January 10, 2021

If Trump knew there was a plan to storm the Capitol building, then his speech to the crowd was an incitement, even though he never told the crowd to commit any act of violence.

2 days ago, I read Trump's speech looking for any language that could support the claim that he incited the crowd to storm the Capitol. I wrote a post listing the 7 most violence-inducing statements. They're about fighting and showing strength and never giving up, but they're all consistent with an idea of having a big, traditional street protest — with lots of people marching and displaying their passion for the cause through big numbers, determined-looking faces, and lots words on signs and in chants and speeches. 

But what if Trump knew there was a plan to storm the Capitol? Then all those words are transformed! They become an incitement to the violence, especially if the people in the crowd know he knows. The avoidance of references to violence would be part of a shared understanding — like winking. We know what we're going to do. 

Now, at this point, I don't even know that there was a plan. 

Yesterday, I wrote about a New Yorker article titled "A Palm Beach Proud Boy at the Putsch," and, in the comments, Bob Boyd said, "Putsch implies a plan. There was no plan. It was a protest that turned into a riot." 

I replied: "That's your hypothesis. I await investigations. You have no way to know the extent to which subdivisions of the crowd were acting according to a plan." 

I'm not going to assume either way. Was there a plan or wasn't there? If there was a plan, when did it develop and who knew about it? If it was talked about on social media, the record exists. Wouldn't the FBI have seen it in advance and communicated to the President about it? But then, why was the Capitol not fully protected?! The vulnerability of the Capitol raises the inference that there was no advance knowledge of a plan.

This morning, I'm seeing this at Buzzfeed
The first glimpse of the deadly tragedy that was about to unfold came at 9 a.m. on the morning of the insurrection for one Black veteran of the US Capitol Police....
“I found out what they were planning when a friend of mine screenshot me an Instagram story from the Proud Boys saying, ‘We’re breaching the capitol today, guys. I hope y’all ready.’” 

Now, that's 9 a.m. on the day of the protest, so it could be a plan that arose at the last minute. But Trump's speech did not begin until 1:11 p.m. That's 4 hours of lead time. Perhaps that Capital Police officer is lying or mistaken or perhaps he doesn't exist at all and Buzzfeed is wrong. But it's a fact that can be checked with Instagram. And I want to see all that there in social media, all the evidence of a plan, and what law enforcement knew about this plan, whether Trump was informed, and why there wasn't better protection of the Capitol. 

I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd to breach the Capitol. You can see that in my 7 statements post. But if he was informed of a plan, then I will read all of those statements as an incitement, and I would have to say that he should resign.

436 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 436   Newer›   Newest»
hombre said...

When did a Trump crowd behave like this - ever? What does the behavior remind you of? Does the guy breaking the window by repeatedly pounding the corner until stopped by a middle aged Trumper appear to be experienced? Does the guy dressed in black except for a MAGA hat jumping the railing seem familiar? Who is John Sullivan and why was he in the vanguard of the riot? What is the definition of “agent provocateur?” Why was Sullivan released when others were not?

These are better questions than, “Did Trump know?”


Robert Cook said...

"Fifty fucking cities burned in a coordinated effort of leftist violence for weeks on end with all prominent Democrats literally cheering them on."

Did they? When and how?

MadTownGuy said...

From the post:

"I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd to breach the Capitol. You can see that in my 7 statements post. But if he was informed of a plan, then I will read all of those statements as an incitement, and I would have to say that he should resign."

Hypothetical situation: if our blog hist were defense counsel for Mr. Trump, and the foregoing evidence were presented in court to make the case for guilt, would it controvert her client's plea of innocence? I'm not trained in law, so I ask the question.

Conversely, to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, would there not have to be an audit trail (paper or digital) showing that Mr. Trump were informed before finalizing his speech and delivering it? Otherwise, all we have is the dubious standard of guilt in the court of public opinion.

Freder Frederson said...

Freder sez: "Your speech is violence, our violence is speech!"

I have consistently condemned violence by both sides. So fuck you.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Robert Creamer had a plan and met in the Obama White House numerous times to fine tune the plan. But The Sloppy Althouse is too disordered in her blinkered thinking to even bother to pretend to care.

"I'll be dead before what I reaped is suffered by others hence I am history's greatest champion" defines this dynamic Keynesian cruelty.

The Althouse tribe surely knows they are ending what once was an agreement called America, because of the infinite hatred they have that has consumed all other emotions.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

I expected violent resistance to the crazy lockdowns and might have said so on here but I never advocated. I’m so tired of STRICT SCRUTINY being applied to some while others get away with worse crimes in public and have the Media-DNC complex cover for them. I never felt Althouse endorsed this two-tiered injustice until today. Sad.

Qwinn said...

Freder: Did you ever suggest that Harris and Pelosi resign for actively endorsing and aiding and abetting that violence, in far more direct ways than anything Trump has said?

Then fuck you sideways, buddy.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Remember Kathy Griffin’s bloody head? Good times man!

Bob Boyd said...

It was poorly planned, but there were definitely some in the mob planning a coup. If not to "arrest" members of Congress, why were several people equipped with flexi-cuffs?

Not sure what your point is Freder.
There was a hundred thousand people. I saw a picture of one with cuffs. Did he bring them or did he find them in Capitol somewhere or swipe them from a cop? Who knows?

99,999 people didn't bring flexi-cuffs. Did they just forget?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

dreams said... Uh oh, it seems Althouse has succumbed to the liberal mob and is now in CYA mode.

This is my feeling on the recent postings as well. CYA and hope the "mob" of liberal prudes won't take down the blog for not kowtowing to the approved right-thinking.

Like those signs on the front yard that say...HEY BLM people...I'm on your side...please don't burn down my house. Of course. That didn't work and they trashed the property anyway.

First they came for the Twitter accounts but I didn't have one so...............

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

You've been very judicious Ann. My wife is a Trump hater, I am not, and I admitted to her today that Trump's behaviour since election day confirms the stereotype that he is inclined to live in a very small world of his own feelings. He was right in the summer to point out flaws in the "new" mail-in systems--lacking elementary security features of in-person voting, worse than Florida. But at some point weeks ago he should have admitted defeat, time to move on, reconciliation and unity, peaceful transition of power, etc. The Ellipse speech at best was a provocation to people who were already angry, and something like the opposite of what he should have said. He should have committed to being present at the Inauguration.

Yesterday I thought he was not guilty of inciting a riot: I relied partly on Kaus, although it made a difference to me when Coulter said at best the speech was "assholery," and came close to saying "shame if the Capitol is somehow burned down." If he knew people were already thinking of violence, and said what he said, there is probably a case for incitement and the law should take its course. Pence shouldn't pardon him. It doesn't really matter if many of the protestors were just goofs, or whatever.

Clayton Hennesey said...

At this point, with the technocrat tanks - count the Mozilla Foundation in that number now as well - rolling into Poland in pursuit of Parler and anyone else deviating from the woke-approved narrative I have chosen to view criticism of the events of January 6 as nothing more than the mewlings of subjects of King George at the nerve of those colonists to stand up on her hind legs and throw perfectly good tea in the harbor.

There is no more neutrality, and remaining a wholly-owned creature of Google erodes one's credibility by the hour.

Qwinn said...

If Trump had said something like "We will be raising bail money for anyone who are arrested during the protests", I would agree that would count as incitement. "Do what you want, we'll make sure there are no repercussions." is what that would say.

Kamala Harris did exactly that.

dreams said...

And now, even Althouse has been exposed as a faux profile in courage.

D.D. Driver said...

I am interested. Thanks. I skimmed through that thread and found a few commenters warning about violence but only one commenter predicting violence. It was you. @5:46 PM

LOL. For the record: you got me.

I immediately went to see what I possibly could have said that could have been construed as such....

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

I didn't like it when, in Trump's speech, he eluded to an idea where somehow Pence could be the super-hero.

The ship sailed... the democrats cheated in targeted blue precincts. Nobody can stop them. Big tech hid Biden family corruption. We know this.
But Pence cannot change it.

Bob Boyd said...

I'm going to repost my comment responding to Professor Althouse mentioning me on the front page because it fell right before the page change, which is just bad luck.


Yesterday...in the comments, Bob Boyd said, "Putsch implies a plan. There was no plan. It was a protest that turned into a riot."

Yesterday in the comments we were talking about a Putsch, not about taking the demonstration from the street into the building. Putsch was defined, in the post I was commenting on thusly:

A "Putsch" is "An attempt to overthrow a government, esp. by violent means; an insurrection or coup d'état." That's the OED.

I think we need to differentiate between a Putsch and a breach. There's a big difference. Were some hotter headed protestors talking big online before the march? Out of a hundred thousand people? Doubtless.
Is that planning a Coup or an insurrection? I'd say no. Does it even rise to the level of a plan of any kind? I suppose, in the sense of expressing an intention, it could be called a plan, but in the sense of a detailed proposal for achieving something, I'd say we haven't established that.

IMO, the reason the media wants to call this a Putsch or a coup is, they need to make it more than a protest. They have been praising violent protests all year and there are probably more BLM and Antifa protests to come. They can't come out against protests now.
I haven't seen any evidence that the protestors at the Capitol wanted to do anything more than shake their fists under the noses of the Congressmen and Senators who they feel have betrayed their oaths. I don't have any reason to think they had any intention of setting themselves up as the new rulers of America. They wanted to be heard, not ignored, then go home.
I don't know what Trump was thinking, but you can't reasonably claim he was plotting a Coup because some guy got wound up and popped off on Instagram.

Meade said...

For the record, Mr. Driver, I appreciate the lawyerly way you engage in polemics. Scrubbing evidence — not so much. (Though I say that with empathy.)

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Fascinating that all these fresh names support Althouse’s thoughtful and specious condemnation of trump. Fascinating.

Earnest Prole said...

I believe the actual federal crime of incitement requires a specific, unambiguous request or demand for violent acts. But if you’re talking about incitement in a more general (and still impeachable) sense, sure.

hombre said...

