Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

salmocab

namloc1980 wrote: »

Yeah the guys who had detailed maps of the Capitol were just on a guided tour and the guys dressed in military fatigues and carrying hand restraints must have got lost on their way to a fancy dress party.

I wonder do you actually believe the stuff you post.

I’ve often turned up to stuff on the spur of the moment with my trusty cable ties ready to bind peoples arms on the off chance I walk into the middle of an attempt to over throw the will of the people.

Foxtrol

namloc1980 wrote: »

No and I got news for you the Republicans have fought for decades for the rights of businesses to do business with whoever they want. Think of it like this: Trump is like the gay couple looking for a cake for their marriage; Stripe/Twitter are the conservative cake shop who refused due to their beliefs/corporate terms of service.

This.

Also, Republicans have demanded that businesses have the right to donate unlimited funds on elections.

The tech companies aren't even carrying out unlimited power like Republicans claim businesses should when it comes to topics they support, all teach companies are doing are enforcing the rules that Republicans signed up to when they signed up for their service.

It is like throwing a tantrum when you join a soccer team and they don't allow you to beat the opposition with a steel pipe during a game.

Carfacemandog

Overheal wrote: »

Sure yeah I can just pull IEDs out of my ass on the spur of the moment.

Thank goodness for that, I was starting to think the near dozen pack of molotov cocktails I carry around with me might look suspicious to some.

uncleoswald

BattleCorp wrote: »

But my point remains, it's a very dangerous precedent to set when you allow private corporations to dictate which political parties (or politicians) get to have their voice heard and or get the ability to raise funding on their sites.

Yeah I have some problem with it. But right now I have a bigger problem with a two party political system where one party doesn't accept the results of an election and allow a megalomaniacal leader to constantly undermine the democratic process and radicalise his base.

None of this would be necessary if the GOP had the backbone to stand up to Trump or had allowed conspiratorial thinking to become the mainstream in the party. This can't go unchecked.

There are no easy answers here and **** the GOP for putting people in this position.

BattleCorp

listermint wrote: »

I'm not sure you actually know much about American.

Private companies literally give and decide who gets funding and who doesn't. Super PACs

Not quite the point I am making.

Yes, private companies can decide which political campaigns they want to fund. And that's fine.

But private companies preventing other companies/people from donating through their platform to someone they don't like is setting a dangerous precedent IMHO.

And some people have likened it to the gay cake controversy. I think it's closer to 'I'll bake your gay cake but not the other guy's gay cake'. A bakery either cooks or doesn't cook gay cakes. A platform like Stripe either allows political funding or doesn't allow political funding, it shouldn't decide which political funding they allow.

Gregor Samsa

BattleCorp wrote: »

Funny you should bring Germany into it.

Merkl doesn't agree with Trump being deplatformed either.

https://www.ft.com/content/6146b352-6b40-48ef-b10b-a34ad585b91a

Did you actually read the article? Merkl’s point is that governments should have a tougher regulatory system in place for online content.

This isn’t the valiant defending of free speech you seem to think it is.

namloc1980

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Thank goodness for that, I was starting to think the near dozen pack of molotov cocktails I carry around with me might look suspicious to some.

Maybe he thought he was going to a cocktail party and just got a bit confused.

I mean, be honest, who here among us hasn't turned up to a spur of the moment coup attempt looking like this?

Foxtrol

titan18 wrote: »

Any check if twitter ATM can see violent threats with one search, some of which would have been up for ages. So if it's moderated, it's doing a damn sh1t job.

I mean 4chan still exists.

Endless childish whataboutery.

It is news to me that no one can be punished for a crime if everyone who ever carried out the same crime has been caught and punished.

BattleCorp

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Did you actually read the article? Merkl’s point is that governments should have a tougher regulatory system in place for online content.

This isn’t the valiant defending of free speech you seem to think it is.

Yep, I did read the article. Obviously we are both taking different things from it. She said Twitter and FB shouldn't be making up their own rules. Which is pretty much what I've been saying.

maebee

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I don’t think you do get it. It’s nothing to do with disliking Trump. It’s the fact that he actively sent a violent mob to stop Congress from certifying his legitimate successor. And the fact that he showed no remorse for doing so and looked likely to try to do it again.

Exactly. And if he hadn't encouraged, no, requested his violent mob to storm Capitol Hill, five of his countrymen would be alive today.

