A few thoughts about January 6, 2021

[tstorm823]

Nothing on the level of endorsing a death threat or endorsing beating someone into unconsciousness, mind you.

Put a bullet in him? Blow up the White House? Actor assassinating the president? None of that rises to an endorsement of death?

There's also quite a difference between saying "I feel like doing X" and saying "if other people do this, it's good and right". The former reads like an expression of personal anger and frustration; I could say I certainly feel like giving Trump (and Biden) a punch. It's true, I do. You'll notice that nobody took these statements as instructions or encouragements, because they obviously weren't.

A man just drove across the country to try to murder Brett Kavanaugh.

 

[Silvanus]

Put a bullet in him? Blow up the White House? Actor assassinating the president? None of that rises to an endorsement of death?

"Put a bullet in Donald Trump" rises to that level-- unfortunately for you, that line was from Rick Wilson, who was a Republican at the time (statement was in 2015; he became independent in 2017).

The other two statements were from Johnny Depp and Madonna.

So you essentially want to blame Democrats for the statements made by three people who aren't actually members or officials of the party, one of whom was an avowed Republican.

A man just drove across the country to try to murder Brett Kavanaugh.

Yep. Not encouraged by Democrats to do so.

I mean, Democrats for the most part have been milquetoast as fuck towards the Republicans. They play softball, while the Republicans hurl Molotovs full of excrement.

 

[Hades]

One man driving across the country to murder Brett is obviously an attempted murder

But when men violently storm a building, shouting loudly about how they wish to hang someone and scour the halls looking for him then people go ''But are we sure they REALLY wanted to hang Mike Pence? Maybe they just wanted to hang out WITH Mike Pence''

I don't think any would be assassin for Kavanaugh should be accepted, but the people most concerned about this seem to me like the same people who blow off murder attempt when the target isn't a far right Republican. They aren't shocked that someone would want to do harm to a public figure, but they are shocked that the target is a pubic figure that's on their side. Had it been Jackson they wouldn't have cared or quasi innocently ask ''but did they REALLY want to kill her?''

 

[tstorm823]

One man driving across the country to murder Brett is obviously an attempted murder

But when men violently storm a building, shouting loudly about how they wish to hang someone and scour the halls looking for him then people go ''But are we sure they REALLY wanted to hang Mike Pence? Maybe they just wanted to hang out WITH Mike Pence''

I don't think any would be assassin for Kavanaugh should be accepted, but the people most concerned about this seem to me like the same people who blow off murder attempt when the target isn't a far right Republican. They aren't shocked that someone would want to do harm to a public figure, but they are shocked that the target is a pubic figure that's on their side. Had it been Jackson they wouldn't have cared or quasi innocently ask ''but did they REALLY want to kill her?''

Nah, the people who entered the Capital with weapons and zipties should be (and are) prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as is the would be Kavanaugh assassin. That's not being debated. The subject of debate is how much blame to lay on the rhetoric of politicians, which I would universally put little blame on anyone other than the actual criminals in either case. And the conspiracy theories are about criminals being instructed by politicians to commit their crime, which is nonsense in either case. All the people who entered the capital by force committed at least some level of crime, and some were worse than others. Nobody here is going to suggest otherwise.

 

[tippy2k2]

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

Rep. Bennie Thompson indicated it's up to the Justice Department to decide on its own whether to pursue criminal prosecutions.

www.nbcnews.com

Someone explain it to me like I'm five what the point of a giant investigation is for if you're going to do fuck all with the info you gather?

It's been in the hands of the Justice Department for a year and a half what to do. Nothing in this investigation is new information. No one is shocked Pikachu faced over these findings.

Maybe there's something I'm missing but it seems pointless. No one is going to have their minds changed by this committee's findings and if no one (in power that is) is going to be held accountable anyway, why are we bothering?

 

[Agema]

Someone explain it to me like I'm five what the point of a giant investigation is for if you're going to do fuck all with the info you gather?

A range of possibilities, such as:
1. Ensure there's an official record
2. Might convince at least some people, and sometimes even just a few is enough
3. Useful headlines and political capital
4. You might not use that info to prosecute, but someone else might.

 

[tippy2k2]

A range of possibilities, such as:
1. Ensure there's an official record
2. Might convince at least some people, and sometimes even just a few is enough
3. Useful headlines and political capital
4. You might not use that info to prosecute, but someone else might.

I guess your faith in...well... everything is a lot higher than mine.

 

[Agema]

I guess your faith in...well... everything is a lot higher than mine.

Well, aside from the official record stuff, none of it might work. But if you do nothing at all, it's guaranteed nothing will happen.

 

[tstorm823]

Someone explain it to me like I'm five what the point of a giant investigation is for if you're going to do fuck all with the info you gather?

They get to campaign using public funding.

 

[Hades]

Nah, the people who entered the Capital with weapons and zipties should be (and are) prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as is the would be Kavanaugh assassin. That's not being debated.

Perhaps if we're generous not debated by the powers that be. But among the Republican base its a consistent talking point that January six wasn't that bad, and the idea that the insurrectionist were out to murder Pence is often dismissed.

