A few thoughts about January 6, 2021

[Agema]

That isn't what happened. Republicans agreed to join the commission until Nancy Pelosi started vetoing their appointments. The process for selecting committees is admittedly not written in stone, but the Speaker of the House rejecting the appointments from the minority party is not normal behavior.

Rejected with good reason, much like you'd reject putting a police officer in charge of a criminal investigation that was potentially going to encompass his own conduct.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Yeah but remember, it doesn't count when Republicans commit crimes because...well he'd rather it not count. Attempting a coup doesn't count, organizing a coup doesn't count, Trump is too stupid to understand consequences therefore he's immune from crimes, Democrats exist therefore anything goes, and truly at the end of the day, don't we all know Trump really won and had every right to do whatever he wanted.
That's what it always boils down to. Any desperate, anti-reality moving of the goal posts to let the organizers of the Jan 6th operation off the hook, so they can reorganize and next time get it right. That's what its down to. Republicans are tired of democracy and have decided if the people pick the president, they'll just pick the people.

 

[tstorm823]

Rejected with good reason, much like you'd reject putting a police officer in charge of a criminal investigation that was potentially going to encompass his own conduct.

If Nancy Pelosi is going to disqualify anyone whose behavior led to the situation, she should begin by removing herself from the decision making process first.

 

[SilentPony]

If Nancy Pelosi is going to disqualify anyone whose behavior led to the situation, she should begin by removing herself from the decision making process first.

Ah, the classic abusive spouse logic. "Look what you made me do!" Is that it, huh? America is the misbehaving wife who needs to be taught a lesson, and your kind are the ones to do it? No more voting Democrats, only vote Republican or we slap around the capital a little more?
Seriously, do you hear yourself? People attempted to overthrow the Government and kill Democratic lawmakers, and your response is the Democrats are at fault and should take the blame?

 

[Gergar12]

The thing about the Nazis is that had the communists just sided with the social democrats and conservatives not let Hitler be head of state, their movement could have died down. Plus the German Middle Class sided with Hitler vs here whereas the US suburban middle-class sides with Biden. (at the moment)

In the US the conservatives have generally checked Trump, and his allies when they could without political reprisal like Mike Pence arguing he had no power to decertify the election, Mitch McConnell being publically against Trump, and the progressives generally sided with Biden after he won unless you a Jimmy Dore fan & ally, or a Russian or Chinese bot/paid troll.

We are nowhere near fascism right now. The US military under Ivy-league educated Gen. Milley has still upheld democracy. Even wealthy republican donors are revolting against Trump as evidenced by Pence who works for his doner's recent speech against Trump.

Edit: More evidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/31/trump-gets-little-support-from-major-republican-donors.html

 

[tstorm823]

Ah, the classic abusive spouse logic. "Look what you made me do!" Is that it, huh? America is the misbehaving wife who needs to be taught a lesson, and your kind are the ones to do it? No more voting Democrats, only vote Republican or we slap around the capital a little more?
Seriously, do you hear yourself? People attempted to overthrow the Government and kill Democratic lawmakers, and your response is the Democrats are at fault and should take the blame?

Do you apply this to any other protest? When they had a fake guillotine outside the White House, did you take Trump's side? You think it's the logic of spousal abuse to think politicians have earned disapproval?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Do you apply this to any other protest? When they had a fake guillotine outside the White House, did you take Trump's side? You think it's the logic of spousal abuse to think politicians have earned disapproval?

...would *you* apply this to any other protest? Put avowed BLM activists on juries?

 

[Agema]

The thing about the Nazis is that had the communists just sided with the social democrats and conservatives not let Hitler be head of state,

That's not how it happened. It was the conservatives who handed Germany to Hitler, not the communists.

