Protests?

[TUMe]

"Some among America's military allies believe..." is not a very strong way to start a message.

The only good that comes from the awful events Wednesday is that our security folks should (and damn well better) be more altert. It is a great thing that people can visit the People's House but security must be stronger. This is sad but Trump gets a big part of the blame along with the faillure to update security that was fine decades ago (but don't forget the attack from the galleries many years ago.) Still, the villian is Trump this time. Believing after the fact is too little too late.

 

[watu04]

Interesting article by a journalist who on 12/26 predicted a Trumpist attempt to take over the Capitol based on following far right social media and chat rooms. Claims that the planning was elaborate including detailed maps of Capitol infrastructure. Emphasizes the issue of why wasn’t Congress better protected?

The Man Who Saw the Coup Attempt Coming Is Only Surprised It Wasn’t Much Worse

“It was not the army I expected it to be.”

www.gq.com

A quote:

“But a lot of them also just imagined they were going to be there for this historic time when Trump pulled away the curtain and revealed that all of Congress were traitors and then took his just and equal revenge. There were a variety of characters: people who were there to watch Trump gain control and people who thought Trump would win, but only by activating the military, [with] a proper military coup that they supported. They thought they were there to go and purge Congress. They were there to stop the certification. They were there to punish those who went against Trump. When you put them all together, you get this explosive mixture.”

 

[HuffyCane]

it wasn’t a lack of awareness or preparation. It was a lack of coordination and a desire not to repeat this summer.

 

[astonmartin708]

it wasn’t a lack of awareness or preparation. It was a lack of coordination and a desire not to repeat this summer.

If only there had been some sort of commander.... a commander in.... "chief" of sorts... that were tasked with upholding the constitutionally mandated process and protecting the sanctity of our electoral process using actual facts and evidence as his guide....and who's ultimate mandate was to ensure domestic tranquility.


Too bad we didn't have one of those. Just some fat twitter troll on the Russian pay rolls.

 

[HuffyCane]

You don’t want politicals running law enforcement agencies or making command decisions. With the exception of the DC mayor’s office that controls Metro PD, there’s very very little input by politicals into how federal law enforcement operates in the District. The President can call DOJ and say “Do whatever you have to do to stop people from spraying Baby Killers on the Vietnam Memorial. Or harassing high school kids at the Lincoln Memorial.” But DOJ regs prohibit politicals of both parties when in power from doing what you describe to prevent abuses.

DOJ and the United States Congress were the lead agencies for security at that event. Both have professional law enforcement agencies who have apolitical leadership and a duty under pre existing agreements and applicable federal regulations. One said they were ready and weren’t asked for support. The other didn’t want extra cops and the military in photos of the Capitol that day.

One had hundreds of cops close by waiting to react. The other waited to call.

You decide if it was a failure to prepare or not.

 

[astonmartin708]

You don’t want politicals running law enforcement agencies or making command decisions. With the exception of the DC mayor’s office that controls Metro PD, there’s very very little input by politicals into how federal law enforcement operates in the District. The President can call DOJ and say “Do whatever you have to do to stop people from spraying Baby Killers on the Vietnam Memorial. Or harassing high school kids at the Lincoln Memorial.” But DOJ regs prohibit politicals of both parties when in power from doing what you describe to prevent abuses.

DOJ and the United States Congress were the lead agencies for security at that event. Both have professional law enforcement agencies who have apolitical leadership and a duty under pre existing agreements and applicable federal regulations. One said they were ready and weren’t asked for support. The other didn’t want extra cops and the military in photos of the Capitol that day.

One had hundreds of cops close by waiting to react. The other waited to call.

You decide if it was a failure to prepare or not.

Seemed like Trump did fine ordering the Justice Department and the Pentagon to protect him as he walked outside through a crowd of mostly peaceful (meaning they hadn't started a large scale brawl with police forces)

Not sure why we should expect him to protect his Whitehouse photo ops with the military, but not the processes of our Congress.... considering he is the "commander in chief" who is tasked with ensuring domestic tranquility.

 

[HuffyCane]

Seemed like Trump did fine ordering the Justice Department and the Pentagon to protect him as he walked outside through a crowd of mostly peaceful (meaning they hadn't started a large scale brawl with police forces)

Not sure why we should expect him to protect his Whitehouse photo ops with the military, but not the processes of our Congress.... considering he is the "commander in chief" who is tasked with ensuring domestic tranquility.

Because we have separation of powers in this country and that still means something. It’s up to the Congress to decide whether they want any help with security. They didn’t. DOJ offered. It was refused. Even after it got out of hand they initially refused help. Those are just facts. Which you are still free to ignore.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

An aside that I didn't think deserved it's own post topic. Boebart and the rest of her like , who are nothing other than bandwagon lapdogs of a fast exiting Trump, are pitiful. They are used car salesmen. They give politicians a bad name, and that's saying something.

 

[watu04]

More is starting come out about Trump’s involvement in security planning for Jan 6. Lot’s of finger pointing and denial now. Foreign security counterparts are telling their leaders it was an attempted coup because the security was so lax and at odds with the basics of security practices that US and NATO allies share with each other.

