A few thoughts about January 6, 2021

[Thaluikhain]

I think that's attributing more organisation than is required. There was a call to action, and lots of people turned up, but more as a lynch mob than a revolution. This is not to dismiss the severity of the action, or the lack of legal reaction, though.

 

[SilentPony]

I think that's attributing more organisation than is required. There was a call to action, and lots of people turned up, but more as a lynch mob than a revolution. This is not to dismiss the severity of the action, or the lack of legal reaction, though.

Again, the more evidence that comes out, the less true that is.
Some mooks were in a mob, sure. Seems like the organizers knew what was going on. The Oath Keepers are being charged with Sedition, and US code 2384 requires a conspiracy to commit sedition. So the government thinks the Oath Keepers were planning to overthrow the government by preventing Pence from certifying the electors.
Several state officials were drafting alternate elector documents in the event Pence is stopped.
Giuliani was directing the planning of a fake electors scheme to overturn the election.
In order to prevent an audit from proving the new electors are false voting machines would need to be confiscated.
Trump was in the works creating a draft order for the military to confiscate voting machines.

That's not random and unorganized. That's not 3 different groups each magically and very coincidently taking on 1/3rd of an operation, to be conducted at the same time with the same goal using the same tactics, and boy howdy if they're that lucky they should go to Vegas.
All this talk of "Oh it wasn't organized, it was a spontaneous riot by some bad apples" is straight up gas-lighting. Its trying to rewrite history to let the organizers walk.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Several state officials were drafting alternate elector documents in the event Pence is stopped.
Giuliani was directing the planning of a fake electors scheme to overturn the election.
In order to prevent an audit from proving the new electors are false voting machines would need to be confiscated.
Trump was in the works creating a draft order for the military to confiscate voting machines.

Ah, ok, was unaware of that, that would certainly cast a different light on things.

 

[Avnger]

And I bet if you go 3 more degrees you can get to Kevin Bacon.

We know Trump wanted the election overturned.

We know there was a command center of his closest associates for overturning the election.

We know Trump was in contact with said command center hours before the insurrection.

We know far-right militia terrorist groups were armed, mobilized, and ready to try storming the capitol.

We know said militia terrorists were also escorting key Trump allies such as Roger Stone on the day of the attack. Other militia groups were also in contact with Stone leading up to that day.

Just in case you need someone to inform you: None of this is normal for an outgoing president on the day of Congress confirming an election.

Edit: Oh and we know Trump was suggesting and weighing options to seize voting machines in various states including drafting executive orders where DHS or the military were to be the stormtroopers.

 

[Agema]

And I bet if you go 3 more degrees you can get to Kevin Bacon.

The idea that there wasn't some degree of centralised plan to thwart the election is simply willful blindness.

This is a classic accountability avoidance tactic. Everyone points enough fingers at everyone else so that no person (especially the guy at the top) has to take the blame.

 

[tstorm823]

Just in case you need someone to inform you: None of this is normal for an outgoing president on the day of Congress confirming an election.

To answer the implication, none of this is normal for a Republican, but Democrats pulled essentially all this crap in 2016-2017. Elections were questioned, Democratic Senators objected to the vote, "faithless electors" actually tried to flip the election for Hillary, protests were organized multiple times during the month of January, protestors turned violent on inauguration day with people vandalizing Washington DC, and Hillary Clinton herself questioned the validity of the election.

To answer what you wrote directly, this isn't normal for an outgoing president, but that's because the large majority of presidents leave office after hitting the term limit.

It's perfectly normal for half the country to want the election overturned. It's wrong to pretend there was ever any chance of that happening, and trying to use that as a pretext to further demonize the people you already don't like is bad.

The idea that there wasn't some degree of centralised plan to thwart the election is simply willful blindness.

There was an attempt to legally challenge the results of the election. That effort was legal, nonviolent, and unsuccessful. Was the riot part of that effort? No.

 

[BrawlMan]

To answer the implication, none of this is normal for a Republican, but Democrats pulled essentially all this crap in 2016-2017. Elections were questioned, Democratic Senators objected to the vote, "faithless electors" actually tried to flip the election for Hillary, protests were organized multiple times during the month of January, protestors turned violent on inauguration day with people vandalizing Washington DC, and Hillary Clinton herself questioned the validity of the election.

To answer what you wrote directly, this isn't normal for an outgoing president, but that's because the large majority of presidents leave office after hitting the term limit.

It's perfectly normal for half the country to want the election overturned. It's wrong to pretend there was ever any chance of that happening, and trying to use that as a pretext to further demonize the people you already don't like is bad.

There was an attempt to legally challenge the results of the election. That effort was legal, nonviolent, and unsuccessful. Was the riot part of that effort? No.

 

[Kwak]

To answer the implication, none of this is normal for a Republican, but Democrats pulled essentially all this crap in 2016-2017. Elections were questioned, Democratic Senators objected to the vote, "faithless electors" actually tried to flip the election for Hillary, protests were organized multiple times during the month of January, protestors turned violent on inauguration day with people vandalizing Washington DC, and Hillary Clinton herself questioned the validity of the election.

To answer what you wrote directly, this isn't normal for an outgoing president, but that's because the large majority of presidents leave office after hitting the term limit.

