Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[archer]

58 minutes ago, BNakagawa said:

they are, for some reason, afraid of the bus.

 

I don't know why they'd be afraid of the bus.

 

Although it's a short one, at least they get to ride in the front.

[BNakagawa]

everyone associated with 45 ends up under the bus sooner or later.

[Pariah]

Wait, they can DO that?  

 

Passengers who harassed Romney at SLC Airport placed on No-Fly list

 

It's called "consequences", boys and girls. 

[TrickstaPriest]

16 minutes ago, Pariah said:

Wait, they can DO that?  

 

Passengers who harassed Romney at SLC Airport placed on No-Fly list

 

It's called "consequences", boys and girls. 

 

As you can imagine, I don't like the overreach.

 

But man, the crazy people out there (going this far for Trump).  😕

[archer]

3 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

As you can imagine, I don't like the overreach.

 

But man, the crazy people out there (going this far for Trump).  😕

 

After 9-11, misbehaving inside an airport once you get through security is no different than misbehaving inside an airplane while it's in the air.

 

Considering that if you go very far at all you could be charged with federal crimes, being put on a company's no-fly list is relatively mild.

 

And this particular article wasn't very clear but the people were put on Delta Airlines' internal no-fly list so that they can't fly on Delta Airlines. These people were not put on the national no-fly list.

[megaplayboy]

There's a lot of false equivalency being tossed around on the right to try to downplay and equate the insurrectionists with BLM, Antifa, and people concerned about Russian interference.  I'm assuming this level of diversion and denial lasts until the first domestic terror act to occur during the new administration, likely committed explicitly in Trump's name.  

[Cygnia]

Oh hey, they're looting the White House now...

[archer]

4 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

Oh hey, they're looting the White House now...

 

This one photo: it always is at least a possibility that this one item actually belonged to the guy and that he brought it to the White House as part of his office decorations. People do bring items from home to display in their office and not everyone grows up in a 1 bedroom apartment on the wrong side of town.

 

(I could make a lot of money on the side by buying a bunch of cheap but historical-looking things, displaying them and taking pictures in my White House office, then selling them later as authentic items which were in the White House when Trump was president. I'd be shocked if none of the Trump grifters has thought of doing that.)

 

That aside, I always expected the White House to be looted or vandalized when the pro-Trumpers left. If you have no respect for the government, the republic, or its institutions, there's no reason to suspect that you'd start having that respect as you're clearing out your desk.

[Ragitsu]

 

[unclevlad]

4 hours ago, Pariah said:

Wait, they can DO that?  

 

Passengers who harassed Romney at SLC Airport placed on No-Fly list

 

It's called "consequences", boys and girls. 

 

CNN did an interview with a Democratic congressman from California because he took an insane amount of harassment from *several* Trump supporters.  The brief version is here:
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/11/rep-lou-correa-dulles-airport-harassment-orig-jm.cnn

The longer version showed while the congressman was talking to Don Lemon had multiple voices and much more stridency.

And Tricksta, this was Delta's response;  the passenger wasn't put onto the national, TSA No-Fly list.  Just Delta's.  Here's the question on whether this is an overrreaction:  imagine this happened on the plane.  Moving to a physical assault would be an escalation, to be sure...but how much of one?  I'm just saying punches, of course.  What is the risk it would spread, so it was no longer one person on each side?  This absolutely affects the safe and proper operation of the plane, so even if you think it's a *small* risk...it's far too much to accept.

[pawsplay]

Although I have radically shifted in my overall views, my personal roots are in libtertarianism. One thing I have learned is that the division between Democrats and Republicans at least creates some space in the middle to make a case for strong free speech. I am about as free speech as you can get.

But I have grown towards a more encompassing view of incitement. "I kind of like Nazis," is free speech. Having a parade with swastikas in a racially diverse city is a threat.

[Ragitsu]

20 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

Although I have radically shifted in my overall views, my personal roots are in libtertarianism. One thing I have learned is that the division between Democrats and Republicans at least creates some space in the middle to make a case for strong free speech. I am about as free speech as you can get.

But I have grown towards a more encompassing view of incitement. "I kind of like Nazis," is free speech. Having a parade with swastikas in a racially diverse city is a threat.

 

The Confederate Flag is our swastika.

[unclevlad]

10 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

Although I have radically shifted in my overall views, my personal roots are in libtertarianism. One thing I have learned is that the division between Democrats and Republicans at least creates some space in the middle to make a case for strong free speech. I am about as free speech as you can get.

But I have grown towards a more encompassing view of incitement. "I kind of like Nazis," is free speech. Having a parade with swastikas in a racially diverse city is a threat.

