US Presidential Election 2020

[stickdog99]

https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p ... -and-other

Patriot Act 2.0 will be rolled out with a lot of mindless bleating about white supremacists and fighting fascism and the actual policies and laws put into place will have virtually nothing to do with any of those things. It will be geared at preventing the revolutionary changes that need to be pushed for via grassroots activism in the United States.

more ,,,

[stickdog99]

AOC calling for more corporate censorship



Hmmm. How about just enforcing the laws we already have against stuff like this?

[JackRiddler]

.

Watch him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CymYqaMSQZI

[Responding to Harvey, "drive new divisions among the divided."]

I seriously beg to differ. January 6th did not invent a division between racists, and now actual movement fascists, and the people they seek to dominate and suppress. They are enemies, that's right. It was not the first time that such forces were organized to overturn an American election on behalf of a white supremacist, charismatic leader. This "division" has been with us for centuries. For centuries, denial of it has been a pillar of maintaining the racist, white supremacist system.

The attempted coup (sorry, that is what it was, however much it was bound to fail or incompetent or did not have an endgame) merely illustrated it, for the umpteenth time. But apparently there's no amount of illustration that will suffice for many to see this reality. Let's not notice the racism, oh no, that causes division!

I thought nobody here supported white supremacy, but if they were I admit I missed it.

I continue to think you can read better than that. Is this a response to what I said? I don't think so, as clearly I didn't say (see italicized part) anyone here has spoken "in support of white supremacy." Rather, I have suggested a number of passages seem to express denial or obliviousness to it, or render it trivialize it (and trivialize the fascism at the core of the coup attempt) compared to other factors. (As for whether anybody here supports it, that is impossible to say -- the readers still outnumber the posters by a goodly factor.)

Nobody has tried to support the coop either (my preferred term whatever it was) and yet several here have already been passively accused of supporting and or justifying 'the coup attempt' when, as it appeared to me, they were trying to interpret what they were actually seeing.

Let's be specific. No, as you say, no one posting here has expressed support. However, no one that I saw -- certainly not I -- has suggested this.

Rather, there have been various characterizations of the fascist mob that was invited to Washington by the president and dispatched by him to shut down the Congress by rioting at the Capitol while it was voting to certify the election that he lost and thus keep him in office. Effectively, a coup attempt.

The mob is not a) "the downtrodden" (fantastically untrue, though of course there were some downtrodden among them). They cannot be excused or be made into figures deserving of understanding because they were b) "frustrated." (Sure, but by what? Their purpose was stated: stop the election certification.) They are not c) "the people" (though a part of them). Also, d) calling them fascists at this point is accurate (though their expressions of it are as particular to time and place as any other fascist mob), and it is not unfair or "divisive" to use the term for these "frustrated citizens," as BS held (that's where I jumped in).

Finally, we can agree that this was a coup attempt, however ludicrous and unplanned many aspects may appear to be. Enough of those present wanted it to be so. If there had been 10 times as many of them, they'd have held the Capitol. As it was, it was a cosplay and a huge promotional for movement building.

This network remains in place and determined to try again. There are worse problems in the world, assuredly. There are worse things being done by the U.S. government as a matter of routine operation around the world, assuredly. These worse things will get even worse if this naked coup attempt is allowed to stand, i.e., goes unpunished. That is not an endorsement of any new law, any new surveillance (surveillance was hardly necessary in this case, the crime was committed in public and with pride), any new spongy rhetoric about "extremism" and "terrorism" that allows flexible application to all, new censorship, or new measures of repression. The existing laws and procedures for dealing with crime -- starting I certainly hope with Trump and any elements in the police and government who facilitated the January 6 action.

Neatly illustrating what I meant by 'new divisions.' Perhaps I really meant to say, perceived divisions. Such as yourself, losing track of the rather great distinction between forming an alternative narrative on the one hand and support for white supremacy on the other.

Untrue.

Alternative narratives are often necessary -- in the absence of sufficient facts. But what are the facts on which we can agree?

