Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

House Republicans continue GOP’s affront to law enforcement


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

On 3/24/2023 at 7:40 PM, Grim Reaper 6 said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if that occurs, findings are irrelevant because it’s all about the political optics for these people. Representative Green is a drama Queen and media face time is all she cares about.

JIMHO

 

She is just echoing the exact thing that Trump says hoping to be his Vice-Presidential candidate. But she is too valuable in Congress for him to help and try to overturn the 2024 election should Trump lose again, so he will not choose her, so she is just as usual blowing hot air for no reason.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I didn't say anything either for or against And Then's position. But to use his words as a reason to be "offended" or "insulted" on behalf of others is just way over the top! 

Comparing the events of January 6 as similar to what happened at Pearl Harbour or 9/11 "is delusional and IMO shows what rabbit holes of extremism that left wingers listen to". 

The difference between our views is that the rabbit hole of extremism that And Then listens to is an extreme example of right winger views. The rabbit hole of extremism that the left listens to is broadcast at 6pm on 95% of the news channels you turn on in the evening! 

It's really not though. You just think that because you are down the same rabbit hole as him.

My most consistent news source is probably the morning NPR podcast (probably one of the "95%" leftist broadcast) during my commute and I haven't even heard of this pearl harbor comment, even though I'm allegedly the target audience. Had to look it up just now to find out it was Kamla Harris (not surprised by her. I also recall I was mad at her for her veterans day comment last year).

It's clear in most topics I read that extreme right wing people are in online echochambers that constantly point out obscure woke comment, tweets, or situations around the world to keep them in a consistent state of range and fear. Everything is a conspiracy. Everyone is out to get them. 

Until Biden supporters storm the capital to obstruct the transfer of power then your comment is invalid.

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spartan max2 said:

Until Biden supporters storm the capital to obstruct the transfer of power then your comment is invalid.

I've been meaning to ask you, how exactly were they going to "stop the transfer of power"? Couldn't they have transfered it the next day? The next week? Or even that evening as early as most of the grandpas and grandmas left and everyone else had cleared out. My neighbor saw it on the news before she had to run some errands. She picked up the kids, stopped for a few minutes at her mother's and went to the grocery store. She asked me what was happening when she got back and it was mostly over with and I had gone back outside. I watched it from start to finish.

Edited by Michelle
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

It's really not though. You just think that because you are down the same rabbit hole as him.

My most consistent news source is probably the morning NPR podcast (probably one of the "95%" leftist broadcast) during my commute and I haven't even heard of this pearl harbor comment, even though I'm allegedly the target audience. Had to look it up just now to find out it was Kamla Harris (not surprised by her. I also recall I was mad at her for her veterans day comment last year).

It's clear in most topics I read that extreme right wing people are in online echochambers that constantly point out obscure woke comment, tweets, or situations around the world to keep them in a consistent state of range and fear. Everything is a conspiracy. Everyone is out to get them. 

This was said by the Vice President,  it wasn't a very deep rabbit hole to go down!

 

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Until Biden supporters storm the capital to obstruct the transfer of power then your comment is invalid.

Biden supporters DID try to storm the Capitol in 2017! Well, leftists did,  at least (technically they'd be Hillary's supporters considering the year, but it's essentially the same group of people). But the people in charge of Capitol security actually took the threat seriously and the leftists were met with thousands of police in full riot gear! As a result the riot failed spectacularly.

If that level of policing was present in 2021 the J6 rioters would have been just another normal day in history and we would not be talking about it today!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2023 at 8:31 PM, and-then said:

I agree.  J6 needs to be totally re-investigated and any FBI agents or capitol police who were involved should be detained until that investigation is completed.  None of them should be allowed visitors nor medical care until they either plead out or get acquitted.  

This stuff isn't a joke and heads need to roll for what is being done to these Americans.  That jail should be raided by sitting members of the House and any deficiencies found there should be brought to the attention of the American people.  

These are the ones that set up a gallows outside, then proceeded to chant "Hang Mike Pence!" and attempted to breech the halls of Congress until gunshots rang out and you defend these people? Most normal would not stand by and watch Police barricades forcefully breeched and think it was OK to enter the Capital. They should have known it was trespassing because anyone who was there could see what was happening and just decided to walk on in. I think the problem with these people is they are trying to separate who was there for deadly intent, and those who ignorantly walked on in.

Question, if you saw riotous conditions ahead and a Police barrier breeched would you think it was OK to meander on in?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The good ol ' days... 

Eisenhower, Patton and MacArthur face down the Bonus Army... 

Quote

[00.06:53]

...

On July 28, 1932 (80 years ago today), President Herbert Hoover ordered US Army soldiers under the command of General Douglas MacArthur to remove a number of protesters, known as the Bonus Army, from Washington, DC. MacArthur exceeded his orders by attacking the protesters, causing a number of casualties. The incident may have been the final nail in the coffin of Hoover re-election campaign already on life support. It is a sad part of American history, as men who had fought for their country in 1917 and 1918 were set upon by the very army to which many of them once belonged.