 

[Trunkage]

I guess your faith in...well... everything is a lot higher than mine.

Did the Pentagon papers being read out lead to arrests?

Does it mean that it shouldn't be read out if there are no arrests?

 

[Trunkage]

Perhaps if we're generous not debated by the powers that be. But among the Republican base its a consistent talking point that January six wasn't that bad, and the idea that the insurrectionist were out to murder Pence is often dismissed.

That's not what Tstorm is saying

Their saying that you can only charge those that physically turned up

Conversely, dont bother looking at anyone who set up the situation and sent people to get into trouble. If you tell some you should go and riot at the capital, its not the speakers fault, its the listeners

 

[tippy2k2]

Did the Pentagon papers being read out lead to arrests?

Does it mean that it shouldn't be read out if there are no arrests?

We're spending millions of dollars to investigate a crime that they have no intention of doing anything with the information they gathered.

I am not familiar with The Pentagon Papers except for what I just looked up but from what it looks like, that was released decades after the events occurred and no one who was involved in it still had any power. Right now they're actively investigating people who are right now in power (or will likely go for power next election in the case of Trump) and they have decided to do absolutely nothing with it.

Maybe I'm the weird one here but yeah, if you have no intention of actually doing anything with this information, then quit wasting a bunch of money doing an investigation you won't be punishing anyone for. At this point, the people watching this are just affirming what they already believe (Trump attempted a coup!) and the people who are on Team Trump won't pay any attention to the proceedings anyway (it's just all fake news from the lamestream liberal media!).

This isn't some history thing where they're revealing past sins, the people being investigated are actively part of the government or will likely attempt to be elected again in 2024. What the hell is the point of this investigation if you just plan on doing nothing with the information you gather? It's hard to take anything revealed in this process very seriously when we know that nothing will come of it.

 

[Silvanus]

I am not familiar with The Pentagon Papers except for what I just looked up but from what it looks like, that was released decades after the events occurred and no one who was involved in it still had any power. Right now they're actively investigating people who are right now in power (or will likely go for power next election in the case of Trump) and they have decided to do absolutely nothing with it.

This battle has always, first and foremost, been a battle of public perception.

Just as with the impeachment, the intention is to make malfeasance as widely publicised and recognised as possible, to nudge public opinion against the perpetrators. It's weak, but you use the tools you have.

Besides, you and I both know that If they didn't bother to investigate, there'd be a loud chorus from the left of the party (and rightly so) that their silence is complicity.

 

[tippy2k2]

This battle has always, first and foremost, been a battle of public perception.

Just as with the impeachment, the intention is to make malfeasance as widely publicised and recognised as possible, to nudge public opinion against the perpetrators. It's weak, but you use the tools you have.

Besides, you and I both know that If they didn't bother to investigate, there'd be a loud chorus from the left of the party (and rightly so) that their silence is complicity.

Speaking of impeachment, I think that (and the Mueller Report) are the two major reasons I've become so...I don't know if bitter is the right word but I'm going with that over this committee.

They've shown already on two separate occasions that absolutely nothing will happen with this investigation, even if you want to say that the justice department could take action with what is uncovered. Especially with the Mueller Report, they uncovered some pretty shitty stuff and revealed to everyone what happened and then...nothing.

The Public didn't give a shit (you were pro or anti trump pre report and nothing in that report changed your thoughts) and a whole lot of nothing happened to anyone legally even though some pretty damning stuff popped out.

I guess I'm just getting really sick of people being investigated, them finding a lot of shit, and then a lot of nothing happening. Nobody in power is ever going to be punished and I'm getting really sick of them pretending otherwise.

 

[Silvanus]

Speaking of impeachment, I think that (and the Mueller Report) are the two major reasons I've become so...I don't know if bitter is the right word but I'm going with that over this committee.

They've shown already on two separate occasions that absolutely nothing will happen with this investigation, even if you want to say that the justice department could take action with what is uncovered. Especially with the Mueller Report, they uncovered some pretty shitty stuff and revealed to everyone what happened and then...nothing.

The Public didn't give a shit (you were pro or anti trump pre report and nothing in that report changed your thoughts) and a whole lot of nothing happened to anyone legally even though some pretty damning stuff popped out.

I guess I'm just getting really sick of people being investigated, them finding a lot of shit, and then a lot of nothing happening. Nobody in power is ever going to be punished and I'm getting really sick of them pretending otherwise.

It's immensely unjust that nothing gets done with the information. But those with the power to take legal, punitive actions aren't the same people who do the investigating. They're different bodies by design.

 

[Agema]

Maybe I'm the weird one here but yeah, if you have no intention of actually doing anything with this information, then quit wasting a bunch of money doing an investigation you won't be punishing anyone for. At this point, the people watching this are just affirming what they already believe (Trump attempted a coup!) and the people who are on Team Trump won't pay any attention to the proceedings anyway (it's just all fake news from the lamestream liberal media!).

I disagree in the sense that I think there is an intrinsic value in having official investigations into matters of major public importance, just for the sake of public record.

In a sense, we should be very bothered if a government experiences the shock of a violent mob storming its parliament and does nothing at all, because looking at big stuff that happens is part of what the government is for, even if there aren't a lot of actionable items from their investigation.