I have asked you many times now -- do you disagree with the basic set of facts concerning the visible event?

1. President called for a rally to "Stop the Steal" promising it would be wild.
2. Various white supremacist networks and orgs like Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, etc., went to work above all on public online platforms to mobilize for the rally.
3. A lot of off-duty cops and movement fascists showed up among the many, many with arms and specific plans and intents to break into the Capitol, shut down the vote, and possibly take hostages and/or kill politicians if possible. (Certainly threats were made.)
4. Trump, Giuliani and others spoke to them at length and told them to go to the Capitol and show strength, have a trial by combat, etc.
5. They went, they broke in, they were allowed in by some of the cops, they rioted, they interrupted the vote, they stormed their way into chambers and offices, looted, trashed, took pictures of themselves, killed a cop, four of them died, including one shot, and the vast majority of those who engaged in such activity got to walk past the cops and blow town (though now many are being arrested).

I don't dispute the known facts, just what some of those facts are and also what they mean.

Do you dispute any of the above five points? Do you disagree that this constitutes the invitation and incitement by the president of a fascist mob to go shut down Congress so as to overturn the election results and thus to effect a coup d'etat?

.

[stickdog99]

https://mtracey.medium.com/journalists- ... eb871d29dc

We’re in the midst of what is likely the most extreme corporate censorship crusade in modern history — whereby oligarchic tech officials have moved to simultaneously purge the sitting, democratically-elected President from all the internet’s most-used public communications platforms — and the reaction among media activists (a more apt term than “journalists”) is 100% predictable: complete jubilation.

They absolutely love corporate censorship, and their ecstasy at its implementation grows in direct proportion to how ruthless and politically vengeful that censorship is. These people have the foresight of a gnat: they are so consumed by an ideology of petty, vindictive victimhood that they have no capacity to see how such democracy-overruling censorship power poses an unprecedented threat to political speech and civil liberties.

This threat — the coming purge which will be effectuated by those in positions of authority who crave nothing more than to punish their allegedly fascist/white supremacist/MAGA enemies and thereby impose a left/liberal corporate authoritarian monoculture — in the long-run vastly outweighs whatever “threat” was posed by the farcical MAGA goofball intrusion at the Capitol on Wednesday. Which, again, was obviously not a “coup attempt” in any recognizable sense of that term. “MAGA Terrorist Insurrection,” the insane characterization put forth with a straight face on nationally-televised CNN broadcasts by Jake Tapper (to take just one of countless examples) is sheer propaganda — intentionally designed to foment fear and hysteria for profit. CNN enjoyed its highest ratings ever on Wednesday, and of course you can’t just let that go to waste.

It’s darkly hilarious to consider what the supposed “crisis” of those yahoos taking a mob joyride through the Capitol actually achieved, and whether it warrants such a drastic state and corporate crackdown. If they really thought they were going to help their God Emperor Trump triumphantly retain control of the Presidency, what happened was that they hastened his demise. Within about 24 hours, Trump was made to denounce his own pro-Trump mob, and then sheepishly conceded in humiliating fashion. Likewise, the mob’s reward will be not eternal glory, but prison.

In other words, the specter of “coup” or “insurrection,” which never existed in the first place, should now be dead and buried even for those with the wildest of imaginations. But the actual cessation of the purported “threat” is never going to be good enough for power-mad opportunists who are determined to exploit this fiasco for all it’s worth. Their brains are so addled by five years of nonstop Trump-induced mania, they will never be able to comprehend that the ramifications of this full-speed-ahead crackdown exceed by many orders of magnitude the ramifications of a few hours of mob stupidity at the Capitol.

Terminated in the ongoing purge is not just Trump himself, but figures regarded to even have been affiliated with him, such as Sidney Powell, Mike Flynn, and Steve Bannon. In the case of Powell and Flynn, the rationale put forth by Twitter is that their accounts engaged in “behavior that has the potential to lead to offline harm” — a formulation that almost sounds like it was intentionally crafted to evoke dystopian bureaucratic nightmare. Bannon’s YouTube was similarly nuked, and surely there’s more to come.