Hitler became chancellor in 1932 by presidential decree because the traditional mainstream right backed him, to form a narrow minority government. He then used his new position to unleash a storm of repression against the left (SPD, KPD) and centre (Zentrum) now also able to use the resources of the state as well as the Nazi Party street thugs. He ran another election - unfair, unfree - overseen by Nazi functionaries to consolidate his power, and banned the KPD (communists) from taking their seats. That done, the Nazi Party had an outright majority: although the German conservatives backed him in the Enabling Act that made him de facto dictator anyway.

It is always the same: the extreme right takes power by subsuming a large chunk of the mainstream right, and then the rest of the mainstream right rolls over on its back and hands it the keys to office. The future will tell whether that's what we're observing now in the USA, and I do not feel very confident.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well, it is true that the leftists wouldn't play nice with the "centrists" after the "centrists" let the right murder lots of leftists some years back. To oversimplify.

 

[tstorm823]

...would *you* apply this to any other protest? Put avowed BLM activists on juries?

This isn't a criminal trial, this is representative government.

 

[Trunkage]

That's not how it happened. It was the conservatives who handed Germany to Hitler, not the communists.

Hitler became chancellor in 1932 by presidential decree because the traditional mainstream right backed him, to form a narrow minority government. He then used his new position to unleash a storm of repression against the left (SPD, KPD) and centre (Zentrum) now also able to use the resources of the state as well as the Nazi Party street thugs. He ran another election - unfair, unfree - overseen by Nazi functionaries to consolidate his power, and banned the KPD (communists) from taking their seats. That done, the Nazi Party had an outright majority: although the German conservatives backed him in the Enabling Act that made him de facto dictator anyway.

It is always the same: the extreme right takes power by subsuming a large chunk of the mainstream right, and then the rest of the mainstream right rolls over on its back and hands it the keys to office. The future will tell whether that's what we're observing now in the USA, and I do not feel very confident.

Just some minor things. Hindenburg and von Papen was voted in mid '32 over Hitler. This is notable as Hindenburg was an authoritarian right winger but generally centrist and left wingers voted for him this time as everyone saw how dangerous Hitler was. So when another crisis happened and they had to vote again in November, Hitler was on top.. but had to form a coalition. Which was a bit hard for anyone except right wingers. Papen (conservative catholic party) lost his job but intervened to give it to Hitler.

Even emergency power Hindenburg, a very authoritarian conservative, could see that Hitler was dangerous. Also, note that before the election, Germany could NOT get any policies through because of the infighting. It had pretty much been an emergency decree state since '30 so something like Hitler with all his emergency decrees were not that out of character for a chancellor. Now, if that reminds of you of a current country... youre not alone

 

[Agema]

If Nancy Pelosi is going to disqualify anyone whose behavior led to the situation, she should begin by removing herself from the decision making process first.

As SilentPony addressed.

If you are having an argument with someone, you don't reasonably justify punching them on the grounds that they were disagreeing with you.

 

[Silvanus]

This isn't a criminal trial, this is representative government.

It's literally an investigatory panel.

It would be utterly indefensible to place those under investigation on the panel investigating their own behaviour, handing them the power to let themselves off the hook. It would completely delegitimise the process, reducing the likelihood of trust and restitution to zero.

That is not a principle which exists only in a criminal trial. It is a principle which exists pretty much universally. Just imagine experiencing improper conduct from a colleague at work, going to HR, and HR placing that same colleague in charge of your complaint.

---

Here in the UK, there is currently a high-profile investigation ongoing into a string of parties that took place in 10 Downing Street and a few other government buildings. There is widespread public anger, because it appears very strongly that the Prime Minister held numerous booze-ups when the rest of the country was in full lockdown.

The government agreed to hold an independent inquiry. It appointed the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case to lead it. Then a short while later, it turned out that one of the parties had been held in Simon Case's office.

You know what happened when that become public knowledge? He recused himself. Because there is absolutely no fucking chance in hell that anyone in the country would respect the outcome of an inquiry into wrongdoing led by someone who was himself implicated.

And no, it's not a fucking valid defence of this to say that the opposition drove him to drink in the first place, so the opposition is just as much to blame.