Proud Boys have become Whipping Boys mostly for defending themselves. Democrats are trying to erase the Trump movement just as they erased the Tea Party movement. They got caught corrupting the IRS for the latter. Now their efforts are more brazen and more corrupt.

Trouble is, denying aggrieved citizens a platform leave only a couple of alternatives, the street or the gulag. Most will choose the street - or maybe the hills.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Like ultra-rich Anti-space Assed Shat-bul, I am richer than over a billion Chinese and in addition over a billion Indians.

So tuck you I am the (worldwide) 1%!!

Qwinn said...

Some serious arrests going down in Italy right now, as we speak. Arrests for interfering in the election.

Signed affidavits from a man confessing to participating in the election theft, including backups of the computer systems used to pull it off, in exchange for protection.

Trump said during the speech, "wait till you see what comes out in the next few days". And suddenly. every single tech giant collides to silence him, and the move to impeach goes into ludicrous speed.

The Left couldn't be acting more like cornered rats, like criminals desperate to cover up their crimes, if they tried.

stonethrower said...

Ann Althouse said, "I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd ..." My take is that this statement is supposed to show that Althouse is reasonable and fair.
Think about the phrase "held off from believing." Wow! Way to go! Such bloody restraint.

Freder Frederson said...

Freder: Did you ever suggest that Harris and Pelosi resign for actively endorsing and aiding and abetting that violence, in far more direct ways than anything Trump has said?

If you can provide the actual statements that you claimed "actively endorsed and aided and abetted the violence", then maybe I will consider it.

And it has to rise above the level of "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".

Qwinn said...

Freder: Are you suggesting that raising bail money for those committing violence doesn't qualify as aiding and abetting? Cause you have to have seen Harris's posts raising money for them by now.

stonethrower said...

Bravo, hombre. What he said.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

The video showing clearly the police letting people into the building - will not be reported by the MSM.

The top BLM guy was in there and some Antifa (hoe many? 0 -we will never know. Doesn't fit the narrative.

Bilwick said...

I for one am happy that the Spirit of 1776 is alive somewhere.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Freder your selective editing and repeating of the vinnie barbarino act with “what example? Where?” caused me to go way back to 8:56 for just one example of you being a devious Dick:

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
As usual the conspiracy theorists ignore EXPLICIT CALLS FOR PEACEFUL PROTEST in favor of their ever useful dog whistle bullshit. Althouse tacitly endorses leftist violence by her selective criticism. She never called for lying “fine people” Joe or “the riots hee hee won’t stop!” Harris to step down or be shunned.

1/10/21, 8:56 AM

Either address Harris’s blatant incitement or drop your sad act and ban yourself for trolling here.

Matt Sablan said...

"The top BLM guy was in there and some Antifa (hoe many? 0 -we will never know."

-- I'm most frustrated by the Insurrection USA guy who was not arrested, despite being part of the breach and admitting he encouraged people to burn it down and threatened police.

Freder Frederson said...

Some serious arrests going down in Italy right now, as we speak. Arrests for interfering in the election.

It would be nice when you make these outrageous claims if you could link to an actual source.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Mike of Snoqualmie-

We cannot Impeach Biden without the house and senate.

That's why the left installed Biden and they are working overtime to make sure their vote fraud machine spreads like metastasized cancer.

yes - Biden should face investigation and impeachment.

where is the FBI? oh right.

LawGuy5000 said...

This is your second post on whether Trump "incited" the crowd with is words to the crowd on the afternoon of January 6, 2021. I couldn't tell from your first post whether you were limiting "incitement" to its legal definition (under federal law), or a general understanding, or why it matters. Now I see this is the basis of your opinion as to whether Trump should resign.

What I find interesting, Prof. Althouse, is that your opinion on whether Trump should resign does not seemingly involve any consideration of other context, such as his consistent denial that he lost the election and outright false claims of voting fraud, his public and private pressure on the VP not to certify the results, the fact that he placed a great deal of importance on the January 6th date (as a date where the results of the election could be overtunred) to his supporters, his tweets regarding January 6th, and the fact that the crowd didn't simply riot, but tried to disrupt congress from certifying his election loss (and an attempt to keep him in office even though he lost the election) while at the US Capitol.

Does none of this context matter to you? The criteria by which you decide, in your opinion, whether he should resign (as it appears in your post), are indefensible.

Bob Boyd said...

Aide: Mr. President?

Trump: What is it? I'm running late for my speech.

Aide: Sir, we have reason to believe somebody said their friend said they read that a Proud Boy was talking big on Instagram.

Trump: Shit. Call the speech writers back in.

Aide: Right away, Sir.

Trump: And bring me a Diet Coke.

Kai Akker said...

--- The Left couldn't be acting more like cornered rats, like criminals desperate to cover up their crimes, if they tried. [Qwinn]

It's a remarkable implosion. Except that it might take the judiciary to enforce a couple or three laws to get to the climax.

Freder Frederson said...

Freder: Are you suggesting that raising bail money for those committing violence doesn't qualify as aiding and abetting?

Of course it doesn't. Bail is a guarantee that you are going to show up for your court dates.

Don't you believe in "innocent until proven guilty"

Do you consider raising bail and defense money for Kyle Rittenhouse to be aiding and abetting?

mandrewa said...

The lack of barriers, police, and National Guard. Everyone should have been on the line in full kit that day.

Approaching the Capitol Building was like landing at Atlanta airport. Total clear runway. Flashing lights. Beacons. People were guiding Trump supporters in.


And this is what I was thinking yesterday, or maybe two days ago. That this is and was a conspiracy. The words by the way are from Michael Yon and Michael K. cited them above.

Some of Donald Trump's worse enemies are in DC and they are completely capable of doing something like this and it's an almost obvious idea. And it was completely predictable that whatever had happened at this demonstration that the media would discredit those that were there.

Now here is what I'm saying. Most of the people that went into the Capitol Building were real Trump supporters. Of course they were only a tiny fraction of the people that went to this election fraud protest and most of the people there didn't go into this wide open Capitol Building.

But the question is why was the Capitol Building wide open? Why was it so easy to get into there?

Why wasn't there more security than normal? Why weren't the police there?

The demonstration wasn't a secret. It had been planned for I don't know how long. And if it had been Antifa or BLM there would have been security and lots of it. We have already seen that in DC.

I don't know whether there were agent provocateurs in the crowd, although I suspect there were, but even if they hadn't been, this could have happened spontaneously, given that you have you so many people, and some of them are guaranteed not to be rational, and that the building was so undefended.

I don't know who the conspirators were, but they only really needed to do one thing. That is to arrange for a minimal police presence and other security in the vicinity of the Capitol Building.

Temujin said...

I'll say this about this blog, Althouse, because I know many of you seem to be disappointed that Ann does not take your side on everything. Not sure where you got the idea she was here to take a side, let alone your side. She is who she is. You know who she is by reading her blog daily. What's up with denouncing the Blog Host for not agreeing with your every opinion? Sounds pretty...can I say...Leftist of you.

Althouse has given us a forum. She's been a phenomenal host and shows much more patience with all of us than I ever would. My suggestion is that you thank her for what she does- while she's still here doing it. Then donate something for her efforts, unless you think you are entitled to her time of life and her work, then also entitled to disparage her for not spending her time of life doing it as you prefer her to do it.

Seriously. We've got some very real and very pressing (and some not so pressing) things to discuss here. How she appears to agree or disagree with you is simply not one of them. Get over yourselves. None of us are that brilliant.

Meade said...

"See Meade? You are willfully ignorant"

YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!! (The "willfully" part, I mean.)

Laslo Spatula said...

"None of us are that brilliant."

Speak for yourself. My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.

I am Laslo.

mockturtle said...

Like all bullies, the tech media are slapping us around and sneering, 'So what are you going to do about it?".

Matt Sablan said...

"But the question is why was the Capitol Building wide open? Why was it so easy to get into there?

Why wasn't there more security than normal? Why weren't the police there?"

-- Or, apply Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice what can equally be attributed to stupidity. The Capitol Police have been woefully unprepared to stop breaches of the Capitol FOR YEARS. Bowser essentially turned away any Federal offers for help (or insisted on it being useless by saying that the National Guard *couldn't wear body armor to help with riot control.*) You have idiots like Bowser in command, and the Capitol Police who can't even stop people from Code Pink rushing Congress people, and who sometimes can't even *identify Congress people,* and you get exactly what you saw.

Meade said...

Bob Boyd said...
Aide: Mr. President?

Trump: What is it? I'm running late for my speech.

Aide: Sir, we have reason to believe somebody said their friend said they read that a Proud Boy was talking big on Instagram.

Trump: Shit. Call the speech writers back in.

Aide: Right away, Sir.

Trump: And bring me a Diet Coke.
----------------------------------
Whew! I was afraid it was going to end with And bring me the head of Clendening!

MayBee said...

What does it say that the wife of the leader of the opposing party can call for all the tech companies to shut the current POTUS off from tech, and they do it?

Marty said...

I am sure you don't promote violence, but I don't remember reading any "if true" posts about the dem politicians and the truly violent summer riots. As for me, I laugh at the "armed insurrection" bullshit, and the threatened impeachment makes me think of the catholic trial of Pope Formosus who had died months beforehand and was disinterred for the trial.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

MayBee said... What does it say that the wife of the leader of the opposing party can call for all the tech companies to shut the current POTUS off from tech, and they do it?

Tells us who is really in charge. Who is the power behind the puppet with dementia. Who is going to be President until Kamala takes over.

"Dr." President Jill.

Tells us we are all totally fucked.

Matt Sablan said...

"Look at what happened to the news crews at the Capitol?"

-- BLM and Antifa have been attacking news crews for years. There was nothing new about what happened to news crews at the Capitol.

Inga said...