...

https://potus-geeks.livejournal.com/245124.html?page=1

~

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Michelle said:

I've been meaning to ask you, how exactly were they going to "stop the transfer of power"? Couldn't they have transfered it the next day? The next week? Or even that evening as early as most of the grandpas and grandmas left and everyone else had cleared out. My neighbor saw it on the news before she had to run some errands. She picked up the kids, stopped for a few minutes at her mother's and went to the grocery store. She asked me what was happening when she got back and it was mostly over with and I had gone back outside. I watched it from start to finish.

According to the testimony of some of them the idea was to stop the election from being certified and then helping Trump when he starts martial law (to control the chaos and investigate the election).  During martial law and the investigation Trump would still be president of course. 

The oath keepers there even had weapons cached in hotels to wait for this. They planned to assist Trump once he called on martial law.

May sound crazy to you, but then again you aren't the kind of person to go to that riot on the first place. 

They left once Trump tweeted for them to go home.

What Trump wanted them to do is up for debate but it's pretty clear many of the rioters thought they were doing what Trump wanted them to do. 

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

This was said by the Vice President,  it wasn't a very deep rabbit hole to go down!

 

Biden supporters DID try to storm the Capitol in 2017! Well, leftists did,  at least (technically they'd be Hillary's supporters considering the year, but it's essentially the same group of people). But the people in charge of Capitol security actually took the threat seriously and the leftists were met with thousands of police in full riot gear! As a result the riot failed spectacularly.

If that level of policing was present in 2021 the J6 rioters would have been just another normal day in history and we would not be talking about it today!

I'm sure if I look that 2017 claim it will be just as "accurate" as all the false comparisons people made after Jan 6th of Dems not voting to certify Trump's election.

Did Hillary organize this alleged 2017 protest? Also on the exact day of the election being certified, to quote "stop the steal( the literal name of the protest on Jan 6th)

 

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

And don't forget about Antifa and BLM, all attacked for their political views. Oh yeah.:devil:   

That’s one way to put it. Others might say they are criticized for their political views. 
 

Others might say it’s them that do the attacking. Some might go so far as to say, after looking at body counts, and burnt cities that they are outright terrorists. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm sure if I look that 2017 claim it will be just as "accurate" as all the false comparisons people made after Jan 6th of Dems not voting to certify Trump's election.

 

3 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Did Hillary organize this alleged 2017 protest? Also on the exact day of the election being certified, to quote "stop the steal( the literal name of the protest on Jan 6th)

 

Trump didn't organise the protest in 2021 either, so I see no point arguing a straw man! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Trump didn't organise the protest in 2021 either, so I see no point arguing a straw man! 

He was the keynote speaker at the event...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

He was the keynote speaker at the event...

And as that's not really relevant to the point I was making when I brought this up, I think there's no point arguing further! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

And as that's not really relevant to the point I was making when I brought this up, I think there's no point arguing further! 

From my understanding, you were trying to say that the only difference between Jan 6th and anti Trump protest at the white house was effective security.

I was explaining the number of reasons I disagree with that. 

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

From my understanding, you were trying to say that the only difference between Jan 6th and anti Trump protest at the white house was effective security.

I was explaining the number of reasons I disagree with that. 

I was actually thinking more back to why I originally responded back a page or two,  which had more to do with being insulted.   But even in the immediate context,  I wasn't arguing "the only difference". If there were thousands of armed riot police outside the Capitol on January 6, 2021 and the protesters arrived,  saw the show of Force,  and then dispersed without breaching security, we wouldn't be taking about January 6 today! This is a significant difference,  if not the only one. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

 

Trump didn't organise the protest in 2021 either, so I see no point arguing a straw man! 

I admit I'm getting up there in years so my memory may not be as sharp, but did the "mostly peaceful" protesters in 2017 storm the capitol building, ransacked members offices, and call for the deaths of members of Congress?  I do recall Hillary Clinton conceding the election, so yeah, perfect comparison.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had told me, just a handful of years ago that the Republican Party would turn its back on law enforcement, I would not have believed the forecast.

“In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a fierce-looking king, a master of intrigue, will arise. Daniel 8:23
____________
Trump’s appearance in Waco, TX last weekend is more than just a dog whistle to his “rebels.”

I won’t be at all surprised if lawlessness spreads like wildfire in the U.S., before the 2024 election cycle, and law enforcement is conveniently blamed for much of what goes wrong.

Trump can then claim to be both victim and a hero of this anti-law enforcement movement.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

That’s one way to put it. Others might say they are criticized for their political views. 
 

Others might say it’s them that do the attacking. Some might go so far as to say, after looking at body counts, and burnt cities that they are outright terrorists. 