Preventing the risk of further “violence,” the justification claimed by Twitter for Trump’s expulsion from his primary communications outlet, is complete bullshit. There is no standardized or neutral way for these tech officials to evaluate the alleged risk of “harm” or “violence” posed by any given tweet. Not only are the concepts themselves infinitely malleable — I hereby declare myself “harmed” by the existence of Mehdi Hasan, please ban him — this conceptual malleability ensures that enforcement actions are deployed solely at the subjective whim of the enforcers. What these corporations have done is made a raw political calculation, one that happens to solidify their supra-national discursive dominance and positions them nicely as a new Democratic administration is about to come in.

This is coordinated corporate censorship of a historic magnitude — an attempt to destroy via public and private power any remnants of a political “movement” which has so enraged elite culture. If you were under the illusion that journalists would be a bulwark against such an ominous development, please know that they are its most ardent cheerleaders.

[stickdog99]

[Marionumber1]

the sitting, democratically-elected President

He really wasn't: https://www.mintpressnews.com/donald-trump-warned-of-a-rigged-election-was-he-right/224326/

[Joe Hillshoist]

.

I'd wager that most that were there are certainly far more in the 'downtrodden' (read: working/labor classes) category than the comfortable/privileged/ZOOM-meetings demo that certainly did NOT attend this "event".

But beyond that, as I mentioned a number of times before: however misinformed/conditioned these people are, there is clear frustration being expressed (even though some of it may have been staged).

Legitimate frustration. Frustration that will only grow in the coming year, given all we've seen and heard thus far for the plans in play.

What exactly is the argument here? The people are getting f'd more this year than, perhaps, any prior year of the history of this Empire, arguably, and it will get worse, at least over the near term (12 - 24 months), barring larger uprisings. Is this in dispute?

There is good cause to be angry. There is good cause to be frustrated. The primary challenge is that conditioning mechanisms (via social media/internet/media) are very powerful and pervasive, now more than ever before; much of the legitimate frustration will likely be directed towards disingenuous movements, which in turn will provide the Technocrats in power more leverage to pass ever-more draconian laws/mandates/policies.

(This is hardly a robust dissemination. Many scenarios remain possible for 2021)

Legitimate frustration. They want their country back.

From the coons and the homos and the jews. Otherwise why the fuck weren't they marching on Wall St? On the people who really stole their country?

There was some cockhead walking around in a camp auschwitz t shirt. Why the fuck didn't someone beat him to death with a fire extinguisher? For having the temerity to walk around wearing that at their frustrated protest. I would have. The cunt.

[JackRiddler]

Legitimate frustration. They want their country back.

From the coons and the homos and the jews. Otherwise why the fuck weren't they marching on Wall St? On the people who really stole their country?

There was some cockhead walking around in a camp auschwitz t shirt. Why the fuck didn't someone beat him to death with a fire extinguisher? For having the temerity to walk around wearing that at their frustrated protest. I would have. The cunt.

The "legitimate frustration" alibi for this mob could have worked -- if the first thing they had done was to storm the podium from which the establishment, ruling-class, big-owning mobster who had worked so hard for so long to oppress, defraud, bilk and wage war on every kind of downtrodden in every way, to cut taxes on the rich and cut wages for the working class, was now urging them to go on a suicide mission so as to end any remaining pretense of democracy and install him as dictator.

That's what astonishes me about the various excuses, trivializations and justification narratives being put forth, unfortunately also on this thread. As though the crowd had somehow gathered spontaneously. As though it had no leader. As though he wasn't present and telling them what to do. As though there was no stated ideology. No organizations doing the mobilization. No advance planning, conducted on public online platforms. No announced intents.

It is, of course, exactly as you say. Thank you, Joe.