Trump has used violent rhetoric against the the media calling them the “enemies of the people” for years now. Look at what happened to the news crews at the Capitol. Anyone who wants to go on pretending Trump hasn’t encouraged violence against his enemies is living in a fantasy. It’s time to stop making excuses for this man. What will you gain by doing so? It won’t make you a better person.

Tommy Duncan said...

Bob Boyd said:

"I haven't seen any evidence that the protestors at the Capitol wanted to do anything more than shake their fists under the noses of the Congressmen and Senators who they feel have betrayed their oaths. I don't have any reason to think they had any intention of setting themselves up as the new rulers of America. They wanted to be heard, not ignored, then go home."

A voice of calm and reason.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"If he knew people were already thinking of violence, and said what he said, there is probably a case for incitement and the law should take its course"

This so ipso incites violence c unt.

I know you were already thinking this c unt.

Rick said...

Freder Frederson said...
Freder sez: "Your speech is violence, our violence is speech!"

I have consistently condemned violence by both sides. So fuck you.


Freder and the other leftists have consistently claimed leftist violence is the sole responsibility of the violent while all the right is guilty in violence by any rightist. This is despite the left intentionally developing a protest movement which supports violence justified by absurd allegations of white supremacy and fascism.

This happens because their only interest is protecting the left and attacking the right so they use whatever different standards are necessary to justify both goals.

Separately it's interesting Althouse is still reading comments but has yet to address the simple and obvious fact that opposing violence is not evidence she has applied a consistent standard of responsibility for inciting violence.

Marty said...

Geez, Inga, take a moment and reflect on your projection. Maybe this quote will help guide you:

"Projection can cloud your vision and skew your perception of reality. This makes it hard to see a situation for what it is, and instead, morphs a person or situation into something it is not. When you engage in projection, you become susceptible to self-victimization and blaming other people for something you need to address within yourself."

Bob Boyd said...

Yesterday Althouse took the time to explain to me how I could be better at communicating in writing. Given that I'm just a dumb nail pounder and Althouse has forgotten more about words than I will ever know, I was elated. It made my day. I took it to mean she doesn't think I'm a hopeless case.
P.S. If I'm wrong about that, don't tell me.

I'm Not Sure said...

Aide: Sir, we have reason to believe somebody said their friend said they read that a Proud Boy was talking big on Instagram.

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw a Proud Boy at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

Douglas B. Levene said...

Ann, How can you behave like a lawyer at a time like this, all focused on the evidence and the facts? Don’t you know it’s time to run around like a chicken with its head chopped off? That’s what all our moral superiors are doing.

Browndog said...

In 1983, Susan Rosenberg planted a bomb outside the US Senate chamber to assassinate Republican senators.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman @RepJerryNadler
got Pres. Clinton to pardon Susan Rosenberg.

She’s now a board member of Black Lives Matter Network, Inc.


Pic at the link

Rick said...

Inga said...
Trump has used violent rhetoric against the the media calling them the “enemies of the people” for years now. Look at what happened to the news crews at the Capitol. Anyone who wants to go on pretending Trump hasn’t encouraged violence against his enemies is living in a fantasy. It’s time to stop making excuses for this man.


Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters - among others - are on tape referring to various people and groups on the right as enemies of the state. This has resulted in exactly zero accusations of responsibility from Inga or the other leftists. The truth is they use whatever standard is necessary to judge those they hate but they will never apply the same standard to their allies.

zipity said...


Did you also call for the resignations of the Democrats who, after Trump was elected, harassed his supporters and members of his Administration on the street, in restaurants, at their HOMES....?

Maxine Waters told her supporters to harass and abuse Trump supporters EVERYWHERE.

How about the ones who slandered the Covington high school kids, calling them racists, accusing them of abusing a Vietnam "veteran". Saying Nick Sandman had a "punchable face".

I must have missed your condemnation of the Democrats not accepting the results of the 2016 election. For FOUR YEARS.

tim maguire said...

The reason I always have good expectations for the future--most people are decent and generally honest and liberals always overplay their hand.

tcrosse said...

It has been posited that Trump could resign, then President Pence could pardon him. But the way things stand now, Pence would probably ask to throw the book at him.

Wince said...

steve uhr,

Watch the cued link that follows.

Your shamefully cribbed quote of Don Jr saying “fighting like the democrats do" at the rally was, in context, obviously about the fight for intra-Republican control of the party in state-wide elections.

All you did was stipulate, in your own paraphrase, "Democrats riot and loot and burn buildings."

steve uhr said...
At the rally, Donny Jr said that the democrats riot and loot and burn buildings and it is time to start “fighting like the democrats do ... and “fight their way.”. If that’s not incitement what is? When the violence started, he tweeted to his people that they shouldn’t “act like the other side.”

Night Owl said...

If there was any consistency to it, if people had been outraged over all of the violence the last four years aimed at Trump and Trump supporters, then I might be willing to go along with what's being said. But there isn't. So this week was just a big nothingburger as far as I am concerned. Move on.

Same here. I did my job (from home) this week and watched none of the coverage. I, and others I know, expected there to be some sort of demonstration that could turn violent. It was entirely predictable; no shock at all that this happened. And no shock at all regarding the media reaction to it; an observant child could've written the script.

If Althouse wants to play useful idiot and push media-propaganda that's on her. The cancel-culture zombies will likely unperson her anyway. It's what they like to do, and they are high on power.

But... Trump's actions after the elections were bone-headedly short-sighted.

Granted, the man has been mistreated by the lying Dems, deep-state and media since before he took office. I'm still amazed that he withstood it all and did as well as he did. If he wanted to use his transition to call out voter-fraud and question Biden's legitimacy that's fine. He should have stuck to just attacking and smearing his corrupt opponents. They deserved all the crap he could throw at them. But he went too far. He should never have used his supporters the way he did.

He should not have led his supporters to believe he had the ability to overturn the election based on voter fraud, when he obviously had no such plan. What an asshole move. He encouraged the protest on Wed, apparently too dopey to imagine what could happen. Now all the good he's done will soon get swept away.

donald said...

I've been quiet the last few days? So my 20+ posts in the "media filter" thread yesterday constitute "quiet"?

For you, yes.

You deserve a curb stomping you piece of shit Freder. The dishonesty, the lies you will make are the reason.

JaffaneseAmerican said...

Why wouldn't the police have first contacted Capitol Police or Congressional offices about knowledge of a plan to beach the Capitol? I don't understand why such foreknowledge makes Trump guilty--surely he would assume such tactical knowledge would be given to those on the Hill, including the police. Moreover, this rumor of an assault may have been defamatory, intended to disrupt the rally. But maybe I'm missing something major. I am not a fan of riots and destruction--I thought they would clearly bring people over to Trump.

Rosa Marie Yoder said...

haha... of course you would... raise your hand if you're shocked at AA's final triumph

wendybar said...

Democrats were for Mob violence before they were against it....."Thursday afternoon, Democrats killed a resolution aimed at curbing mob violence. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced the bill after a man in Utah was mobbed then shot by a group of rioters. The non-binding resolution offered a statement of support for peaceful protesters and law enforcement who do their job well, while condemning violence and the desecration of monuments across the country." https://thefederalist.com/2020/07/02/democrats-block-resolution-condemning-mob-violence/

Narayanan said...

And if there was no *storming*?

There was no need to prevent access unless Congress is bunch of cowering cowards.

MayBee said...

Does anybody know how the other 4 people died?

StephenFearby said...

1. There was also this in the Buzzfeed story:

'...“I found out [at 9:AM] what they were planning when a friend of mine screenshot me an Instagram story from the Proud Boys saying, ‘We’re breaching the capitol today, guys. I hope y’all ready.’” The officer, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation from his superiors, told BuzzFeed News that it was just a sign of the chaos that was to come, which saw officers regularly finding themselves unprepared and then outmanned and overpowered by the mob.'

So what did this veteran Capitol Police Officer do with this information? Did he inform his superiors (as was his obvious duty to do so)?

Instead, crickets.

2. There is also this (on Trump's mindset to punish people engaging in criminal violence and damaging federal property):

Executive Order on Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence Issued on June 26, 2020

"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Sec. 2. Policy. (a) It is the policy of the United States to prosecute to the fullest extent permitted under Federal law, and as appropriate, any person or any entity that destroys, damages, vandalizes, or desecrates...or vandalizes government property. The desire of the Congress to protect Federal property is clearly reflected in section 1361 of title 18, United States Code, which authorizes a penalty of up to 10 years’ imprisonment for the willful injury of Federal property."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-protecting-american-monuments-memorials-statues-combating-recent-criminal-violence/

https://people.com/politics/capitol-rioters-could-serve-up-to-10-years-in-prison/

Ken B said...

I like the post but disagree with the conclusion.

If he incited he should be *impeached*.

He should *resign* anyway, because he was recklessly inflammatory for two months, like a lot of politicians who should similarly resign were all summer.

wendybar said...

Inga said...
Trump has used violent rhetoric against the the media calling them the “enemies of the people” for years now.

Because they are. They are the propaganda arm of the Regressive party.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Actual domestic terrorists are routinely pardoned by Democrats and the exclusively apply “enemy” tags to their R opponents, but now they are threatening to act. Bravo Inga calling the dnc-media the enemy of the people (which is true) is the exact crime Trump is now being tried by the media for committing. How perfect of you to voice the perfect party line on the subject. Perfect.

Dude1394 said...

So if the FBI/CIA/DOJ say that someone planned this, are you really going to believe them? If the NYTimes/WashPost say that someone planned this, are you really going to believe them?
If buzzfeed says that someone planned this, I guess you ARE going to believe them.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Saying a corrupt democrat party press is "enemy of the people" is a fact.

Inga - we note you ignore all of the left's utterances and encouragement of rioting and harassment.


Here's the compilation. Actual clips of actual people saying it all. way way way worse than anything Trump has ever said.

Ken B said...