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Every sleazy corrupt action and collaboration should at the very least be made official public record for the sake of some semblance of transparency. Getting a look behind the veil of their self-indulgent processes is immensely valuable for further understanding of the various personalities most aggressively building hurdles against any attempt made towards healthy change or even just due process, now the bar has been lowered this far.

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/16/trump-put-pence-more-danger-than-we-knew/

We knew about that brush with danger. During the hearing on Thursday of the House select committee investigating the riot, we learned about the second — one that came after Donald Trump had specifically targeted his vice president with tweeted words of condemnation.

A lot happened between 2 and 2:30 p.m. on that day. At 2:12 p.m., a member of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group smashed a window with a stolen police shield and rioters began flooding into the Capitol. At 2:13 p.m., Pence was evacuated and, shortly afterward, arrived in that nearby office. Chris Hodgson, Pence’s director of legislative affairs, told the committee’s investigators that, soon after, “the noise from the rioters became audible.”

A few minutes later, Fox News aired an interview with a Trump supporter who expressed frustration at Pence’s by-then public refusal to accede to Trump’s plan to reject the electoral votes submitted by states. Shortly after that, Trump — quite possibly watching Fox’s coverage — tweeted a condemnation of Pence:

“Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!”

During Thursday’s hearing, the committee played several snippets of video showing Trump supporters reacting both to Pence’s initial refusal to play along with Trump’s plan and to Trump’s tweet about it. In a prepared video, the committee noted that the tweet was followed quickly by a new push from the rioters in multiple locations.

Around 2:25 p.m., the video stated, Pence was evacuated from the ceremonial office down some stairs to a more secure location. In an animation, the committee showed how close the rioters were as that evacuation was taking place: 40 feet.

This is important information for several reasons.

One is that it reinforces that the danger to Pence was ongoing. Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) revealed in the hearing that “a confidential informant from the Proud Boys told the FBI the Proud Boys would have killed Mike Pence if given a chance.” Given that members of the Proud Boys were both among the earliest arrivals inside the building and had a demonstrated predilection for violence, that’s not an idle threat.

Another is that it reveals that Pence was in peril even after Trump’s tweet.

The crowd was already furious at Pence; Trump’s tweet seemed like “pouring gasoline on the fire,” as one former White House aide said in recorded testimony. That’s because the staff — and, almost certainly, Trump — knew about the violence that was already underway at the Capitol, another significant revelation that emerged from the hearing.

Ben Williamson, an aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, texted Meadows at 2:02 p.m. suggesting that “we may want to put out some sort of statement because the situation was getting a little hairy over at the Capitol,” as he put it. He then went down to see Meadows to reiterate the recommendation. Meadows quickly got up and left the room. In a separate bit of testimony aired during the hearing, Williamson described following Meadows to the Oval Office — suggesting he was going to speak with Trump.

Aguilar stated during the hearing that Meadows probably knew about the violence even before that. (By 1:50 p.m., rioters had reached the scaffolding in place for the inauguration.)

“We received testimony that the president’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, was notified of the violence at the Capitol by 2 p.m. and likely earlier,” Aguilar said. “The testimony further establishes that Mr. Meadows quickly informed the president and that he did so before the president issued his 2:24 p.m. tweet criticizing Vice President Pence.”

Again, though, this was only the last point at which Trump intentionally directed the mob’s anger at Pence. In his speech during the rally at the Ellipse, Trump repeatedly insisted that everything hinged on the vice president’s decision — though multiple advisers had informed Trump and his team that Pence had no power to derail Joe Biden’s inauguration.

“Our investigation found that early drafts of the January 6 Ellipse speech prepared for the president,” Aguilar stated at another point, “included no mention of the vice president.”

So Trump’s excoriations of his vice president in that speech — for example: “Mike Pence, I hope you’re going to stand up for the good of our Constitution and for the good of our country, and if you’re not, I’m going to be very disappointed in you” — were late additions meant either to put pressure on Pence directly or to spur the crowd to do so.

Pence’s team members had warned the Secret Service the day prior that they expected the vice president to be a focus of anger on Jan. 6; they understood what it meant to buck Trump on this. Sure enough, just before 2:30 p.m. on Jan. 6, Pence and his family were being hustled to a new, more secure position in the Capitol with rioters 40 feet away.

At that same moment, Trump was busy: trying to leverage the delay in the counting of the electoral votes to make phone calls pressuring senators to reject the submitted votes. In other words, to do what Pence had understood he had no power to do.

“Did Donald Trump ever call the vice president to check on his safety?” Aguilar asked Greg Jacob, a Pence attorney who testified on Thursday.

“He did not,” Jacob replied.

Was 'America's Frontline Doctor' Simone Gold at US Capitol Attack?

Readers may remember Gold from the notorious "White Coat Summit" of 2020.

www.snopes.com

 

[bluegate]

Was 'America's Frontline Doctor' Simone Gold at US Capitol Attack?

Readers may remember Gold from the notorious "White Coat Summit" of 2020.

www.snopes.com

Only two months?

Couldn't they have found some drugs on her person?