A separate issue here is the inability to distinguish between (1) an appropriate and necessary response to a fascist coup attempt -- round up and prosecute the leaders, planners and collaborators within the state, and of course those who directly engaged in violence, for the crimes you saw them commit literally live in real time -- and (2) the fact that this event may instead be exploited on behalf of a new, expanded, general state repression agenda that will be directed also, if not mainly, against the left. The latter (2), which is always being imposed and always has to be opposed, does not take away from the absolute urgency of the former (1).

.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

My goal is to steer clear from this thread/this forum but you've inspired me to chime in once more here.

.

I'd wager that most that were there are certainly far more in the 'downtrodden' (read: working/labor classes) category than the comfortable/privileged/ZOOM-meetings demo that certainly did NOT attend this "event".

But beyond that, as I mentioned a number of times before: however misinformed/conditioned these people are, there is clear frustration being expressed (even though some of it may have been staged).

Legitimate frustration. Frustration that will only grow in the coming year, given all we've seen and heard thus far for the plans in play.

What exactly is the argument here? The people are getting f'd more this year than, perhaps, any prior year of the history of this Empire, arguably, and it will get worse, at least over the near term (12 - 24 months), barring larger uprisings. Is this in dispute?

There is good cause to be angry. There is good cause to be frustrated. The primary challenge is that conditioning mechanisms (via social media/internet/media) are very powerful and pervasive, now more than ever before; much of the legitimate frustration will likely be directed towards disingenuous movements, which in turn will provide the Technocrats in power more leverage to pass ever-more draconian laws/mandates/policies.

(This is hardly a robust dissemination. Many scenarios remain possible for 2021)

Legitimate frustration. They want their country back.

From the coons and the homos and the jews. Otherwise why the fuck weren't they marching on Wall St? On the people who really stole their country?

There was some cockhead walking around in a camp auschwitz t shirt. Why the fuck didn't someone beat him to death with a fire extinguisher? For having the temerity to walk around wearing that at their frustrated protest. I would have. The cunt.

Strawman talking points.

I'm referring to frustration broadly, not necessarily to this largely staged event that some here continue to naively refer to as a "fascist coup". Yes, it certainly presented as 'fascist coup' on TV, didn't it? I'm sure a number of the rubes there that day earnestly believed they were participating in some form of an insurrection, but that wasn't the objective by the primary drivers.

You're being played, FFS. Look at the immediate aftermath. The event was intended to TRIGGER. And clearly, it succeeded.

JRiddler:
That's what astonishes me about the various excuses, trivializations and justification narratives being put forth, unfortunately also on this thread. As though the crowd had somehow gathered spontaneously. As though it had no leader. As though he wasn't present and telling them what to do. As though there was no stated ideology. No organizations doing the mobilization. No advance planning, conducted on public online platforms. No announced intents.

I expected you to be better at filtering what you see in front of you, particularly given the timing and repercussions of this event, not to mention the clear FAILURE, in every respect, of achieving whatever was overtly presented as the intent.

Leave you with a couple links. Embedded links at source(s).

https://off-guardian.org/2021/01/08/pre ... rism-bill/

...Soon-to-be-President Joe Biden promised a new “domestic terrorism bill” back in November, according to the Wall Street Journal.

That is why you’re seeing so much usage of the phrase “domestic terrorism” in the last couple of days. It’s the meme-phrase. The primary talking point for this whole exercise. It was underlined in all the memos sent out to all the media outlets.

That’s why Joe Biden went to such lengths to distinguish “domestic terrorists” from “protesters” in his speech following the riots.

That’s why the Council on Foreign Relations had an interview with a “counter-terrorism and national security expert” published within 24 hours of the incident, in which he spends 4 paragraphs arguing that the people who “stormed the capitol” were domestic terrorists.

That’s why the Washington Post has got an article dedicated to “lawmakers and experts” arguing that the Capitol Hill protest was an act of “domestic terrorism”. And so have Vox. And Mother Jones.

That’s why ABC had an article about how “domestic terrorism and hate crimes” were a growing problem in America…a week before the riot took place.

And that’s why #TrumpisaDomesticTerrorist is trending on Twitter.