Blogger mockturtle said...
Like all bullies, the tech media are slapping us around and sneering, 'So what are you going to do about it?
————

Nationalization, that's what.

Meade said...

"I took it to mean she doesn't think I'm a hopeless case."

Welcome to my world, Bob.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

And so it begins.....

CNN just insinuated that some Capitol Police officers were in on the plan!

Amadeus 48 said...

Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

A few days ago, I posted a number of comments which argued that Trump was a reckless fool to proceed with a march to the Capitol under the circumstances. I posed two questions: What was he trying to do? What did he think would happen when he did what he did?

I said: "What was the object of the intended “March to the Capitol?” Were they going to present a petition? Were they going to sing “We shall overcome?” Were the going to rip into the Capitol and take Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, and Mike Pence hostage until they agreed to certify the Trump electors? Were they going to set the place on fire? Were they there to show that some of the 75 million people that voted for Trump were unhappy? But what about the 80 million people that voted for Biden? Wouldn’t some of them be unhappy at this new protocol for dealing with electoral votes?"

Further: "Wouldn’t you think that tens of thousands of marchers who have been routinely sneered at, insulted, laughed at, lied to, seen others lied to, stifled by the tech giants, locked up for dubious reasons for months on end might be a bit volatile? They’ve been told that they have been cheated again. Didn’t it occur to Trump and his team that things might get out of hand? Won’t some of those people think that BLM and antifa have been getting away with this for years, so now it is our turn? Did Trump know who was in that crowd? How many sociopaths? How many mentally ill?"

And finally: "The bottom line is that wise and thoughtful people don’t do things like this. This hare-brained scheme was intended to disrupt things with no thought as to what would probably follow.

"I voted for Trump twice and I applaud many things he achieved as POTUS. But his post-election behavior has been foolish indeed. He has turned on every true friend who told him the truth about his situation. The Democrats outsmarted him with mail-in ballots. No one knows who voted in this election, and there was no way to sort it out in the time allowed. Trump needed to think ahead [and face reality]. Instead, his supporters disgraced him at the Capitol, as he should have foreseen they might."

You don't need malice. Stupidity got there first. Give it a rest. The Demmies now control the presidency and both Houses of Congress. Trump is out on January 20. He has conceded a peaceful transition. He won't go to the inauguration. He has thrown away the future support of people like me.

His lack of self-discipline got him in the end.


Freder Frederson said...

In 1983, Susan Rosenberg planted a bomb outside the US Senate chamber to assassinate Republican senators.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman @RepJerryNadler
got Pres. Clinton to pardon Susan Rosenberg.

She’s now a board member of Black Lives Matter Network, Inc.


This of course, is a lie. Her sentence was commuted, she was not pardoned. You may not know the difference, but the author of the tweet, who claims to be a lawyer, should know the difference.

And Trump just pardoned four men convicted of killing 17 unarmed civilians, including a nine year old.

LA_Bob said...

Browndog said, "In 1983, Susan Rosenberg planted a bomb outside the US Senate chamber to assassinate Republican senators."

C'mon, Browndog. That was for Social Justice. You're not against Social Justice, are you?

Chris of Rights said...

Upon further reflection, this post deserves the #CivilityBullshit tag.

Joe Smith said...

Late to this, but Jesus Christ, the Proud Boys don't CC Trump on their emails.

Quit looking for what's not there.

It sounds like you're covering your bases..."He might be a horrible person after all!"

Have you been getting pushback from your prog neighbors?

doctrev said...

Ken B said...

Nationalization, that's what.

1/10/21, 11:12 AM

Mmhmm.

Althouse flip-flopping on whether the President should resign or not is a sideshow. The mass deplatforming online is having the WONDERFUL effect of driving enraged conservatives right into the arms of nationalism. Especially Gab and SocialGalactic, two REAL hard-right alternatives which will nuture tens of millions of Trump supporters with the hardest content. Kelli Ward just signed up for Gab: you'll see anyone to her right joining just to maintain their credibility, and all Trump voters will remember the old revolutionary slogan: "join, or die." On Gab's front page right now, a trending post is about how Alex Jones is trying to discredit the Q movement. That's right: having the slightest tendency to shoot right will get you immediately denounced and dropped by the flood of Trump supporters moving to Gab.

It doesn't matter how many Congresstraitors denounce Trump, or how many media personalities attack him. The failed attacks of the past have resulted in a nationalist core millions strong. Soon to be tens of millions.

Sleep tight. When we come back, we're not just going to take some podiums.

tim maguire said...

MayBee said...Does anybody know how the other 4 people died?

COVID, probably.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Meade,
"Welcome to my world, Bob."

Sandwich day?

Guildofcannonballs said...

The CIA ought be grifted and the leftover grifting war-starters purged.

Imagine what a world without all the grifts, then plan and strive toward living what God recommends.

Kai Akker said...

---Nationalization, that's what.

The market is working every minute, Ken. Every minute of every day. It might not look like your preferred schedule. It sure hasn't been my preferred schedule. But you will get your wish the old-fashioned way (it says right here).

Freder Frederson said...

Sleep tight. When we come back, we're not just going to take some podiums.

There's another example for you Meade.

Browndog said...

She’s now a board member of Black Lives Matter Network, Inc.

This of course, is a lie. Her sentence was commuted, she was not pardoned. You may not know the difference


Eat shit, fuck-head.

Qwinn said...

"This of course, is a lie. Her sentence was commuted, she was not pardoned. You may not know the difference"

This kind of retort is pretty much equivalent to "Those videos showing open fraud taking place in Fulton County Georgia are completely discredited because they were BOXES of ballots, not SUITCASES!"

Freder Frederson said...

Eat shit, fuck-head.

Does that mean I am mistaken?

Amadeus 48 said...

"Meade--'I took it to mean she doesn't think I'm a hopeless case.'
Welcome to my world, Bob."

Meade, you are one of the greats. It was a wonderful day when you two took a chance on each other. I hope you don't think she is a hopeless case, either.

Freder Frederson said...

This kind of retort is pretty much equivalent to "Those videos showing open fraud taking place in Fulton County Georgia are completely discredited because they were BOXES of ballots, not SUITCASES!"

No it doesn't. There is a huge difference between a pardon and a commutation. Maybe you can get Ann to explain it to you. I can't be bothered.

stlcdr said...

Blogger wendybar said...
Inga said...
Trump has used violent rhetoric against the the media calling them the “enemies of the people” for years now.

Because they are. They are the propaganda arm of the Regressive party.

1/10/21, 11:06 AM

Exactly what I was going to say. But, this is why the Progressives like to rewrite the meaning of words; they can use words as literal (sic) violence.

Qwinn said...

Freder: "And Trump just pardoned four men convicted of killing 17 unarmed civilians, including a nine year old."

Also Freder: "It would be nice when you make these outrageous claims if you could link to an actual source."

Qwinn said...

"No it doesn't. There is a huge difference between a pardon and a commutation."

When the point is that a stone cold killer was deliberately released by Democrats and is now a leader of the BLM movement, no, there isn't a single fucking substantive difference whatsofuckingever.

JaimeRoberto said...

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw an Instagram post about a plan last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

Freder Frederson said...

Qwinn

there you go

MayBee said...

mezzrow said...
I agree with Bret Weinstein about what the danger is here. Listen while you can.

https://youtu.be/lGlrjmIalJY?t=3653
-------------------

Thanks for posting this. It is indeed great.

effinayright said...

Seems to me that Freder is rewriting one of Obama's quips:

"If they bring a gun, we bring flexi-cuffs".

Talk about serious escalation----woooo!!!

How many of the protesters actually had lethal weapons? How many of the Capitol Police did?

Who actually fired them or set them off inside the Capitol?

AFAIK only one shot was fired, by the Capitol Polices at an unarmed woman, who died.

Seriously, when have unarmed people ever forcibly overthrown a government?

So can anyone argue that the idiots who invaded the building were intent on executing a "coup"? If Trump were to remain POTUS, what kind of "coup" would that be?

A "coup" on Trump's behalf, one where he would illegally seize and take over Congress?

And would Trump have allowed the rioters to be so completely INEFFECIVE from the very start, if he knew what they were up to?

SNORT

roesch/voltaire said...

The reason I think Brian Sicknick was killed by the Trump supporters is based on the recent videos showing the crowd beating the downed police officer. New video also shows a line of disciplined Trump supporters in bullet proof vest make their way up the steps to the Capitol -- getting cheers as they passed through, now what were they planning?

deepelemblues said...

Did Kamala Harris KNOW that riots and violence towards anyone who got in the rioters' way was going to continue when she egged it on over the summer? Yes, she did. So should Kamala Harris resign? Nancy Pelosi? Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? Yes or no, Professor. Should they resign for incitement?

Francisco D said...

More and more it seems like liberals are joining the leftists in deciding what speech should be allowed and what speech should be punished.

I have confidence that Althouse will not join that crowd.

Lurker21 said...

His lack of self-discipline got him in the end.

I guess so. What I take away from the whole four or five years is that an outsider can actually get elected and have some remarkable achievements, but lack of political experience and lack of understanding of how Washington works and how politics work and who one can trust and how far one can trust them - and yes, lack of self-discipline - will bring an outsider down in the end.

Night Owl said...

The idea that that the storming of the Capitol was planned leads to the next question; planned to accomplish what, exactly? If the protesters planned to storm the building to take over the govt, as the idiot media imply, wouldn't the plan have included some guns?

This was either a "mostly peaceful" protest that got out of hand, or there were some bad apples that planned to lead the crowd astray in order to smear Trump and his supporters. The idea that Trump would want these optics on his way out is ridiculous. What he probably wanted was a strong showing of supporters crying and shouting "four more years" as he walked away "triumphant". His ego got in the way of thinking through what could actually happen.

As others have said, if Trump deserves to resign so should all the Dems and media that encouraged the Antifa and BLM "mostly peaceful" protests. When will Harris resign?

YoungHegelian said...