It's perfectly normal for half the country to want the election overturned. It's wrong to pretend there was ever any chance of that happening, and trying to use that as a pretext to further demonize the people you already don't like is bad.

There was an attempt to legally challenge the results of the election. That effort was legal, nonviolent, and unsuccessful. Was the riot part of that effort? No.

What will it take for you to condemn it? What level of planning?

 

[tstorm823]

What will it take for you to condemn it? What level of planning?

It's not a matter of condemning or not. It's that there isn't a singular "it". I can condemn the rioting, I can ridicule the people declaring themselves Trump's electors in case the courts magically flip the result, I can ignore the politicians objecting to the election... those are all different things

 

[Buyetyen]

What will it take for you to condemn it? What level of planning?

There isn't one. There is no bottom on the right anymore. Winning is all that matters and all means are justified in the pursuit of victory.

 

[SilentPony]

There isn't one. There is no bottom on the right anymore. Winning is all that matters and all means are justified in the pursuit of victory.

This is the correct answer. The GOP has adopted the morality of Donald Trump, ie anything goes. Literally anything. There is no tactic too scummy, no talking point too dark, no conspiracy too wild. Its power grab for a power's grab sake.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

And I bet if you go 3 more degrees you can get to Kevin Bacon.

That's just desperate

 

[SilentPony]

Oh wow! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-tore-records-turned-over-124231581.html

Destroying records while still in office so no one could investigate. That sure is random. What a kooky, random guy Trump and his goons were, just randomly tearing up hand written notes and orders for actions to be taken in regards to January 6th, 2020, of all random, non-organized dates.

 

[tstorm823]

Destroying records while still in office so no one could investigate. That sure is random. What a kooky, random guy Trump and his goons were, just randomly tearing up hand written notes and orders for actions to be taken in regards to January 6th, 2020, of all random, non-organized dates.

Follow your source, click the link about how tearing up papers was a thing Trump did, note that the first example it gives was a letter from Democrats that Trump didn't like. You're inferring that records were destroyed so no one could investigate, but using the link you've provided, I've learned that Trump did that to papers he just didn't care for, and was informed by staff that they're going to be preserved and he should stop tearing things up, which makes your inference an unlikely explanation of events.

 

[SilentPony]

Follow your source, click the link about how tearing up papers was a thing Trump did, note that the first example it gives was a letter from Democrats that Trump didn't like. You're inferring that records were destroyed so no one could investigate, but using the link you've provided, I've learned that Trump did that to papers he just didn't care for, and was informed by staff that they're going to be preserved and he should stop tearing things up, which makes your inference an unlikely explanation of events.

Did YOU read the link? Because what you're talking about is events related to notes and documents from 2018!
What Trump is alleged to have destroyed was notes, hand written it seems, written on or about Jan 6th and were torn up after the events of the 6th.
And not to quote too directly from the article, but " A president does not own the records generated by his own administration. The definition of presidential records is broad. Trump’s own notes to himself could qualify and destroying them could be the criminal destruction of government property."

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

What will it take for you to condemn it?

The people he hates doing it.

 

[Agema]

There was an attempt to legally challenge the results of the election. That effort was legal, nonviolent, and unsuccessful. Was the riot part of that effort? No.

Sorry, but that is utter bullshit. These incidents did not occur in isolation.

It is not possible to view the Trump administration's actions in the 2020 election as anything short of a determined attempt to undermine or subvert an election, which occurred through a range of tactics. Attacking the legitimacy of the election and the electoral process; deliberate lies and misinformation; attempting to pressure electoral officials (note Trump is under criminal investigation in Georgia); attempting to pressure justice officials into unjustified investigations; all manner of legal shenanigans and dodgy plots; pressuring the VP to likely overstep his powers; and sending a mob at the Capitol.

 

[tstorm823]

What Trump is alleged to have destroyed was notes, hand written it seems, written on or about Jan 6th and were torn up after the events of the 6th.

It genuinely doesn't say that. It says some of the papers turned over to the commission by the national archive were torn up. You inferred what they are about, when they were written, and why they were torn, but it says none of that.

Sorry, but that is utter bullshit. These incidents did not occur in isolation.

It is not possible to view the Trump administration's actions in the 2020 election as anything short of a determined attempt to undermine or subvert an election, which occurred through a range of tactics. Attacking the legitimacy of the election and the electoral process; deliberate lies and misinformation; attempting to pressure electoral officials (note Trump is under criminal investigation in Georgia); attempting to pressure justice officials into unjustified investigations; all manner of legal shenanigans and dodgy plots; pressuring the VP to likely overstep his powers; and sending a mob at the Capitol.

I don't want to engage too far with you on this. All of those things except the mob have numerous precedents. Donald Trump didn't intentionally send the mob. I respect your opinions on most things, but you don't seem to see reality when it comes to Trump.

 

[Silvanus]

Donald Trump didn't intentionally send the mob.

"And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore. [...] All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they’re doing … We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. [...] Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about … We will stop the steal.”

Yeah, who on earth would hear those words being spoken to a furious, armed crowd and conclude that it was incitement? Tsk!

 

[Cheetodust]

Yeah, who on earth would hear those words being spoken to a furious, armed crowd and conclude that it was incitement? Tsk!

And Giuliani calling for "trial by combat".