 

This debate is not new.  

https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/topics/freedom-of-speech-2/personal-public-expression-overview/fighting-words/

 

But it's rather nuanced:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fighting_words

 

Your example of a parade with swastikas is flirting on the border, IIRC.  Some such have been turned down for permits, others have I believe received them.  It'll also have to be decided by the courts whether more clearly violent expressions in social media *outside* the event in question, becomes a factor.

 

Also, the standards against which these decisions are made, are not fixed.  The social climate should be a factor.  Our culture takes umbrage now for much less insult, and reacts more strongly.  So what constitutes "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" is also dynamic.  Individual reaction versus mob reaction is another factor.

[pawsplay]

I would say it's more like our Iron Cross... a formerly neutral military symbol that was used to replace images of a disfavored government, but which was immediately co-opted by people in piece time to ambiguously signal their allegiance in the peacetime after.

[unclevlad]

23 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

I would say it's more like our Iron Cross... a formerly neutral military symbol that was used to replace images of a disfavored government, but which was immediately co-opted by people in piece time to ambiguously signal their allegiance in the peacetime after.

 

But the confederate flag was a political symbol from the get-go, given that it was the common symbol of the confederate government.  Your argument would hold up better had the swastika not been the centerpiece of the Nazi flag, and used more as a personal symbol...say, as an alternative to the stylized SS tabs.  

[archer]

The Justice Department’s Office of Public Affairs on Thursday launched a new webpage listing every defendant facing charges in Washington, D.C., over their alleged roles in last week’s violent pro-Trump riot at the Capitol. 

 

The page lists the name of each defendant, along with their specific charges, place of residency, the case status and the date the information was last updated on the website. The page’s extensive chart also includes links to digital copies of the press releases and charging documents associated with each case. 

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/investigations-regarding-violence-capitol

 

(Hat tip to The Hill)

 

MAGA:

 

Many 

Are

Getting

Arrested

[archer]

11 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

 

But the confederate flag was a political symbol from the get-go, given that it was the common symbol of the confederate government.  

 

What we generally think of as the confederate flag is really the battle flag used by the southern armies. They came up with that for battlefield use because the "Stars and Bars" official flag of the confederacy was too similar to the USA flag and caused confusion on the battlefield.

 

The confederate battle flag wasn't adopted for use by the confederate government until 1863.

 

So his comparison of that flag (in it's original use) to the Iron Cross (in it's original use) wasn't entirely inaccurate.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America

[archer]

The guy who was carrying a confederate flag inside the Capitol Building and his son have both surrendered themselves to the authorities.

 

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvx5a8/the-guy-who-flew-a-confederate-flag-in-the-capitol-has-predictably-surrendered

[Lord Liaden]

45 minutes ago, archer said:

The Justice Department’s Office of Public Affairs on Thursday launched a new webpage listing every defendant facing charges in Washington, D.C., over their alleged roles in last week’s violent pro-Trump riot at the Capitol. 

 

The page lists the name of each defendant, along with their specific charges, place of residency, the case status and the date the information was last updated on the website. The page’s extensive chart also includes links to digital copies of the press releases and charging documents associated with each case. 

 

 

I find this development unsettling. I understand the deterrent intent behind the decision, but these people are still only charged, not convicted. It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process" are still supposed to be cornerstones of the American justice system. Making these people's names and locations public, in this political climate, means they and their loved ones face ostracism, harassment, or worse. It's punishing them before they've been convicted.

 

This smacks a little too much of an "enemies list" for my liking.

[archer]

16 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

I find this development unsettling. I understand the deterrent intent behind the decision, but these people are still only charged, not convicted. It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process" are still supposed to be cornerstones of the American justice system. Making these people's names and locations public, in this political climate, means they and their loved ones face ostracism, harassment, or worse. It's punishing them before they've been convicted.

 

This smacks a little too much of an "enemies list" for my liking.

 

That's all public information anyway. The only difference is that the government is gathering the information in one location rather than having it available to the public in a wide variety of government websites. Or depending on a third party to look it up on government websites and provide people with links to the information.

 

Once you're arrested and charged, that becomes public information because it's in the court system. Anybody can look up the name of the person, the charges against them, and the dates if they want to go through the effort.

 

edit:

Like here's a third party site which was linking to all the information.

 

https://seditiontracker.com/

[Thia Halmades]

Archer is absolutely correct, and I get what you’re driving at, LL, however.

 

And I say this as someone with strong liberal leanings, who values their anonymity above almost all else: this is just the chickens coming home to roost. After the doxxing, the virtual bullying, the Proud Boys insisting on beating people up in the streets like a scene out of Fight Club, and the fact they’re exceptionally outspoken, they aren’t going to be ostracized by this any more than they already were by the company they elected to keep and those who they shunned.

 

My wife’s Aunt has gone “full Q” as we say, and I can tell you that not only did she make my mother in law cry on her birthday, she’s never going to see my daughter again, even by video call. And I feel zero bad about enforcing that, but super bad about having to do it.