@Freder,

Whatever one may think of Trump's pardon of the Blackwater contractors, it seems to me that there's a huge moral difference between what happens on a battlefield, especially a battlefield where the insurgents don't wear uniforms, insignia, and fade into the civilian population at will**, and what violent acts a domestic radical decides to commit on a civilian population in peacetime.

The Left really cuts its actual & would-be terrorists far too much slack. I use the words "would-be" because there are LOTS of terrorist acts attempted by the Left that they were just too incompetent to pull off (e.g. the large number of bombs set by the Symbionese Liberation Army that failed to detonate).

** It always amazes me that the Left expects the American military to abide by the terms of the Geneva Convention when the only combatants we've ever faced that even made a pretense of abiding by the Conventions was Nazi Germany. And, by the way, all of the criteria I mentioned above are forbidden by the Conventions, yet the Left cheers on insurgencies that trample on them all the time.

Michael said...

RV
Seen the vid of the woman being shot. Point blank?

Ajnal said...

why did they bring zipties to a protest?

Meade said...

Thanks, Amadeus48!

"I hope you don't think she is a hopeless case, either."

Nope. Although, I confess, I've had my moments. Once or twice, an innocent passerby might have overheard me stomping around the Meadhouse estate muttering, fracturing, paraphrasing: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. And then she makes me a sandwich and once again, as long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the Madhouse garden.

Lurker21 said...

"Incitement" and "violent rhetoric" seem to be "eye of the beholder" things. Politics usually involves abusive language, especially now, but different people judge the rhetoric differently based on whether they agree with the speaker. You hear intemperate language from a wide variety of politicians today, and many of those attacking Trump have used more provocative language than Trump did on Wednesday. I suppose what matters is whether the guard rails (real as well as metaphorical) are up and secured in order to prevent real disruption and violence.

Clayton Hennesey said...

"why did they bring zipties to a protest?"

Why does a woman display her cleavage? Because she wants to fuck you, of course.

Rick said...

MayBee said...
Does anybody know how the other 4 people died?


I think it's 4 total, not 4 others.

Cop hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, woman shot by cop, 1 trampled, 1 heart attack.

Amadeus 48 said...

Lurker21--I saw your survey of the Trump years the other day, and I thought you are absolutely right.

Sigh.

MayBee said...

Thanks, Rick. I did just see some video of people at the entrance beating on a cop and it sickened me.

Freder Frederson said...

it seems to me that there's a huge moral difference between what happens on a battlefield, especially a battlefield where the insurgents don't wear uniforms, insignia, and fade into the civilian population at will**, and what violent acts a domestic radical decides to commit on a civilian population in peacetime.

Which is why we have trials to determine if the acts rise to the level of murder. Are you saying the Blackwater mercenaries (that is what we used to call armed military contractors) did not receive a fair trial. Was that mentioned in the pardon?

Browndog said...

"Incitement", as a criminal charge, is ambiguous. More so than even "collusion".

Libs love this shit because it allows for selective interpretation and selective prosecution, of which they are exempt.

Readering said...

Right now Trump sitting in Camp David making a list of all the people he could have picked for veep instead of Pence who would have prevented electoral college envelopes being opened to get Biden to 270. Cross-referencing with his draft pardon list.

He' probably also reading reports that PGA about to move 2022 championship from Bedminster. And realizing he can forget ever getting the British Open to one of his clubs.

Freder Frederson said...

1 heart attack.

And the heart attack occurred because the guy apparently accidentally tazed himself in the nuts.

Rick said...

Freder Frederson said...
In 1983, Susan Rosenberg planted a bomb outside the US Senate chamber to assassinate Republican senators.

She’s now a board member of Black Lives Matter Network, Inc.


Note the NGO system is supporting her financially, just as the education system employed Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn after their release for killing Americans. The single biggest reason education has become so expensive is left's use of it to provide sinecures for their activists including domestic terrorists. This is the true purpose first for grievance studies departments and later Title IX weaponization and "diversity" agencies.

That's why the left's reference to last week's participants - both peaceful and violent - as domestic terrorists is so amusing. They don't even oppose domestic terrorism as long as it supports the left.

MayBee said...

Ajnal said...
why did they bring zipties to a protest?


What do *you* use zip ties for? Maybe they wanted to hold doors open or hang up signs. Maybe they were going to zip tie themselves to the gates or in the corridors, like the "Extinction Rebellion" people superglue themselves to buses. Maybe they were going to zip tie themselves together, like the Occupy people used to do.

Maybe the people who brought them imagined they would use them to kidnap someone. But just because that's the only scenario you are letting yourself imagine, it doesn't mean that's the only purpose of bringing them.

YoungHegelian said...

@Freder,

Are you saying the Blackwater mercenaries (that is what we used to call armed military contractors) did not receive a fair trial. Was that mentioned in the pardon?

No, I'm not. I don't agree with the pardon.

But, you're missing my larger point -- whatever the circumstances, what happens on a battlefield is a much different moral situation than in one's native country in peacetime. Yet, you chose to use it as an example of a Trump & his allies major moral failure.

What I am claiming is that the American Left absolves among its violent members is much more morally clear as simply terrorism, that is violent acts against a civilian population of their own fellow citizens. And the Left has absolved them over & over again, without any repentance on the part of the activists themselves.

Rick said...

Ajnal said...
why did they bring zipties to a protest?


Why did left wingers take a guillotine? Political theater.

Joe Smith said...

"Here's where you can change that."

A Paypal link?

Nice grift.

And who might Louis Dixon be?

Achilles said...

roesch/voltaire said...

The reason I think Brian Sicknick was killed by the Trump supporters is based on the recent videos showing the crowd beating the downed police officer. New video also shows a line of disciplined Trump supporters in bullet proof vest make their way up the steps to the Capitol -- getting cheers as they passed through, now what were they planning?

This is a blatant lie.

Sicknick went home that night.

He went to work the next day.

He did not die at the protest. He was not killed by Trump supporters.

People who repeat this blood libel like r/v are the worst sort of degenerate shitheads. This is even more grasping than saying the police killed George Floyd.

Achilles said...

Rick said...

MayBee said...
Does anybody know how the other 4 people died?

I think it's 4 total, not 4 others.

Cop hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, woman shot by cop, 1 trampled, 1 heart attack.


A cop who went home that night, and went to work the next day.

Leland said...

Way late to all this. I understand the point being made by the host.

What to make then of all the lefty celebrities that pledged bail money for protesters this summer. Doesn’t offering bail, and it was in advance, suggest knowing criminal acts would occur? And didn’t they say they were offering because people needed to protest the sitting President?

Are those people being pressured to resign? It seems their allies simply gave them room to protest.

Rick said...

A cop who went home that night, and went to work the next day.

I heard he spent the day in a coma at the hospital and then died. We'll know which as the fog of war dissolves.

I Callahan said...

Trump has used violent rhetoric against the the media calling them the “enemies of the people” for years now.

No, he didn’t. He stated a fact - the media are the enemy of the people.

Look at what happened to the news crews at the Capitol.

Well what do you know? They got some pushback for all the lies they’ve been telling. Boo frickin’ hoo.

Anyone who wants to go on pretending Trump hasn’t encouraged violence against his enemies is living in a fantasy. It’s time to stop making excuses for this man. What will you gain by doing so? It won’t make you a better person.

It will make me a more honest person than anyone on the left.

Freder Frederson said...

What to make then of all the lefty celebrities that pledged bail money for protesters this summer.

What of all the righty celebrities that pledge bail and lawyers fees for Kyle Rittenhouse?

doctrev said...

YoungHegelian said...

What I am claiming is that the American Left absolves among its violent members is much more morally clear as simply terrorism, that is violent acts against a civilian population of their own fellow citizens. And the Left has absolved them over & over again, without any repentance on the part of the activists themselves.

1/10/21, 12:37 PM

That's because they're fighting 5th generation warfare openly, and many conservatives are still in Parler mode, gobsmacked that Amazon would DARE engage in a tech conspiracy to shut down the First Amendment because this isn't capitalism!

Thankfully, the terminally stupid and naive are becoming increasingly irrelevant, and Trump CERTAINLY isn't heeding their calls to resign. He crossed the Rubicon, and it's going to be one of those terminal historical ironies if it turns out he wasn't aware of the fact.

Get hyped.

Freder Frederson said...

what happens on a battlefield is a much different moral situation than in one's native country in peacetime.

Undoubtedly true, but irrelevant. They were not on a battlefield, they were providing security to the State Department.

Rick said...

Freder Frederson said...
What to make then of all the lefty celebrities that pledged bail money for protesters this summer.

What of all the righty celebrities that pledge bail and lawyers fees for Kyle Rittenhouse?


Note the left's deep commitment to avoid whataboutism. Why sometimes it seems they invented that saying solely to justify their double standards while freely engaging in it themselves.

But on the merits: The contributions came after the fact so they couldn't be inciting future actions. Plus the donors could judge for themselves his self defense justification.

I Callahan said...

This of course, is a lie. Her sentence was commuted, she was not pardoned. You may not know the difference, but the author of the tweet, who claims to be a lawyer, should know the difference.

Well that changes everything. Commuted vs pardoned. Did she do the crime she was convicted of or not?

And Trump just pardoned four men convicted of killing 17 unarmed civilians, including a nine year old.

Weren’t you the one complaining about others not adding links for their outrageous assertions?

YoungHegelian said...

@freder,

They were not on a battlefield, they were providing security to the State Department

In a country fighting a civil war, where there was no front line...

Forget it, Freder. Either willingly or because you're just obtuse, you refuse to engage the main point. Go play with someone else.

Achilles said...

Rick said...

A cop who went home that night, and went to work the next day.

I heard he spent the day in a coma at the hospital and then died. We'll know which as the fog of war dissolves.

Oh it gets even better.

Looks like Sicknick died of a stroke and there is no actual confirmation of being beaten with a fire extinguisher.

To be honest I do not know.

