DC Unrest Megathread

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/alanfeuer/status/1349820067974938629

What I don't understand about this specific incident, is why did the other guards that were at the door (door area), not surge forward in strength (20 feet or so) in order to reach this guard that was on the ground. They could have then grabbed him and then retreated back to their original line.

Seeing a fellow guard in distress and immediate need is motivation enough. And they would have had the right to use excessive force, if necessary, to achieve this goal. These trump bastards were (slowly) killing this guard, right in front of them.

I'm no expert, but I believe that's what they did, but their primary goal was to hold the Cordon to keep the mob from breaking through and potentially slaughtering everyone in the building. Especially when doing so would leave them able to be attacked on three sides by an armed violent mob that vastly outnumbered them.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1350151770450911232

Genuinely interested to know if a single one of those signatories were Republican officials.

It would warm my heart, but I'm realistic.

[Badger]

US takes back its assertion that Capitol rioters wanted to 'capture and assassinate' officials

Justice Department prosecutors have formally walked back their assertion in a court filing that said Capitol rioters sought to "capture and assassinate elected officials."

A federal prosecutor in Arizona asked a magistrate judge in a hearing on Friday to strike the line in a recent court filing about defendant Jacob Anthony Chansley, a man who is alleged to have led some in the crowd in the first wave into the Capitol with a bullhorn while carrying a spear and wearing a fur headdress.

The entire line the prosecutors want to omit from their court filing is: "Strong evidence, including Chansley's own words and actions at the Capitol, supports that the intent of the Capitol rioters was to capture and assassinate elected officials in the United States Government."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/15/politics/capitol-capture-assassinate-elected-officials/index.html

What?? Rioters storming the capitol floor arm with zip ties and chanting hang Mike Pence isn't enough of a clue?

[Badger]

US takes back its assertion that Capitol rioters wanted to 'capture and assassinate' officials

Justice Department prosecutors have formally walked back their assertion in a court filing that said Capitol rioters sought to "capture and assassinate elected officials."

A federal prosecutor in Arizona asked a magistrate judge in a hearing on Friday to strike the line in a recent court filing about defendant Jacob Anthony Chansley, a man who is alleged to have led some in the crowd in the first wave into the Capitol with a bullhorn while carrying a spear and wearing a fur headdress.

The entire line the prosecutors want to omit from their court filing is: "Strong evidence, including Chansley's own words and actions at the Capitol, supports that the intent of the Capitol rioters was to capture and assassinate elected officials in the United States Government."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/15/politics/capitol-capture-assassinate-elected-officials/index.html

What?? Rioters storming the capitol floor arm with zip ties and chanting hang Mike Pence isn't enough of a clue?

My understanding is that the feds are extremely methodical and cautious on these matters? The sentence retracted is rather specific.

True. You are absolutely correct on that point.

But still, even by that standard that's a rather spit-take inducing announcement.

[Badger]

It is clear that some of the rioters at least had the intent to capture/assassinate. But maybe there’s no evidence stupid horns man was one of those, so they don’t want to give his legal team something to seize on to deflect from his very clear crimes?

I don’t know, just spitballing here but it would make sense.

I think that is the actual story here.
The dropping of "the assertion to capture and assassinate" only pertains to the case/charges regarding this QAnon-wearing-horns moron, and not necessarily for all cases.

But if that were the case, wouldn't they seek to strike only the words " including Chansley's own words and actions at the Capitol"? Striking the entire sentence seems to State the entire mob's violent intent can't be established at this point, which I find difficult to swallow.

[Badger]

Have many Trump supporters been around since Trump attempted a coup?

I’ve only seen Del Tachi post a few times, and have yet to hear from Fuzzy Bear or SirWoodbury.


I hopeful that they now see they were wrong to support him but I also kinda doubt it.

Fuzzy made a post suggesting Trump should resign. He's been very quiet though.

Woodbury is probably in federal custody.

He's been sh**tposting support for Trump and apologism for the Capitol rioters on AAD.

[Badger]

Have many Trump supporters been around since Trump attempted a coup?
I’ve only seen Del Tachi post a few times, and have yet to hear from Fuzzy Bear or SirWoodbury.
I hopeful that they now see they were wrong to support him but I also kinda doubt it.