 

I may be rambling. But this is our justice system functioning as designed and enforcing the law, rather than the vigilante justice these individuals have attempted to enforce.

[Old Man]

Right-wing activists received foreign cryptocurrency payments one month prior to the coup attempt which is not fishy at all.

[unclevlad]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

I find this development unsettling. I understand the deterrent intent behind the decision, but these people are still only charged, not convicted. It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process" are still supposed to be cornerstones of the American justice system. Making these people's names and locations public, in this political climate, means they and their loved ones face ostracism, harassment, or worse. It's punishing them before they've been convicted.

 

This smacks a little too much of an "enemies list" for my liking.

 

I hear ya but...this is the age of disinformation, too.  Would you put it past those arrested to claim they've been arrested on spurious charges?  Well, they'll call anything spurious, but charges far above and beyond anything they've actually been charged with.  Also, once an arraignment is made, that information is public.  At least;  I think it's true for an arrest.  The arraignment, tho, for sure.  One can argue that ok, but one doesn't see the government doing this in an organized manner...but I'll go back to the disinformation issue, as well as press interest.  I don't think it can be argued that the press could do this...so figure there are news organizations asking for it.  Now combine that with disinformation......

 

The problem is that core American liberties have been abused with malicious intent.  I concede the risk but I think we need to come to some new balance as well.  CAN we?  Dubious to say the least.

[Thia Halmades]

One other thing I would point out here, while I’m thinking about it:

 

The “enemies list” was oppression BY the State against an ideology, specifically Communism. While he probably didn’t have the names in his pocket, there was a real list and those people were branded, unfairly, enemies of the State.

 

These people are enemies of the State. The self described “Q Shaman” believes that they doing the will of God, fighting against Communism and the Globalists, that the Democrats are satan worshippers and drink the blood of babies. And if you think I’m making that up, please, fact check it. And be appalled.

 

Even with all of that, I have always said “Hey man, you do you. You want to believe some crazy bull—, that’s cool, just don’t ask me to believe it or do anything, you know. Stupid, dangerous or treasonous.” Again, I assure you, these are things I have actually said in reference to this. I respect everyone’s First Amendment Rights. The thing is, they believe that they are doing God’s work, that God and Jesus Christ appointed Trump, and that killing a democratic member of the Legislative Branch is a blow for humanity because the liberals are going to destroy this nation, revoke all of their freedoms and install communism.

 

We won’t even begin to point out that they already largely benefit from Socialism in how wealthier States pay for poorer States, the New Deal installing the social safety net that they are currently using, etc etc. Let it be known that we are operating on two very different sets of facts; actual, provable facts, and... baby eating satanic cultists operating out of a pizza joint’s basement... where said pizza joint has no basement. 

 

The First Amendment does not give you the right to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater, and it doesn’t give you the right to storm the Capitol with zip ties, build a gallows, or scream “Hang Mike Pence.” I think it’s easy to block out just how horrifying Wednesday was. So yes. It is an “enemies list.” A list of people who are self professed and self identified as having the singular goal of tearing down the existing constitutional government, rebelling to stop the peaceful transfer of power to a duly elected President and Vice President, and install their “God Emperor” — who is absolutely bonkers and Simon can wrap my knuckles for saying it — for four more years, or longer.

 

That makes them seditionists, and that means they are, literally, enemies of the State. That the justice system puts the information out publicly only ties to what they were already doing on Social Media.

 

Just something to consider. And if I’m coming off a little stronger than usual (which to some will be a comical statement, but Ive gotten a lot better) it’s because I am a patriot. My country isn’t lines on a map, it’s the promise of the rule of law and a fair shot for anyone who comes here. That promise is long broken and we need to unify to the facts and a way forward that embraces progressive thought tempered by conservative planning. I am angry. I am blind with fury. I do not want mercy.

 

I want justice. 

 

 

—-

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Old Man said:

Right-wing activists received foreign cryptocurrency payments one month prior to the coup attempt which is not fishy at all.

 

I mean... is it a little fishy? A little... GOLD fishy?

[Lord Liaden]

I absolutely grasp the desire for vengeance. And I can't dispute whatever measure of punishment the State will choose to mete out to the perpetrators of these acts, after they get their day in court. But the American justice system isn't set up to mete out vengeance. Yes, the names of these alleged rioters (not necessarily their locations) would be a matter of public record; but putting all those details for all of them in one easily accessed spot is a calculation for effect, to intimidate them with the knowledge that they'll be found and punished. It's not impossible that charges against someone in this group could be a mistake, but even if exonerated that public association will follow them forever. That list will always resurface, because what's on the Internet never disappears.

 

It's a slippery slope when the State is given license, in the heat of passion, to choose who to punish through stigmatization before due process. Because if they can do that with impunity to someone, they can do it to anyone.