But one thing I do know is that he died the next day.

The other thing I do know is that everyone who is pushing his death as a way to attack Trump supporters has been blatantly lying about things like Russian Collusion and lied to a FISA court to get warrants and participated in numerous other similar falsehoods for 5 years.

They are also using his death to directly attack my freedom.

So I question everything.

And the leftists here cheering on this corporate coup are complete pieces of shit.

Rabel said...

The pressure, direct and indirect, spoken and unspoken, on a person of Althouse's social standing to join in the denunciation of President Trump must be tremendous.

Thus far she has held strong. I attribute that to an honest streak in her personality that runs parallel with her contrarian streak and her cruel streak.

Hang in there.

MayBee said...

Barack Obama's political career was launched by a bomber-- Bill Ayers.

walter said...

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1348261066116100097/photo/1
I didn't find the ABC article picture which suggests a medical condition.
Did find this:
While some news reports had said an unnamed officer was in critical condition after being bludgeoned with a fire extinguisher, family members did not have details of his injuries. They say Sicknick had texted them Wednesday night to say that while he had been pepper-sprayed, he was in good spirits. The text arrived hours after a mob’s assault on the Capitol had left more than 50 officers injured and five people dead.
“He texted me last night and said, ‘I got pepper-sprayed twice,’ and he was in good shape,” said Ken Sicknick, his brother, as the family drove toward Washington. “Apparently he collapsed in the Capitol and they resuscitated him using CPR.”
But the day after that text exchange, the family got word that Brian Sicknick had a blood clot and had had a stroke; a ventilator was keeping him alive.

walter said...

“We weren’t expecting it,” his brother said.
As apparently premature news of Sicknick’s death spread in law enforcement circles, the U.S. Capitol Police Department remained silent, including no response to an early request for confirmation from ProPublica on Thursday evening. The family learned from reporter phone calls that something was wrong.
“We have not gotten any calls,” Ken Sicknick said when first contacted. Brian Sicknick was the youngest of three siblings, all boys. “We’re kind of overwhelmed right now. You guys are getting reports of his death before I even got anything.”
Nearly an hour later, the department issued a statement rebutting news reports that an officer had died. The department finally reported that Sicknick had died at 9:30 p.m. Thursday, adding that this was the result of injuries sustained during the attack the previous day.
By the time family members reached the hospital, they say, Sicknick was dead.
In separate interviews with ProPublica, family members say they are still waiting to learn exactly what happened. They described Sicknick as the kindest of the three siblings. They said he went to a technical school to study electronics but ditched it to follow his dream of becoming a police officer. They couldn’t confirm the time of death.
The family’s grief and confusion comes amid serious questions about how a secretive police department that is well-funded and highly trained at quelling violent protests and protecting members of Congress had failed to protect one of its own from an attack that had been planned out in plain sight.
Sicknick during basic training in 1997. (Courtesy of New Jersey National Guard)
In a press release, the department said: “The entire USCP Department expresses its deepest sympathies to Officer Sicknick’s family and friends on their loss, and mourns the loss of a friend and colleague.”
The Sicknick family issued its own press release Friday, urging the public and reporters to not politicize Sicknick’s death.
“Please honor Brian’s life and service and respect our privacy while we move forward in doing the same. Brian is a hero and that is what we would like people to remember,” the statement said.
Still in shock, one family member, who agreed to talk but asked not to be named, said Sicknick had sometimes expressed frustrations with his job.
“Occasionally he would mention that they were very understaffed and they worked a lot of hours,” the family member said. “And morale could be low.”
Larry Schaefer, who spent 34 years on the force before retiring last year and knew Sicknick, said Wednesday’s breach of the Capitol was unfathomable until he saw it on his TV screen.
Authorities dissuaded some extremists from traveling to Washington, and shared intelligence with Capitol Police, but could not stop the mob that stormed the Capitol, a senior FBI official says.
“We handle demonstrations on a regular basis,” Schaefer said. “We’re prepared for this kind of stuff. We hold people back in a perimeter. We’re set up for mass arrests, to load buses of people away.”
He said he blames department leaders for the tragedy. Under pressure from congressional leaders, Chief Steven Sund of the Capitol Police and two other security officials have resigned.
https://www.propublica.org/article/officer-brian-sicknick-capitol

MayBee said...

Achilles- a cop was definitely beaten:
https://twitter.com/secondchances09/status/1348338762003181570/photo/1

stonethrower said...

Ann Althouse says, "I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd ..." My take on this entire statement is that Althouse want us to know how well-reasoned and fair she is. She "held off." Wow! Such restraint. Look at the origins of the incitement throughout the last 5 years.
Let's not forget the cause of the protest. That the only thing we should be discussing. Instead, we get "I held off from believing that Trump deserved what he got. But if Trump was wearing a provocative dress ..."

Rick said...

The other thing I do know is that everyone who is pushing his death as a way to attack Trump supporters has been blatantly lying about things like Russian Collusion and lied to a FISA court to get warrants and participated in numerous other similar falsehoods for 5 years.

That's why we mock their critcisms rather than granting them weight. Similarly when people who claim Mitt Romney Republicans want to "put ya'll [black Americans] back in chains" (Biden) or create The HandMaid's Tale in America (Inga) criticize others for believing nonsense or demonizing the enemy there is no choice other than laughter.

But you shouldn't allow them to bait you into defending the indefensible.

walter said...

Robert Barnes
@barnes_law
What did Democrats and the media call the months-long forced occupation of the capitol in Wisconsin in 2011? "Beautiful trouble." https://beautifultrouble.org/case/wisconsin-capitol-occupation/
1:27 PM · Jan 10, 2021·Twitter Web App

walter said...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-capitol-police-officer-dies/2021/01/08/5552e036-51bc-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html
Jan. 8, 2021 at 6:44 p.m. CST
He supported Donald Trump. She supported Hillary Clinton.
But in the midst of the 2016 election, Brian D. Sicknick, an officer with the U.S. Capitol Police, and Caroline Behringer, an adviser for a liberal congresswoman, found common ground.
They met mornings at an entrance to the Capitol, she heading to her office, he protecting those doing the people’s work. They chatted about unwinding in the outdoors and joked about being on opposite sides of the political divide tearing the nation apart.
“There was a shared humanity,” Behringer said, noting, “My job was very much dependent on him keeping me safe.”

Jim at said...

Months and months of rioting and not a fucking word from the left.

So you'll pardon me if I don't give a shit who started it the other day.

Clyde said...

I'm sure that the Proud Boys had Trump on speed-dial so they could let him in on what they were planning.

/sarcasm

stonethrower said...

Ann Althouse says, "I have held off from believing that Trump incited the crowd ..." My take on this entire statement is that Althouse want us to know how well-reasoned and fair she is. She "held off." Wow! Such restraint. Look at the origins of the incitement throughout the last 5 years.
Let's not forget the cause of the protest. That the only thing we should be discussing. Instead, we get "I held off from believing that Trump deserved what he got. But if Trump was wearing a provocative dress ..."

stonethrower said...

I think I understand now. Sorry.

Jim at said...

I have consistently condemned violence by both sides. So fuck you.

The hell you have. You don't say a goddamn word when it's your thugs seeking space to destroy. Yet when the right has one protest, you can't stop running your mouth.

So fuck you.

Milo Minderbinder said...

I've tried to reconcile last week's violence and the 'crats' reaction to their blessings of the 2017 Inauguration Day violence, the violent occupation of the Senate offices during the Kavanaugh hearings and last summer's violence (which Schumer admitted hurt 'crats in November), and was about to toss my frustrations in the bin of hypocrisy when I read Alexander Macris' short essay on Repressive Tolerance at the Tree of Woe. Macris is a 2000 Harvard Law grad MCL. He concludes (and I agree):

"For now, let us put to the rest this notion of Leftist “hypocrisy.” When the Left condemns the violence in DC and praises the violence in #BLM rallies, the Left isn’t being hypocritical. It’s being authentic to its values.

"And when the Left openly says that their values require that they silence those who disagree by whatever means are necessary — and when the means to do so are now readily available — you ignore those values at your peril."

https://macris.substack.com/p/repressive-tolerance-in-action

This is now civil war.

stevew said...

Resigning won't stop Pelosi's impeachment game, nor will leaving office on 20-Jan. I say this because it has been asserted that if the House impeaches Trump, and the Senate convicts, Trump will be ineligible to run for POTUS again. Resigning won't do anything other than give the anti-Trump folks a victory of sorts over Trump. I can't see him giving them the win; he's an lolgf sort.

How will it ever be determined that Trump knew of the violence to come this past Wednesday? No matter how you twist his words you cannot prove that Trump knew. Absent a well documented communication to Trump from the organizers of this violence, we'll never know. At this point it cannot even be proven that a plan existed. And there is some doubt about who kicked off the "storming" of the Capitol.

Just a bit more than a week to go. It should all be over soon. Then we can settle in to calm, boring, normalcy.

Joe Smith said...

"No matter how you twist his words you cannot prove that Trump knew."

They don't care.

Just like they knew from behind-closed-doors testimony that there was no Russia collusion yet trotted out that lie to the media for years.

They don't fucking care.

This is about raw power. Nothing more nor less..

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

No, we cannot actually impeach Harris and Biden. But, we can make their lives miserable with such calls for impeachment. Make them regret that they ever ran for office.

Stephen said...

Criminal liability may depend on knowledge of the plot.

Showing that Trump committed a high crime or misdemeanor does not. For a good analysis, see Andrew McCarthy here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/impeachment-by-the-numbers/#slide-1

There are both moral and political reasons to take the vote, including making the 100+ Republican Congressman who voted in favor of the Big Lie, even after Trumpism's assault on the Capitol, vote up or down on whether the Presdent's conduct warranted impeachment. My own guess is that such a vote would have a significant bipartisan component, with perhaps as many as half of House Republicans voting to impeach. As Clyburn pointed out today, such a vote would not have to be followed immediately by Senate procedings, which could trail the legislative agenday for the first 100 days of a Biden administration.