Here is Fuzzy's recent statement regarding trump's Traitorous actions that incited a terrorist insurrection at The Capitol ...

... the idea that Trump "instigated insurrection" is preposterous, and will be found so by history. 

[Badger]

Update: it was a small fire that's been put out.

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1351193997197389827

Thank goodness that it was small, but considering everything I would consider it an unlikely coincidence that this was accidental as opposed to deliberate, albeit ineffective, arson. I'll wait for the investigative reports, of course, but I'm justifiably concerned.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1351197878987927552
https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1351217658662891535

She and this QAnon Lady from Georgia should be expelled from congress. And preferably take Cruz and Hawley with them. They're an embarrassment.

If these allegations are true (and I have no reason to believe that they're not), you'd have to be pretty dumb to lie about doing something in what is most certainly one of the most camera-heavy capital buildings.

The issue is going to be she will inevitably claim these were just like-minded activists she was showing around the capitol and she had no idea they were going to storm the building a few days later. Just like the gendarme being shocked, absolutely shocked I tell you, that there was gambling going on at Rick's Club. "Surely we're not going to punish, let alone expel, a member of Congress just for giving a few activists a behind-the-scenes tour of the Capitol building? Members do that all the time!"

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1351197878987927552
https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1351217658662891535

Does anyone know if she ends up being expelled from congress would that mean she'd be barred running again?

IIRC, Adam Clayton Powell successfully ran again while his expulsion was on appeal to the SCOTUS.

[Badger]

A rioter from Texas threatened to shoot his children if they told the FBI that he participated in the riots at the Capitol.

A Texas man with ties to a right-wing extremist group threatened to shoot his children if they told the FBI he traveled to Washington to storm the Capitol with other President Trump supporters, according to court documents.

Guy Reffitt threatened his daughter and son while arguing with them about his role in the Capitol siege, his wife told an FBI agent, according to the court papers filed in Washington, DC.

“If you turn me in, you’re a traitor and you know what happens to traitors … traitors get shot,” Reffitt allegedly said to his kids.

I give you the pro-life, pro-family party, ladies and gents.

"Killing my kids to own the libs! Who needs kids when I can have four more years of President Trump!?"

Nothing unhinged or irrational about that.

The motivation there has nothing to do with Trump or "owning the libs."   It's unbridled rage at the prospect of betrayal from a family member.  It is sadly entirely predictable that some people would react in such a way.

Jesus, you will defend Trump and these terrorists at every turn

I think it's actually worth understanding social dynamics beyond merely whether something is good or bad.  That really annoys people for some reason but it's important if you ever want to solve things or even just keep things from getting worse.

People right now are being encouraged to turn in their family members.  If you support that, you need to at least recognize that some people won't have the character to respond in a healthy way when it happens to them.

You tell him, Shua! Thank goodness we had such a smarty smart person like you around to explain to us the completely understandable rationality behind threatening to murder one's own children.

Checkmate libtards!

[Badger]

Lol, why the hell would we go easy on a felony criminal because they are threatening to murder their children? I find it impossible to believe that someone would seriously make the argument that a person wanting to murder their own children is evidence that the law shouldn't pursue that person.

Yes, it would definitely be weird if someone was arguing that.

No one here has any idea what you are trying to argue, shua, and I suspect that includes yourself.

And no, that's not because anyone here lacks your self-perceived Galaxy brain level of analysis, but because you have crossed the border from your usual status of inscrutable to being outright incomprehensible.

[Badger]

Lol, why the hell would we go easy on a felony criminal because they are threatening to murder their children? I find it impossible to believe that someone would seriously make the argument that a person wanting to murder their own children is evidence that the law shouldn't pursue that person.

Yes, it would definitely be weird if someone was arguing that.

No one here has any idea what you are trying to argue, shua, and I suspect that includes yourself.

And no, that's not because anyone here lacks your self-perceived Galaxy brain level of analysis, but because you have crossed the border from your usual status of inscrutable to being outright incomprehensible.

I don't know what the point of comments like this are.  If you have a specific question about something I said, feel free to present it!

" I've incoherently rambled on at length. vearing between foolish and outright alarming, but feel free to ask me follow up questions!"