Yes indeed.  So maybe its time to separate breaking laws from politics.   Breaking laws can be demonstrated independently from political views of the perpetrator, in fact they don't matter. 

So the question with riot participants or tax evaders is: Did they commit a crime?  It is not: What political party they support?  That would be blind justice.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Portre said:

I admit I'm getting up there in years so my memory may not be as sharp, but did the "mostly peaceful" protesters in 2017 storm the capitol building, ransacked members offices, and call for the deaths of members of Congress?  I do recall Hillary Clinton conceding the election, so yeah, perfect comparison.

They werr met by thousands of police in riot gear! If the same show of force were present in 2021 the Capitol would not have been breached! Period! 

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/1/2023 at 1:46 AM, Paranoid Android said:

I was actually thinking more back to why I originally responded back a page or two,  which had more to do with being insulted.   But even in the immediate context,  I wasn't arguing "the only difference". If there were thousands of armed riot police outside the Capitol on January 6, 2021 and the protesters arrived,  saw the show of Force,  and then dispersed without breaching security, we wouldn't be taking about January 6 today! This is a significant difference,  if not the only one. 

Golly, I though it was another pavlovian reaction by a poster that feeds on identity politics.

Criminals aren't the same as ethnic Japanese prisoners or pillaging indigenous North America.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Golly, I though it was another pavlovian reaction by a poster that feeds on identity politics.

Criminals aren't the same as ethnic Japanese prisoners or pillaging indigenous North America.

I cannot stand identity politics, I don't know who you are referring to! 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

I cannot stand identity politics, I don't know who you are referring to! 

You were literally speaking in terms of "your side", "we", left and right.

You only can't stand identity politics becausr you wallow in it.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

You were literally speaking in terms of "your side", "we", left and right.

You only can't stand identity politics becausr you wallow in it.

Quote

 

Identity politics is a political approach wherein people of a particular race, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation, social background, social class, or other identifying factors develop political agendas that are based upon these identities

Identity politics is deeply connected with the idea that some groups in society are oppressed and begins with analysis of that oppression

Source for more,  though it's Wikipedia, so be wary.

 

I treat people as individuals, and pointing out commonalities between politics and social attitudes is not unreasonable. The same argument leads me to agree with Spartan Max that there are weird attitudes about politicians on the political right as well. My comments simply point out that such attitudes exist by extremes from both sides of the political aisle, and both types exist here on UM, as evidenced by Max's outrage at certain views on Biden and my somewhat similar reaction to those doing similar with views on other presidents.   

Notice I have made no mention of race,  nationality,  religion,  gender,  sexual orientation,  social background,  social class,  or other identifying factors in assigning values or political identity to these people! Nor did I suggest anything about oppression based on membership in any of the above identities (race, nationality,  et al).  

I therefore submit that you are incorrect,  or perhaps using Identity Politics in some context other than its proper Sociological context! I also take the chance to repeat,  this time in CAPS (not shouting,  just emphasising) - I HATE IDENTITY POLITICS! 

~ Regards,  PA

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

I treat people as individuals, and pointing out commonalities between politics and social attitudes is not unreasonable. The same argument leads me to agree with Spartan Max that there are weird attitudes about politicians on the political right as well. My comments simply point out that such attitudes exist by extremes from both sides of the political aisle, and both types exist here on UM, as evidenced by Max's outrage at certain views on Biden and my somewhat similar reaction to those doing similar with views on other presidents.   

Notice I have made no mention of race,  nationality,  religion,  gender,  sexual orientation,  social background,  social class,  or other identifying factors in assigning values or political identity to these people! Nor did I suggest anything about oppression based on membership in any of the above identities (race, nationality,  et al).  

I therefore submit that you are incorrect,  or perhaps using Identity Politics in some context other than its proper Sociological context! I also take the chance to repeat,  this time in CAPS (not shouting,  just emphasising) - I HATE IDENTITY POLITICS! 

~ Regards,  PA

You definition of identity politics allows for other identifying factors.

When you start using language such as we/they in an ideoligical context you are "othering".

You were "othering" @spartan max2 and asserting he is on some side opposing yours.

You play identity politics; and, play it often. 

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

You definition of identity politics allows for other identifying factors.

When you start using language such as we/they in an ideoligical context you are "othering".

You were "othering" @spartan max2 and asserting he is on some side opposing yours.

You play identity politics; and, play it often. 

"Othering" is not Identity Politics. I also maintain that suggesting commonalities between political views and social attitudes  is not Othering, either,  but even if it is,  it's not Identity Politics!

It's not "my definition". It's simply THE definition! Identity Politics is about immutable characteristics (sex, race, etc). and I simply cannot stand that!

From now on I shall reply to all incorrect references to Identity Politics with the Princess Bride meme:

image.png.1dcc65d05bde558198238f78f0a4834f.png

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.