 

[SilentPony]

Do you apply this to any other protest? When they had a fake guillotine outside the White House, did you take Trump's side? You think it's the logic of spousal abuse to think politicians have earned disapproval?

Im not hearing a no. You think Republicans should slap around Democrats and murder more Capital police officers if they lose the next election?

 

[tstorm823]

Because there is absolutely no fucking chance in hell that anyone in the country would respect the outcome of an inquiry into wrongdoing led by someone who was himself implicated.

The US has a variety of non-partisan entities doing independent investigations into the events of January 6th. This is not one of them.

Im not hearing a no. You think Republicans should slap around Democrats and murder more Capital police officers if they lose the next election?

I don't that, but you reaching that conclusion indicates that you think political violence is justified so long as you agree with their opinions.

 

[Gergar12]

That's not how it happened. It was the conservatives who handed Germany to Hitler, not the communists.

Hitler became chancellor in 1932 by presidential decree because the traditional mainstream right backed him, to form a narrow minority government. He then used his new position to unleash a storm of repression against the left (SPD, KPD) and centre (Zentrum) now also able to use the resources of the state as well as the Nazi Party street thugs. He ran another election - unfair, unfree - overseen by Nazi functionaries to consolidate his power, and banned the KPD (communists) from taking their seats. That done, the Nazi Party had an outright majority: although the German conservatives backed him in the Enabling Act that made him de facto dictator anyway.

It is always the same: the extreme right takes power by subsuming a large chunk of the mainstream right, and then the rest of the mainstream right rolls over on its back and hands it the keys to office. The future will tell whether that's what we're observing now in the USA, and I do not feel very confident.

The German middle class supported Hitler, the American middle class doesn't support Trump. Also had the SPD, and communists joined together, they could have formed a unified front against nazism. Trump is supported by a minority of Americans, and Biden is supported by a plurality of Americans. It's not even close right now given the number of Trump supporters who have died from Covid.

 

[SilentPony]

I don't that, but you reaching that conclusion indicates that you think political violence is justified so long as you agree with their opinions.

Exact opposite. If black lives matters had stormed the capital with the intent to murder Mike Pence, and Nancy Pelosi was the one conducting the operation, I'd be all in favor of an investigation into BLM, the operation, and think Pelosi is the subject of the investigation, not the investigator.
Your side always has this weird holdup that you think liberals/Democrats are equally vicious and contemptuous of rule of law and democracy as Republicans. Like if Trump was implicated in the Ghislaine Maxwell case, we'd all cheer, but if Bill Clinton was we'd call her a liar. NO! Fuck people who break the law, regardless of party. If Trump hurt children, throw the book at him. If Clinton did, throw the book at him. If Nancy Pelosi had a part in organizing the Jan 6th Operation, investigate her ass, and throw the book at her.
But she didn't, but the Republicans who she vetoed from the investigation did, which is why they were vetoed.
It shouldn't be that hard for conservatives to understand, but hey, they wouldn't be conservatives if they could. I mean they think blaming Pelosi for the Jan 6th operation that attempted to kill her makes sense, but blaming Trump after he told the rioters to fight like hell and march on the Capital to stop the certification of the election is somehow wacky nonsense land.

 

[Silvanus]

The US has a variety of non-partisan entities doing independent investigations into the events of January 6th. This is not one of them.

...and because other investigations exist, we may as well just allow this one to be as compromised as possible?

 

[Agema]

The US has a variety of non-partisan entities doing independent investigations into the events of January 6th. This is not one of them.

There was an option of a non-partisan independent commission, which the Republicans also rejected.

Again, here the rationale of the Republicans appears to be to minimise scrutiny wherever possible.

 

[tstorm823]

But she didn't, but the Republicans who she vetoed from the investigation did, which is why they were vetoed.

You got evidence of this?

...and because other investigations exist, we may as well just allow this one to be as compromised as possible?

Compromised by what? Republicans?