Hard pass.

[Badger]

Lol, why the hell would we go easy on a felony criminal because they are threatening to murder their children? I find it impossible to believe that someone would seriously make the argument that a person wanting to murder their own children is evidence that the law shouldn't pursue that person.

Yes, it would definitely be weird if someone was arguing that.

No one here has any idea what you are trying to argue, shua, and I suspect that includes yourself.

And no, that's not because anyone here lacks your self-perceived Galaxy brain level of analysis, but because you have crossed the border from your usual status of inscrutable to being outright incomprehensible.

I don't know what the point of comments like this are.  If you have a specific question about something I said, feel free to present it!

I have a question, albeit a broad one.

Don't you think it's a little weird that, in the wake of a mob storming the seat of American democracy, interrupting the discharging of the duties of Congress, and very nearly resulting in serious bodily harm for elected officials, the entirety of your comments seem to be about defending the people who perpetrated this attack or who appear to have (to be generous) inspired it? Like, even if all your claims were 100% correct, don't you think it's a little curious that this seems to be your sole focus? What do you think it might say about you that your priority seems to be playing defense for people aligned with the side that did this (again, whether or not the specific points you bring up in their defense are accurate or not) rather than condemning it?

I don't see any danger here that their actions aren't being condemned enough.  I do see a great deal of danger in promoting the dehumanization of all those in attendance (and extended by association to large swaths of the American population).

Yes, you inmate contrarian. How terrible that we should dehumanize a white supremacist aligned traitorous seditious cop killing Lynch Mob. Why can't we look on their good side such as how they some of them were nice to their pets and, at least those parents not threatening to murder their kids in their sleep, nice to their family. What WERE we thinking?? Thank you so much for sending us straight.

And by setting us straight, I meant confirming where your true sympathies really lie. Not that it was ever really that much in question, mind you.

[Badger]

Lol, why the hell would we go easy on a felony criminal because they are threatening to murder their children? I find it impossible to believe that someone would seriously make the argument that a person wanting to murder their own children is evidence that the law shouldn't pursue that person.

Yes, it would definitely be weird if someone was arguing that.

No one here has any idea what you are trying to argue, shua, and I suspect that includes yourself.

And no, that's not because anyone here lacks your self-perceived Galaxy brain level of analysis, but because you have crossed the border from your usual status of inscrutable to being outright incomprehensible.

I don't know what the point of comments like this are.  If you have a specific question about something I said, feel free to present it!

I have a question, albeit a broad one.

Don't you think it's a little weird that, in the wake of a mob storming the seat of American democracy, interrupting the discharging of the duties of Congress, and very nearly resulting in serious bodily harm for elected officials, the entirety of your comments seem to be about defending the people who perpetrated this attack or who appear to have (to be generous) inspired it? Like, even if all your claims were 100% correct, don't you think it's a little curious that this seems to be your sole focus? What do you think it might say about you that your priority seems to be playing defense for people aligned with the side that did this (again, whether or not the specific points you bring up in their defense are accurate or not) rather than condemning it?

I don't see any danger here that their actions aren't being condemned enough.  I do see a great deal of danger in promoting the dehumanization of all those in attendance (and extended by association to large swaths of the American population).

Hiding behind other people's condemnations is a dodge. The point is not whether the Sum Total of Condemnation is sufficiently high or not. Who f**king cares? It's not like any of us condemning it has any impact of what happens. The point is whether YOU, Shua, are interested at all in condemning it. Not out of some grand utilitarian calculus, but just because condemning it is the right thing to do, because it would show that you actually care about broader values beyond the standard partisan back and forth.

It's just difficult to believe that you even care about what happened to the Capitol, when none of your posts contain even the slightest hint of a negative emotional reaction to them. I don't know if in your heart of hearts you believe they were right or wrong to do it, and I don't even think that's the point. I think you've just decided that, right or wrong, they're part of "your" team and you have to stand by them, and this is more important to you than standing by democracy itself. I keep hoping to be proven wrong.

(Insert Standing ovation gif)

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/CarolLeonnig/status/1352066474492497921

when is he getting fired court martialed?