Georgetown University, a well-known spook college, published a paper in September 2020 titled the “The Need for a Specific Law Against Domestic Terrorism”, and op-ed pieces bemoaning the lack of such a law have been dotted through the press going back to last summer and even late 2019.

There was one published yesterday, in which a “senior FBI official” says “more could have been done” if there had been a “specific law outlawing” domestic terrorism.

“Domestic Terrorism” is clearly where it’s at in early 2021, so we can expect a brand new law regarding it…probably by March, at the latest.

What will “Domestic Terrorism” mean in this law? The answer to that is pretty much always “whatever they want it to mean.”

Certainly, it will include “incitement” and “hate speech”, I would expect “denialism” to make an appearance, and be downright shocked if “spreading misinformation” doesn’t get a mention. Don’t be surprised if “questioning elections” or “bringing democracy into disrepute” is made an outright crime.

It will probably be tied into the Covid “pandemic” in some way, too. After all, what is discouraging people from taking vaccines if not the very definition of “terrorism”, right? It’s possible that even climate change will get a mention as well. They like to slide that into every issue these days.

Joe Biden has claimed multiple times to be the author of the original Patriot Act, saying it was based entirely on a bill he proposed in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995.

Well now he has a chance to work on the reboot too, and they are always so much better when you can get the original creative team back together.

And this excerpt:

As Twitter and Facebook limit discussion, alternative platforms will be shutdown. Enforcing a corporate monopoly that cooperates with the state…the very definition of fascism.

All this in the name of protecting the nation from “neo-nazi thugs” or “white supremacists” or other phantom threats. In the name of “protecting the constitution”, they are tearing it to pieces. In the name of “preventing a coup”, they are carrying one out in front of our eyes.

It puts in mind Huey Long’s famous quote when asked if fascism would ever come to America:

Sure, we’ll have Fascism in this country and we’ll call it anti-Fascism.”

https://off-guardian.org/2021/01/07/the ... stag-fire/


[edit to syntax, not content]

[Harvey]

https://apnews.com/article/emily-rainey-army-investigation-capitol-5e3cd1ed9fc23269ce3b74ae55664d90

Army investigating officer who led group to Washington rally
By JAKE BLEIBERG, SARAH BLAKE MORGAN and JAMES LAPORTA

In this image taken from video provided by WRAL-TV, Capt. Emily Rainey speaks during an interview with WRAL-TV, in Southern Pines, N.C., in May 2020. The Army is investigating Rainey, a psychological operations officer, who led a group of people from North Carolina to the rally in Washington that led to the deadly riot in the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump. (Courtesy of WRAL-TV via AP)

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — The Army is investigating a psychological operations officer who led a group of people from North Carolina to the rally in Washington that led up to the deadly riot in the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump.

Commanders at Fort Bragg are reviewing Capt. Emily Rainey’s involvement in last week’s events in the nation’s capital, but she said she acted within military regulations and that no one in her group broke the law.

“I was a private citizen and doing everything right and within my rights,” Rainey told The Associated Press on Sunday.

Rainey said she led 100 members of Moore County Citizens for Freedom, which describes itself online as a nonpartisan network promoting conservative values, to the Washington rally to “stand against election fraud” and support Trump. She said she didn’t know of anyone who entered the Capitol and that they were headed back to their buses hours before an emergency curfew took effect.

Rainey, 30, is assigned to the 4th Psychological Operations Group at Fort Bragg, according to Maj. Daniel Lessard, a spokesman for 1st Special Forces Command. Known as PSYOPS, the group uses information and misinformation to shape the emotions, decision-making and actions of American adversaries.

This isn’t the first time Rainey’s actions have come under scrutiny. In May, the captain made headlines after she posted a video online of her pulling down caution tape at a playground that was closed under North Carolina’s COVID-19 restrictions.

Police in Southern Pines, a community about 30 miles (48 kilometers) west of Fort Bragg, charged her with injury to personal property. The police told WRAL-TV that they let her off with warnings twice before after she tore down the tape closing off the playground.