On of the reasons for an impeachment vote in the House is that it could trigger Trump's resignation. McCarthy also sketches a plausible scenario in which Trump resigns, Pence pardons him, and the country moves on. I find his analysis persuasive.

Static Ping said...

Anonymous source in Buzzfeed is multiplying zeroes with Buzzfeed providing extra zeroes.

As often what happens in these events, we get all sorts of conflicting reports early on. Many of them prove to be only partially true, or false, or even the exact opposite of what actually happened. Sometimes these falsehoods or, in some cases, outright lies remain "common knowledge" of our "elites" for years or even decades after events. Furthermore, stories that do not support the "narrative" and cannot be taken out of context to support the "narrative" quickly get dropped and forgotten. (Both of these have been a common event for the past five years.) I would think that cruel neutrality would demand that this story be treated with heavy skepticism. Actually, simply being a thinking human requires this story and dozens of others from this week be treated with heavy skepticism.

Oh well.

Leland said...

I misread. If the Capitol knew 3 hours in advance. They had time to formulate a plan. What was the Capitol’s plan?

rcocean said...

What a stupid post. I'm going with the assumption that Althouse is a liberal democrat and approves of all the censorship, banning, and election fraud from now on.

Incitement? What the fuck does that even mean? Show me where Trump said "go break the law" - you can't. Using words like "incite" "encouraged" " "Suggested" are just bullshit words designed to attack Trump for something he never did.

Period.

wHere are your posts attacking Pelosi, Biden, kamala harris, Romney, et al, for "inciting" violence during the BLM/Antifa riots and domestic terrorism of the last six months? Nowhere to be seen. You're just a fake like all the other leftists. Pretending to care about "violence" when you care about "violence against the Left".

Leigh said...

@Ray So-Cal said, "And I’m amazed for the 300 arrested for rioting at Trumps inauguration, the left supported with lodging, lawyers, etc till the charges were dropped 18 months later. Contrast that with ..."

Contrast that with the rules for Biden's inauguration. The DC Mayor is refusing to permit any protests or demonstrations.
https://twitter.com/MayorBowser/status/1348315751241961473?s=20

Of course, there was no such concern on Trump's inauguration day, as Ray So-Cal noted. For those who may have forgotten the violence so many of the anti-Trump protesters committed, here's an old story from NBC (which I have to assume downplayed it). And this is but one example. YouTube has reams of footage. https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/violent-anti-trump-protests-try-to-steal-spotlight-on-inauguration-day-859451971661

As Michael K correctly observes, this certainly was part of the unfolding plan. We have now been almost fully divested of our rights under the First Amendment, and we'll soon be losing more. There's no need to visit China any more.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

Leland said...

I misread. If the Capitol knew 3 hours in advance. They had time to formulate a plan. What was the Capitol’s plan?


That protest/rally/gathering/whatever you want to call it, was being oepnly publicized at least a month prior to Jan 6. I have a hard time believing that the various groups who monitor such things (FBI, NSA, etc.) weren't aware that it was happening. They might have been inclined to dismiss the potential for violence, 'cause conservative White people don't do stuff like that, but it was there as it always is with a large crowd.

Stephen said...

There is a common premise among commenters here that liberals are hypocritcal in condemning the violence at the Capitol while encouraging or condoning violence in the political protects that followed the televised murder of Mr. Floyd.

That charge is wrong, for several reasons.

First, and to take only one example, the leading liberal, Joe Biden, was clear from the outset of the post-Floyed demonstrationss that violence, looting and destruction of property was unacceptable and should be prosecuted, and said so multilple times.

Trump, in contast, told the folks who broke into the Capitol that he loved them--after they had done so.

Second, there is no contention that anyone who committed crimes during the post Floyd demonstrations claimed to be acting on behalf of Joe Biden or the Democratic party. In contast, the people who committed crimes at the Capitol were carrying Trump flags and wearing MAGA hats.

Third, not all crimes are equal. Crimes that aim squarely at the heart of our democracy and the peaceful transfer of power, even if they are framed simply as trepassing or vandalism, have a different and more serious quality, akin to treason. Not the same as stealing groceries or breaking windows. And inciting such crimes, as Trump did, for his own personal benefit, therefore has a different flovor as well.

Amadeus 48 said...

If Trump had said, "We are going to march down to the Capitol to make sure that justice is done. If they try to stop us, we will march right over them. The rot runs deep, and the traitors are everywhere. Those Capitol policemen are in the pay of Pelosi. We are going to take the Capitol and make sure the House and Senate do the right thing. We stand at Armageddon and we battle for the Lord!" that would be incitement.

FullMoon said...

As mentioned up thread, and yesterday, Obama called for a purge and the techs complied.

Bowser told cops to stand down because she anticipated leftist gangsters would attack peaceful Trump supporters, as happens at every pro Trump gathering. She did not want Trump supporters protected.

As for hope that Trump gonna declassify everthing and expose dems, cannot happen.
Trump does not have the material sitting in his desk drawer, he gotta make a phone call , or send a message to some govt lifers to declassify the docs. The lifer simply not gonna cooperate.

Amadeus 48 said...

Stephen,

With regard to the Floyd riots, you can't buff a turd. Give it up. It was horrible, and it caused thousands to lose their livelihoods and their entire life savings.

I can't believe you are such a moral midget as you appear.

Riots are always wrong.

Rick said...

First, and to take only one example, the leading liberal, Joe Biden, was clear from the outset of the post-Floyed demonstrationss that violence, looting and destruction of property was unacceptable and should be prosecuted, and said so multilple times.

This is a lie. It took Joe Biden until August 30 to criticize the riots which had been in full force for 5 months by then. Even then he used what leftists would criticize as weak criticism if came from Trump. For comparison Trump was criticized for not acting within hours.

What this does show is that left wingers excuse any failure by their allies using whatever excuse is handy.

I'm Not Sure said...

"Months and months of rioting and not a fucking word from the left."

That's not really true. There were lots of words. Encouraging ones.

Rick said...

Slate article Juen 4, 2020.

Slate
@Slate
Non-violence is an important tool for protests, but so is violence.

Rosalyn C. said...

I did check Don Jr.'s speech -- he used the word "fight" the same way all politicians, including Democrats, use it -- to be active politically. There was no suggestion of physical violence. Democrats have been fighting for decades, according to Don Jr., meaning they have been organizing with an agenda to gain power, which Republicans have not done. Republicans have been afraid of being seen or accused as being impolite or coarse.

I think the left has been wanting to silence conservative voices for a long time (resenting their use of the technology leftists developed) and this is the moment they finally could manufacture an excuse. The speed and thoroughness with which people and platforms with opposing opinions are being eliminated is more of a threat to our democratic system than the breach of the Capitol imo.

I wonder how many Democrats still favor a two party system? They seem to only be willing to accept the weakest and most obsequious Republicans, while at the same time wanting to eliminate the Senate filibuster and eliminate the electoral college comes next.

Scott said...

funny how this never happened for previous "breaches" in Washington. Ann-do you support such blatant hypocrisy?

Douglas B. Levene said...

Sen. Sasse said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show yesterday that, "As this [riot] was unfolding on television, Donald Trump was walking around the White House confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was as you had rioters pushing against Capitol Police trying to get into the building." Pretty damning if true and no reason to doubt its truth. https://hughhewitt.com/senator-ben-sasse-on-impeachment-and-transition-the-gop-in-minority/

Douglas B. Levene said...

Someone up above wrote, "riots are always wrong." Yes, a thousand times, yes.

doctrev said...

Douglas said...
Someone up above wrote, "riots are always wrong." Yes, a thousand times, yes.

1/10/21, 3:45 PM

Indeed, I say good sir, harumph ba-dumph!

https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/boston-tea-party-facts

At least try to be less of a spineless cuck, huh? The march on the Capitol did less overall damage than the original Tea Party did.

Joe Smith said...

"McCarthy also sketches a plausible scenario in which Trump resigns, Pence pardons him, and the country moves on. I find his analysis persuasive."

Nothing prevents the Dems from impeaching him anyway.

Unless a deal is made, why wouldn't they?

Democrats will always exercise raw power when they have it just because they can.

You're not paying attention.

doctrev said...

Stephen said...

On of the reasons for an impeachment vote in the House is that it could trigger Trump's resignation. McCarthy also sketches a plausible scenario in which Trump resigns, Pence pardons him, and the country moves on. I find his analysis persuasive.

1/10/21, 2:39 PM

Given how badly McCarthy dropped the ball on Mueller, reversing himself when even a child could realize how weak the case for impeachment was, your faith mainly illustrates your own lack of discernment. Anyone who even watched the House of Cards remake knows not to rely on that kind of strategy, and Trump CERTAINLY won't trust Pence anymore.

Get hyped.

Joe Smith said...

"Given how badly McCarthy dropped the ball..."

McCarthy has never been rock-sold, but has gotten even more squishy as time goes on.

Breathing the air at NRO is like Kryptonite to conservatism.

Victor Davis Hanson > Andrew McCarthy.

Stephen said...

Amadeus48, I am not saying that the violence and destruction of property by some of the Floyd demonstrators was OK. In fact, I am saying the opposite. Peaceful protest is fine; criminal conduct is not. That's true for BLM demonstrators and Trumpist alike.

Rick, that is also exactly what Biden said, and contrary to your claim, he did not wait until August 30 to do so. Instead, he condemned the violence starting on May 29, and then repeatedly over the course of the summer. Citations are here: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/09/17/fact-check-joe-biden-has-condemned-violence-protests-all-summer/5706355002/

Contrast Trump's statement to the criminals at the Capitol that he "loved" them.

Neither of you answer my other two points: that the folks who destroyed property and lives at the Capitol did so under Trump's banner and in his name, and that seditions and treason have a different flavor than stealing groceries.