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/SollenbergerRC/status/1352276941378891778?
Cohen also partially walked back his claims.

Why are people sure that anyone did?

Congresswoman Micki Sherrill claimed to have viewed it first hand. There are other members of Congress making the same claim. Andre Carson identified Lauren boebert by name as having done so.

Investigation obviously needs done, and Sherrill could have been wrong. Still, she does not strike me as an alarmist.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1354163145850429442

"pleaseTrumppleaseTrumppleaseTrump......."

[Badger]

How does a Navy Seal trained on disinformation warfare fall for this?

From Navy SEAL to Part of the Angry Mob Outside the Capitol
The presence in Washington of a longtime member of the Navy SEALs who was trained to identify misinformation reflects the partisan politics that helped lead to the assault.

But none of it has shaken his belief, against all evidence, that the presidential election was stolen and that people like him were right to rise up.

It is surprising because Mr. Newbold’s background would seem to armor him better than most against the lure of baseless conspiracy theories. In the Navy, he was trained as an expert in sorting information from disinformation, a clandestine commando who spent years working in intelligence paired with the C.I.A., and he once mocked the idea of shadowy antidemocratic plots as “tinfoil hat” thinking.

Even so, like thousands of others who surged to Washington this month to support President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Newbold bought into the fabricated theory that the election was rigged by a shadowy cabal of liberal power brokers who had pushed the nation to the precipice of civil war. No one could persuade him otherwise.

By the late fall of 2020, he was spending time on private Facebook pages where far-right chatter proliferated. He posted long, often angry video soliloquies about how the country was being stolen. He seemed to become increasingly convinced that people were plotting not just against Mr. Trump but against the Constitution, and as a veteran it was his duty to defend it.

Mr. Newbold began holding private meetings at his shooting club with other like-minded members, according to a former member who said he quit because he was alarmed at the growing extremism.

“It became super cultlike,” said the former member, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was afraid of retaliation. “I tried to reason with him, show him facts, and he just went nuclear.”

Because any so-called expert, especially in a field such as what he administered in the Navy, is a human being with their own deeply-held partisan beliefs. I'm sure the " disinformation" he separated from "facts" were highly colored by his beliefs, and our intelligence suffered as a result. And in the pre Trump Armed Forces where there was a lot more open conservative partisanship, it would have probably required a clear-cut and demonstrable harmful failure on his part for any consequences to Result.

[Badger]

How does a Navy Seal trained on disinformation warfare fall for this?

Because "super-duper high-speed Navy SEAL trained in disinformation warfare"

translated into English:

some dude on a 6-month detail putting together powerpoint presentations for intel officers.

This. I guarantee the CIA officers he worked with were doing all of the real vetting of intelligence and he was more or less....there. Someone with this level of partisanship and disassociation from reality could never execute such a gig effectively on his own.

Don't buy this. Prior to Trump in particular the military has had a right-wing bias which colors intelligence-gathering. Freak Show like this may very well have been able to skate under the radar for years.

Plus, it's quite possible his descent into conspiracy theory Madness may have accelerated since he left the service.

[Badger]

Another in a long list of potentially criminal actions by the Trump administration:

How Trump’s Focus on Antifa Distracted Attention From the Far-Right Threat
Federal law enforcement shifted resources last year in response to Donald Trump’s insistence that the radical left endangered the country. Meanwhile, right-wing extremism was building ominously.

Mr. Trump’s efforts to focus his administration on the antifa movement and leftist groups did not stop the Justice Department and the F.B.I. from pursuing cases of right-wing extremism. They broke up a kidnapping plot, for example, targeting Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, a Democrat.

But the effect of his direction was nonetheless substantial, according to interviews with current and former officials, diverting key portions of the federal law enforcement and domestic security agencies at a time when the threat from the far right was building ominously.

In late spring and early summer, as the racial justice demonstrations intensified, Justice Department officials began shifting federal prosecutors and F.B.I. agents from investigations into violent white supremacists to focus on cases involving rioters or anarchists, including those who might be associated with the antifa movement. One Justice Department prosecutor was sufficiently concerned about an excessive focus on antifa that the official went to the department’s independent inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, telling his office that politics might have played a part.