Gregor Samsa

BattleCorp wrote: »

Yep, I did read the article. Obviously we are both taking different things from it. She said Twitter and FB shouldn't be making up their own rules. Which is pretty much what I've been saying.

Well, all I’m taking from it is quotes like this:

“ But Ms Merkel said through her spokesman that the US government should take on the responsibility for regulating hate speech, as Germany does, instead of leaving it up to platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.


The intervention highlights a key area of disagreement between the US and Europe on how to regulate social media platforms. The EU wants to give regulators more powers to force Internet platforms such as Facebook or Twitter to remove illegal content. In the US, Internet giants are generally left to police their sites themselves.”

everlast75

It is hard to keep up with this thread, so i don't know if this was posted, but..

https://twitter.com/JoshMargolin/status/1348672731286532096?s=19

There will be significant political pressure on the Republicans to be seen to do something about this. They can't have another jan 6th on their hands.

McConnell will have to try pressure trump to resign and take the fire out of this. If his doesn't, there will be further significant fall out for the reps.

BattleCorp

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Well, all I’m taking from it is quotes like this:

“ But Ms Merkel said through her spokesman that the US government should take on the responsibility for regulating hate speech, as Germany does, instead of leaving it up to platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.


The intervention highlights a key area of disagreement between the US and Europe on how to regulate social media platforms. The EU wants to give regulators more powers to force Internet platforms such as Facebook or Twitter to remove illegal content. In the US, Internet giants are generally left to police their sites themselves.”

And I'm not disagreeing with what you've said. I just think that the 'Internet giants' and tech companies are getting too powerful and now have more control than the Government. And that's not a good thing.

briany

maebee wrote: »

Exactly. And if he hadn't encouraged, no, requested his violent mob to storm Capitol Hill, five of his countrymen would be alive today.

He didn't explicitly tell them to storm Capitol Hill. In fact, he did use the words 'peacefully and patriotically' in his address to that crowd re: going down to the Capitol building to, er, encourage lawmakers to, er, do the 'right thing'.

I just feel the need to point that out, because if you directly accuse him of telling the mob to attack the Capitol building, he can point to those three quoted words, which he probably knew what he was at by saying, and then call his critics 'hysterical', despite him riling up that crowd with the whole lie about the stolen election.

Dressoutlet

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

It's all very ''judge, jury and executioner '' . No one knows the story behind the storming of the capitol.


To me it was all very spur of the moment, by the front liner nutjobs, with a lot of simple country folk flowing into building, and flowing out again.
The arrests were few, and it targeted those nutjobs.

Except any of us who were reading sites such as the Donald and parler knew it was coming because it was openly planned for weeks. Not spur of the moment.

yagan

briany wrote: »

He didn't explicitly tell them to storm Capitol Hill. In fact, he did use the words 'peacefully and patriotically' in his address to that crowd re: going down to the Capitol building to, er, encourage lawmakers to, er, do the 'right thing'.

I just feel the need to point that out, because if you directly accuse him of telling the mob to attack the Capitol building, he can point to those three quoted words, which he probably knew what he was at by saying, and then call his critics 'hysterical', despite him riling up that crowd with the whole lie about the stolen election.

True, but he didn't correct his boy Giuliani's "Trial by combat" line, but built on it.

However I think he crossed the line last spring inciting anti lockdock measures in individual states.

PropJoe10

everlast75 wrote: »

It is hard to keep up with this thread, so i don't know if this was posted, but..

https://twitter.com/JoshMargolin/status/1348672731286532096?s=19

There will be significant political pressure on the Republicans to be seen to do something about this. They can't have another jan 6th on their hands.

McConnell will have to try pressure trump to resign and take the fire out of this. If his doesn't, there will be further significant fall out for the reps.

I can't see Trump taking the fire out of anything. There's nothing more dangerous than a cornered rat, and he's in a "well, i have nothing to lose" type corner now.

It's a very dangerous situation indeed. I hope the police are better prepared than they were for 6th January!

duploelabs

BattleCorp wrote: »

And I'm not disagreeing with what you've said. I just think that the 'Internet giants' and tech companies are getting too powerful and now have more control than the Government. And that's not a good thing.