How about a response to what I actually argued, folks?

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

This whole idea of this takeover of the Capitol being an attempted coup is utter BS. Three hundred crazy loons invading the Capitol aren't going to be able to take over a government of million workers. A coup in today's environment would require creating a false emergency like an invasion of 300 crazy loons, then taking this alleged crisis and manufacturing a national outrage that allows the plotters to discredit the current government. They coup plotters then take the reigns of power and eliminate the legitimate government officials, either by actual or symbolic executions.

Wait, isn't that what happened on Wednesday?

Rick said...

Instead, he condemned the violence starting on May 29, and then repeatedly over the course of the summer.

So it only took him two months? Be sure to let us know if Trump hasn't criticized those who killed the officer by March 7.

folks who destroyed property and lives at the Capitol did so under Trump's banner and in his name, and that seditions and treason have a different flavor than stealing groceries.

Yes, and those who burned the federal building and many others did so for leftism. Leftists likewise understood then as allies as the Slate article supporting violence notes.

Minimizing their actions as stealing groceries - instead of attempted arson of occupied buildings - also reveals how leftists continue to support them by minimizing the danger they pose both physically and politically.

Iman said...

This morning, I'm seeing this at Buzzfeed:

Stepping it up from their usual “100 Reasons Why People Love! Love! Love! Their Cats”?

YoungHegelian said...

@Stephen,

that the folks who destroyed property and lives at the Capitol did so under Trump's banner and in his name, and that seditions and treason have a different flavor than stealing groceries.

Invading the Capitol is sedition & treason? If so, then why has NO ONE ever in the history of the Republic been prosecuted as such? If you believe Trump is somehow "seditious & treasonous" you need to come up with better proof than him saying that he loved his supporters. the largest majority of which were non-violent (I take it when he told them to go home or from the mouth of the Never-Trumper Sen Ben Sasse quoting the ever present "unnamed sources in the WH".

And now, to deal with the golden nugget of imbecility in your posting -- "than stealing groceries". Do you think that's what ANTIFA & BLM are about, stealing groceries? That the ongoing attempt to take over a chunk of land in Portland or Seattle, including trying to burn down a Federal Courthouse in Portland, is "stealing groceries"? I'm sorry, but these organizations have radical ideological agendas that go far deeper than "stealing groceries".

Try again.

Iman said...

I have consistently condemned violence by both sides. So fuck you.

F you with a Husqvarna.

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

The presidential pardon power excludes cases of impeachment. So a new President Pence could not pardon an impeached Donald Trump.

Stephen said...

Rick

Again, your facts are wrong. George Floyd died on May 25. Biden spoke out to support peaceful protest, and to condemn criminal conduct, on May 29. So what exactly is the basis for your claim that he should have spoken out sooner?

And what do you, and others, make of the fact that Trump has, among other things, told the criminals at the Capitol that he loved them, and can't bring himself/hasn't bothered to call the family of the policeman murdered at the Capitol or order federal flags to be flown at half staff?

YoungHegelian said...

@Stephen,

told the criminals at the Capitol that he loved them, and can't bring himself/hasn't bothered to call the family of the policeman murdered at the Capitol or order federal flags to be flown at half staff?

When did he say he "loved" the rioters, Stephen? Give us the text from the transcript.

As for the guard, we are not yet sure he was "murdered", even that he was bludgeoned. People who get bludgeoned almost to the point of death require immediate medical attention, which the guard didn't. He went back to his unit the day of the riot.

Now, many Capitol police officers were assaulted on Wednesday. Few, if any seemingly seriously or else there'd be more casualties & hospitalizations. One bystander was trampled, two died from other health reasons, one was shot by Capitol police, and it's still unclear just what Officer Sicknick died from.

Bilwick said...

"Sedition" has, like "racism" and "fascism" before it, been morphed by the Stupid Left into collectivist Newspeak as a synonym for "opposing The Hive."

I'm Not Sure said...

"and it's still unclear just what Officer Sicknick died from."

If it was from being attacked by a protester, it would be plastered all over the internet by now.

Just sayin'.

Witness said...

Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?

Rick said...

And what do you, and others, make of the fact that Trump has, among other things, told the criminals at the Capitol that he loved them, and can't bring himself/hasn't bothered to call the family of the policeman murdered at the Capitol or order federal flags to be flown at half staff?

It's revealing left wingers insistence during BLM was a bifurcation between protesters and rioters. But the second the right engages in the same activity the need to understand is eliminated in favor of blanket guilt.

I'm Not Sure said...

"And what do you, and others, make of the fact that Trump has, among other things, told the criminals at the Capitol that he loved them, and can't bring himself/hasn't bothered to call the family of the policeman murdered at the Capitol or order federal flags to be flown at half staff?"

Is that a fact?

Proclamation on Honoring United States Capitol Police Officers
Issued on: January 10, 2021

As a sign of respect for the service and sacrifice of United States Capitol Police Officers Brian D. Sicknick and Howard Liebengood, and all Capitol Police Officers and law enforcement across this great Nation, by the authority vested in me as President of the United States by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order that the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset, January 13, 2021. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the same length of time at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels and stations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this tenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-fifth.

DONALD J. TRUMP

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-honoring-united-states-capitol-police-officers/

YoungHegelian said...

@I'm Not Sure,

and it's still unclear just what Officer Sicknick died from."

If it was from being attacked by a protester, it would be plastered all over the internet by now.


I'm not assuming that at all. So far, we just don't know. Cranial damage can take days to "develop" into something catastrophic, as can strokes. It may be he was hit on the head by a rioter, dismissed the injury, and it turned out to be something more serious than he thought.

We simply don't know yet. I'm sure the media want to turn him into a martyr, and maybe he is. But, who among the public know of the autopsy reports of George Floyd or Michael Brown? What they know is the narrative the media created as to what caused their deaths.

Howard said...

I'm still amazed there wasn't a bloodbath in the Capitol. The lack of a law enforcement plan or coordination seemed to help defuse the situation incited by POTUS.

Once the costumed and bedazzled interlopers got inside the offices and great halls to sit in chairs and smoke cigars, all the fight (adrenaline rush) had gone out of the wedding crashers and their capitol mall cop escorts. Then, the trespassing sightseers were dissipated without further violent deaths.

The overreaction of cops incited and instigated by POTUS during the summer BLM protests and Antifa riots led to an escalating chain reaction of violence and destruction.

Rick said...

1619 Author supports violent riots:


Ida Bae Wells
@nhannahjones
Profile picture
May 29th 2020, 9 tweets, 2 min read

There's a lot of consternation on here abt the uprising in Minneapolis & how the only means protestors can be effective is through non-violence.I hurt for the destruction like everyone else. But the fact of history is non-violent protest has not been successful for blk Americans.

YoungHegelian said...

@Howard,

The overreaction of cops incited and instigated by POTUS during the summer BLM protests and Antifa riots led to an escalating chain reaction of violence and destruction.

Howard, in your time here you've said a lot of stupid shit, but this one takes the cake. Do you think that the still-ongoing riots in Seattle & Portland, two of the most lefty places in the country, have anything to do with Trump?

ANTIFA & BLM & the like are far-leftists groups. They hate the US & everything it stands for. They want to tear it all down & build up something completely different in its place. It has nothing to do with Trump. It has nothing to do with Republicans or cops. They just want to destroy the USA as it has & now exists. It's not like they hide it.

Stephen said...

Young Hegelian,

Watch this video, at the end of which Trump explicitly says to the criminals who seized the Capitol: "We love you. You are beautiful." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8PHImxb8Po

Find me something where Biden has done anything remotely similar....His comments on the misconduct by persons protesting Floyd's murder unquivocally condemn criminal or violent conduct.

As for the claim that Trump supporters merely "bludgeoned" the police officer (reportedly with a fire extinguisher), I don't think it changes my question: why hasn't Trump called his family or ordered flags to be flown at half staff?

On another point made, it may be the case that a President who has been removed from office cannot be pardoned, although Nixon was pardoned after resigning, but I don't think that the passage of articles of impeachment by the House would prevent a pardon. So the impeachment followed by pardon scenario remains plausible, and in my view, desirable.

Stephen said...

Rick, The claim that non violent protest has not been successful for black Americans is hard to reconcile with the bus boycott, the lunch counter sit ins, and the march for voting rights at the Pettus Brigge in Selma in 1965.

The Godfather said...

My current understanding is that there were a lot of demonstrators (tens of thousands?), which is OK because we believe in free speech even for those we disagree with; and there were hundreds (?) of rioters -- i.e., those who broke through or circumvented the police lines and got into the Capitol, and we don't think rioters are OK.

AM I WRONG?

Rick said...

Howard said...
The overreaction of cops incited and instigated by POTUS during the summer BLM protests and Antifa riots led to an escalating chain reaction of violence and destruction.


This is amusing. In reality cops under-reacted because leftists in charge were encouraging riots. So for example Portland allowed protesters to create their autonomous zone. Only when this proved violent thwarting their propaganda goals did the the left change tactics.

Revealingly the recent riot proves left wingers understood all along their actions would be not be effective stopping riots. When faced with a riot they opposed - as they were last week - they immediately demanded a mass police response, unequivocal denunciations, and mass arrests - the exact opposite of their reaction to left wing riots.

Rick said...

Stephen said...
Rick, The claim that non violent protest has not been successful for black Americans is hard to reconcile with the bus boycott, the lunch counter sit ins, and the march for voting rights at the Pettus Brigge in Selma in 1965.


You should probably lecture Ida Bae about that then since you believe her support for violence is misplaced. I think it's revealing you believe her erroneous support for violence is best addressed by criticizing others who oppose violence rather than criticizing her for her support.

Douglas B. Levene said...

@doctrev: Sorry, Barney, I'm not buying your fake revolutionary b.s.

You want to storm public buildings, occupy them, steal souvenirs? LOL. Enjoy your time in jail.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 436   Newer› Newest»