The Army gave Rainey “appropriate administrative action” for the incident and she submitted her resignation in September, according to Lessard. He said the resignation process for an officer can take six months or more and Rainey is set to leave the Army in April.

In Washington on Wednesday, insurrectionists took over the House and Senate chambers, smashed windows and waved Trump, American and Confederate flags. Five people, including a Capitol Police officer, died. The riot followed the rally where Trump repeated false claims that the election had been rigged against him and urged his supporters to “fight like hell.”

So far, at least 90 people have been arrested on charges ranging from misdemeanor curfew violations to felonies related to assaults on police officers, possessing illegal weapons and making death threats against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Full Coverage: Capitol siege

Rainey said that her group and most people who traveled to Washington “are peace-loving, law-abiding people who were doing nothing but demonstrating our First Amendment rights.”

Members of the U.S. military are permitted to take part in political organizations and events out of uniform. However, there are caveats. The Department of Defense directive prohibits active-duty servicemembers from sponsoring partisan organizations. It is unclear if Rainey’s participation with her group on Wednesday went against DOD policy.

Rainey said she attended the Trump rally while on leave, didn’t advertise that she was an Army officer and told her bosses ahead of time that she’d be going. “We are confident justice will prevail proving our innocence,” she told AP.

In June, Rainey wrote an article for the online military publication SOFREP about navigating the regulations around political activity. “The more you know about the rules, the freer you become,” she wrote.

[stickdog99]

https://www.downwithtyranny.com/post/ou ... e-reaction

An angry mob of Proud Boy types, off-duty cops and ride-along Trump supporters broke into the Capitol, an angry reaction to a propagandized, misplaced fear that "democracy" was being shattered by election theft, and the reaction to the reaction was swift.

Condemnation — appropriate in my view — was heaped on the perpetrators, complicit and enabling Republicans (that's you, Josh Hawley), and on Donald Trump himself. I've written elsewhere ("About Last Night") that he should be impeached once again for inciting this mob, despite the shortness of his remaining term, just to draw a line no president will dare cross again.

But the reaction to this reaction has been much more than swift; it looks like it's also going to be excessive. The Establishment State and its semi-corporate allies are setting the stage for another round of surveillance and lock-down measures, aimed to be sure at preventing another assault on anywhere elites gather to rule, but also aimed at making sure any threat to Establishment power anywhere can't begin to form.

And never forget, crushing dissent in America has always meant crushing the left.

Another 9/11?

This may be this generation's 9/11 (yes, the original was 20 years ago, a generation away from the present date). That 9/11 brought the Patriot Act, still with us, and universal ("collect it all") Pentagon surveillance of, well, all of us:

“Rather than look for a single needle in the haystack, [NSA chief Gen. Keith Alexander's] approach was, ‘Let’s collect the whole haystack,’ ” said one former senior U.S. intelligence official who tracked the plan’s implementation. “Collect it all, tag it, store it. . . . And whatever it is you want, you go searching for it.”

That plan, ironically named the Patriot Act, and all that followed from it, lives today, long after the terrorists struck New York, long after we entered, destroyed, and left Iraq, and 20 years after we started a war of choice to destroy Afghanistan, a war the Establishment refuses ever to end. Guantanamo too is with us; its prisoners will die before it's closed, like broken medieval men chained to walls, waiting to starve to death.

Joe Biden, both personally and professionally, is a warrior. Personally, he wears his hackles on his sleeve.

He's also a warrior professionally. He was one of the strongest supporters of the Iraq War in the Senate, then lied for decades about why he supported it (he claimed to have been fooled by Bush's fake intelligence) rather than admit fault.

As Branko Marcetic writes at Jacobin, "If you’re looking for a president with a track record of boosting foreign intervention, expanding the surveillance state, and steadfastly backing Israel despite its war crimes, Joe Biden is your guy."