- Federal prosecutors and agents felt pressure to uncover a left-wing extremist criminal conspiracy that never materialized, according to two people who worked on Justice Department efforts to counter domestic terrorism. They were told to do so even though the F.B.I., in particular, had increasingly expressed concern about the threat from white supremacists, long the top domestic terrorism threat, and well-organized far-right extremist groups that had allied themselves with the president.

- White House and Justice Department officials stifled internal efforts to publicly promote concerns about the far-right threat, with aides to Mr. Trump seeking to suppress the phrase “domestic terrorism” in internal discussions, according to a former official at the Department of Homeland Security.

- Requests for funding to bolster the number of analysts who search social media posts for warnings of potential violent extremism were denied by top homeland security officials, limiting the department’s ability to spot developing threats like the post-Election Day anger among far-right groups over Mr. Trump’s loss.

The Trump administration's focus on Antifa is the textbook example of a red herring, to the detriment of the country as a whole.  

Even worse than a red herring distraction. Trump and officials refused to seriously address the growing rise of these right-wing threats because they explicitly and unreservedly worshipped Trump, and our resident narcissistic personality disorder sociopath is incapable of doing anything but reward people for their personal loyalty no matter how reprehensible or dangerous they are.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/RaquelNPhoto/status/1347010671087546368

Just horrifying.

Because some mod just deleted my post suggesting that members of this literal lynch-mob were worthy of death as "inappropriate", let me make it more clear. I sincerely wish that a good armed individual had been there to exercise their complete legal right of Defense of others and, considering the imminent  lethal threat  manifested by a Lynch Mob of 20  angry rioters beating this woman, mowed these people down, as the law permits.

They deserved to die for their actions, legally and morally.

I'm going to call myself out here as a lesson to jumping to conclusions, especially if one has a loaded gun in one's hand.

I meant what I said above. HOWEVER, I personally very well might have started firing at that would be lynch mob to avoid that woman's death, starting with the big ape looking dude holding her.

Bad mistake. HUUUUGE mistake! I went on line to see whatever happened here--still sickened by the report of "no arrests made", which is apparently still the case . I actually saw the attacked woman interviewed. To my shock she said the big guy who grabbed her in that picture was whispering in her ear "Be cool. These people literally want to kill you. Just come with me and I'll get you out of here." And he did. The woman told the CBS affiliate reporter she credits that man with saving her life!

Lesson for us all. Especially to me and a reminder why I refuse to by a gun.

[Badger]

She was stunned by Biden's inauguration. How this South Carolina mom escaped QAnon.

Click here ... https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/03/tech/qanon-mom-former-believer/index.html


If anyone is interested, watch this 5 minute video.
I find interviews like this, captivating and shocking. Just complete disbelief that normal people could not only fall for this nonsense, but make it a major part of their life (and thus allow it to destroy them and relations with their loved ones).

Wonderful to see, and inspiring. However, any happiness here is marred by two points of, not cynicism, but Blount realism.

First, this poor woman and her family are probably going to be subjected to numerous death threats over the coming weeks. All because she publicly announced that she no longer believed in lunatic conspiracy theories.

Secondly, for every one woman like this who can get a clue there are probably about fifty other qanon believers who will never change anytime in the foreseeable future , if ever.

[Badger]

No charges have been recommended for the cop who shot the lady whose name I’m not gonna say.

Good. They were trespassing and warned. He did his job.

Really amazing how Jan 6 just erased an entire summer of advocacy for Black Lives Matter views on use of force by police.

Right, because Breonna Taylor was totally trying to break into the capitol and possibly assassinate members of Congress. I forgot.

I get that being a contrarian on literally everything is your schtick, but this is tedious at best and you know it.

[Badger]

No charges have been recommended for the cop who shot the lady whose name I’m not gonna say.

Good. They were trespassing and warned. He did his job.

Really amazing how Jan 6 just erased an entire summer of advocacy for Black Lives Matter views on use of force by police.

Do you seriously not see the difference between a woman at the head of a lynch mob attempting to break through the last barricade between themselves and their targets and a mentally ill man who bounced a check or a guy selling loose cigarettes or a teenager stealing cigars or a 13 year old playing with a toy gun?

No he doesn't, LV. No he doesn't.