The only reason why trump remained on twitter for so long (and had his tweets factchecked) is because he is government but he couldn't not balls that up (like everything he does) after too long.
You know of the bot that was created that transposed trump's tweets to their own and was banned not after too long.
He still has the world's press at his beck and call and a shiny press room to sit them in

everlast75

"Impeachment witch hunt"


****ing disgusting


https://twitter.com/AndrewFeinberg/status/1348690838453411840?s=19

Tell me how

BattleCorp wrote: »

And I'm not disagreeing with what you've said. I just think that the 'Internet giants' and tech companies are getting too powerful and now have more control than the Government. And that's not a good thing.

Is this really a conservative asking for more governmental control?

Anyway, with respect to the bit in bold, no they don't.
Trump has a Press Office and Press team by which he could communicate should he wish to do so. He hasn't.

David Nunes said yesterday that Republicans no longer have a way to communicate given Twitter and then Google/Apple/Amazon on Parler. The only problem is, he was saying it on the most widely watch cable news network.

Overheal

Feelsgood.gif

https://twitter.com/tony3879/status/1348626353118130176?s=21

everlast75

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I can't see Trump taking the fire out of anything. There's nothing more dangerous than a cornered rat, and he's in a "well, i have nothing to lose" type corner now.

It's a very dangerous situation indeed. I hope the police are better prepared than they were for 6th January!

McConnell can convict him and there are serious ramifications for trump if that happens, plus personal disgrace.

I can only imagine what allowing trump to do nothing about another riot will do to the reps.

People rejoicing in this "new" way of policing discourse and thoughts will soon be shocked when it's turned on them.

Sad to see. Lambs to the slaughter.

PropJoe10

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I can't see Trump taking the fire out of anything. There's nothing more dangerous than a cornered rat, and he's in a "well, i have nothing to lose" type corner now.

It's a very dangerous situation indeed. I hope the police are better prepared than they were for 6th January!

I agree with this. I think the state of his finances, creditors lining up at the door and the inevitable downfall that will follow is Trumps worse fear and puts things in a very dangerous position for us all with his narcissistic mindset.

Captain_Crash

briany wrote: »

He didn't explicitly tell them to storm Capitol Hill. In fact, he did use the words 'peacefully and patriotically' in his address to that crowd re: going down to the Capitol building to, er, encourage lawmakers to, er, do the 'right thing'.

I just feel the need to point that out, because if you directly accuse him of telling the mob to attack the Capitol building, he can point to those three quoted words, which he probably knew what he was at by saying, and then call his critics 'hysterical', despite him riling up that crowd with the whole lie about the stolen election.

There are plenty of laws in the US regarding what constitutes a direction/order. It just has to be perceived as a direction and not specifically asked of someone... they were written specifically to win the war against the mafia.

For example a mob boss comes over to your house and says “nice car you got out there, it would be a shame if something happened to it”. The mob boss didn’t actually say anything incriminating, but he said all he needed to say! Trump is doing the exact same!

You don’t have to ask someone to do something to ask someone to do something!

PropJoe10

Cruz Stocky Steak wrote: »

I agree with this. I think the state of his finances, creditors lining up at the door and the inevitable downfall that will follow is Trumps worse fear and puts things in a very dangerous position for us all with his narcissistic mindset.

Yup. I'd expect him, Don Jr and Rudy to be taken into custody before the end of January, on charges of inciting violence. None of this is going to end well.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Feelsgood.gif

https://twitter.com/tony3879/status/1348626353118130176?s=21

Whooooo... You go girlfriend.

What was that?

jill_valentine

Deleted User wrote: »

People rejoicing in this "new" way of policing discourse and thoughts will soon be shocked when it's turned on them.

Sad to see. Lambs to the slaughter.

Trump is having rules applied to him that already applied to everyone else. These kind of histrionics won't make any traction, because every one of us know how websites work.

MeMen2_MoRi_

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Whooooo... You go girlfriend.

What was that?

That'll be called the insurrectionists Vs the digital age

Gregor Samsa

BattleCorp wrote: »

And I'm not disagreeing with what you've said. I just think that the 'Internet giants' and tech companies are getting too powerful and now have more control than the Government. And that's not a good thing.

But the point is that this is how the US system is supposed to work. Both parties, but especially Republicans, have long opposed Government regulation of pretty much anything. Their point was that businesses should self-regulate. Businesses should have control over who they do business with. And that ultimately nothing bad would happen because the market would not allow it.

Businesses and the market have swung in to thwart a direct attack on democracy that the government could do nothing about. And yet some of the very people who built and defended this system to the nth degree suddenly think it’s an issue!