The Reaction to the Reaction, H.R. 4192

Now comes the muscular reaction to the mob's reaction, Biden's promise to reinvigorate the war on "domestic terrorism":

Democrats have a "domestic terrorism" law ready to go, H.R. 4192, "Confronting the Threat of Domestic Terrorism Act," introduced by Adam Schiff in the last Congress. Many think it will form the basis for Biden's new assault on speech and political action.

Here's how the ACLU characterizes Schiff's proposed law: "By reifying and broadening domestic terrorism authorities, H.R. 4192 would unnecessarily expand law enforcement authorities to target and discriminate against the very communities Congress is seeking to protect."

In a letter to Congress written in opposition to the bill, the ACLU wrote:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) strongly urges you to oppose H.R. 4192, which is unnecessary because the offenses it creates largely duplicate existing crimes, and harmful because it expands authorities that law enforcement has abused to target marginalized communities. In light of recent mass shootings and the surge in white supremacist violence, lawmakers are understandably seeking to take action. But proposals like H.R. 4192 are the wrong approach. This bill is yet another iteration in a series of problematic proposals that would further entrench domestic terrorism frameworks, and cause more harm to the communities that Congress is seeking to protect.

The full text is here. The letter also cites abuse of the Patriot Act and notes, "Law enforcement agencies’ use of these authorities undermines and has violated equal protection, due process, and First Amendment rights. Law enforcement agencies already have all the authorities they need to address white supremacist violence effectively."

Will the Capitol Assault be this generation's 9/11, at least in its lasting aftermath? Stay tuned.

But don't take any bets it won't. The power-hungry (and increasingly insecure) bipartisan state would love nothing better than to expand its control over any effective dissent. Including the dissent of all those hated socialists. And including yours.

[stickdog99]

[DrEvil]

BelSav wrote:

I'm referring to frustration broadly, not necessarily to this largely staged event that some here continue to naively refer to as a "fascist coup". Yes, it certainly presented as 'fascist coup' on TV, didn't it? I'm sure a number of the rubes there that day earnestly believed they were participating in some form of an insurrection, but that wasn't the objective by the primary drivers.

Who staged it? Who are the "primary drivers"? Any evidence?

[stickdog99]

Please note that there are several portions of the following post that I strongly disagree with (the parts in italics). But I strongly agree with the bolded part.

Apparently libs are passing around this absurd video by Arnold Schwarzenegger.



I remember him when he was governor of California. Big tough guy attacked the nurses union.

I don't know about you, but the lazy "storming" of the capitol was the best TV I saw all year. A bunch of rightoids being led into the building by cops, waltzing around, sitting in the "sacrosanct" seats of genocidal maniacs like Pelosi, it was hilarious. I was sincerely disappointed when the crowd began to dwindle.

Whilst the event itself was a joyous occasion, the media coverage was profoundly disturbing. Even up here in Canuckistan, the CBC was referring to an "assault" on the "sacred seat" of "liberty" and "democracy." Say what? Liberty and democracy? What the fuck are you smoking?

As for the politicians, you mean those cowardly buffoons who dived under their chairs and donned gas masks when a few stoners stumbled in?

Libs be all like "this is fascism!" No, fascism is the Patriot Act that your beloved reps keep re-authorizing, D's and R's alike. Fascism is the latest NDAA that allows the President to kill American citizens without trial. Fascism is perpetual war and the NSA and Gitmo. Fascism is the persecution of Assange.

There was never any real possibility that those clowns were going to "take over the government," because the actual "government" is the Pentagon, the CIA, Goldman Sachs etc. Trump is just a temporary figurehead, now tossed aside.

Chomsky noted of the COINTELPRO era that the media went apeshit over a break-in at a hotel but virtually ignored the assassination by the state of Fred Hampton (and many other activists -- some say Martin Luther King) -- an infinitely greater crime than Watergate. This is similar. A few politicians get heart palpitations and it's an "assault on democracy and liberty." Millions are evicted, starving, homeless, well that's just business as usual.

Arnie even has the nerve to quote JFK. Well JFK was taken out by the actual government -- what Peter Dale Scott described as the "deep state." That's fascism.

[stickdog99]