck in.

We should make a long list of these endorsements.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

While it may not have been part of the GOP platform, there were plenty of elected Republican officials who enabled (and fostered) the malicious lie about a rigged or stolen election. There were 147 GOP members of Congress who voted to support Mr. Trump's lies.

And? Fostering malicious lies is pretty much a congressthing's job description. If it's seditious to vote the wrong way, why is the question up for a vote in the first place?

Isn't that where is lies the weakness of Democracy? When one side lacks the care to sustaining Democracy, it is possible to seize the power... presuming a few other things are in step with their moves.

The question was up for a vote in the first place because at least one House and Senate member agreed to contest an election in Arizona because...

...

...

...

Not because there was a mountain of evidence of fraud and voter intimidation as there was in 1876 but because...

...

...

...

It was a lie, they knew it was a lie, and that is why it is seditious! This isn't a political disagreement. This is flat out election fraud on the part of too many GOP politicians. It was a lie so well repeated by AM Media and the GOP, especially the President, that a lot of people went to seize the Capitol Building to fight against the tyranny that was this election theft. Yeah. Seditious.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

While it may not have been part of the GOP platform, there were plenty of elected Republican officials who enabled (and fostered) the malicious lie about a rigged or stolen election. There were 147 GOP members of Congress who voted to support Mr. Trump's lies.

And? Fostering malicious lies is pretty much a congressthing's job description. If it's seditious to vote the wrong way, why is the question up for a vote in the first place?

Isn't that where is lies the weakness of Democracy? When one side lacks the care to sustaining Democracy, it is possible to seize the power... presuming a few other things are in step with their moves.

The question was up for a vote in the first place because at least one House and Senate member agreed to contest an election in Arizona because...

...

...

...

Not because there was a mountain of evidence of fraud and voter intimidation as there was in 1876 but because...

...

...

...

It was a lie, they knew it was a lie, and that is why it is seditious! This isn't a political disagreement. This is flat out election fraud on the part of too many GOP politicians. It was a lie so well repeated by AM Media and the GOP, especially the President, that a lot of people went to seize the Capitol Building to fight against the tyranny that was this election theft. Yeah. Seditious.

You seem to misunderstand, Jimmy. The mob of rioters and looters at the capitol weren't being malicious or seditious, they were only being political. And like their GOP backers and cheerleaders in congress were only exercising their right to free speech.

 

[TomC]

The Civil War was started by Democrats.

Dang, you're swinging wildly.

It actually wasn't. Assuming that what you mean by Civil War was the War of Northern Aggression. That wasn't really a Civil War.
Tom

According to Wikipedia it was Jefferson Davis who ordered the attack on Fort Sumter, and he was a Democrat. Are you defining some other event as the start of the war?

I don't want to start a big derail.

So I'll just point out that anyone who looks at the big picture of that conflict can see that what happened at Sumter was the locals driving off an invasion force from a hostile foreign power.
Tom