 

[lawpoke87]

More is starting come out about Trump’s involvement in security planning for Jan 6. Lot’s of finger pointing and denial now. Foreign security counterparts are telling their leaders it was an attempted coup because the security was so lax and at odds with the basics of security practices that US and NATO allies share with each other.

Sounds like those unidentified foreign security counterparts need to learn how coups work.

 

[HuffyCane]

More is starting come out about Trump’s involvement in security planning for Jan 6. Lot’s of finger pointing and denial now. Foreign security counterparts are telling their leaders it was an attempted coup because the security was so lax and at odds with the basics of security practices that US and NATO allies share with each other.

Never assume conspiracy or misdeed where incompetence or miscommunication can explain the result. You won’t need to be skilled in rhetoric to piece together pieces of information to infer culpability on the President. Especially to an electorate burning white hot to remove him or at least eager to further vilify him. And you’ll get help from Republicans wanting breathing room from him.

But there’s no getting around the fact that the police for Congress screwed this up. There just isn’t. The DC mayor shares a lot of blame too.

And thanks for posting that about the observations of our foreign police partners. I was posting about that within hours of the incident on here and called a crazy apologist for Trump. Using my own background in law enforcement and crowd control as well as some the reports you’ve probably stumbled upon or were linked to.

But it will difficult to make this about the President. The web was buzzing about what they were going to do weeks and days in advance. The Mayor printed her letter in several newspapers saying she disfavored any additional police presence. And they’ve got time stamped police communications with the Cap Police saying before and during the violence they don’t need help. DOJ put there views on record about the need for them to help on public conference calls before hand.

The military was a little slow to react but did the best they could and arguably and probably didn’t need to be and shouldn’t have been involved at all. If for no other reason than to prevent people like the Mayor vilifying their presence on the Mall this summer, saying she doesn’t need or want them for this, then trying to claim it isn’t her fault when her plan to address known risks and threats fails, calls the military and then complains it takes them 20 minutes to respond.

The best you could probably do is say that the President tampered with political leadership in the Pentagon to withhold National Guard troops. But that ignores the remainder of the executive branch from DOJ to DHS to the Department of Energy and even the IRS saying they have cops available if you want them. Congress didn’t.

A lot of what you are probably reading is pro active messaging from Congressional leaders worried not only about suggestions of cowardice, but allegations they exceeded the authority. Apparently Schumer was inside the safe room having Virginia and Maryland Senators call their governors to demand guard troops. It doesn’t work that way, even if it was Maryland soil. Congressmen don’t command troops or federalize state militia or coerce others with authority to do the same.

 

[Gold*]

It’s about the president.

 

[HuffyCane]

It’s about the president.

Yes. It’s clearly not about the person on television this morning complaining about the lack of response from the military and demanding the power to command her own city military guard who a week ago sent a letter specifically instructing the military that their force should be unarmed, limited to 300, and only help with traffic and public transportation.

She’s also the person making hay out of the delayed response from the military without letting people know she was the one that told the military not to use armored vehicles and it took two hours to get the vans SUV and buses necessary to transport the people and weapons into the District that she said she would not need and refused to accept hours before.

If the President did anything, it’s a failing he’s had all along. He doesn’t understand the practical applications of his words in an apolitical setting. He often did things for political effect or to put people off balance and therefore presumably at a negotiation disadvantage.

I would be surprised to learn that he understood the practical implications of telling them to go to the Capitol. It would not surprise me if that was a spontaneous and reckless act. If so, he may have criminal liability. It’s also very possible that he was told to say that by people with nefarious intent that he was unaware of. Either way, malicious, reckless, or unknowing, as a practical matter Presidents are supposed to have their remarks pre-cleared so that adults with experience can flag impacts and deal with them. It’s pretty clear that didn’t happen here.

 

[HuffyCane]

Sounds like those unidentified foreign security counterparts need to learn how coups work.

TU actually offered/offers an excellent course on Coups, both the history of them, but also how to plan and execute them. I made an “A.”

And if you are interested, I highly recommend Edward Luttwak’s classic text on civilian coups, as well as Ken Connor’s second edition on How To Stage A Military Coup. It’s updated to deal with social media, while Luttwak’s was written in the 80s and focuses heavily on Latin America.

And if you’ve read that foreign commentary referenced above, many of them were written by people who understand coups very well. And have real concerns about similar activity. Especially in Paris. But seeing indicators of a coup is not a coup. I don’t think that happened here. You can’t simultaneously claim there was an attempted coup, the military didn’t respond fast enough, and these are all ignorant hick. It was a bunch of criminals attempting to make a violent political statement and some delusional and naive people who were along for the ride.

 

[Gold*]

Yes. It’s clearly not about the person on television this morning complaining about the lack of response from the military and demanding the power to command her own city military guard who a week ago sent a letter specifically instructing the military that their force should be unarmed, limited to 300, and only help with traffic and public transportation.

Your Murdoch manufactured point here is a distraction with just enough tinge of passive racism to qualify for the same idiot rhetorical playbook that has worked for far too long. I don’t think it will work the same in the future.

I know you’re not a racist, but the whole line of logic that blames a mayor who has no direct oversight of the Capitol building (it works in reverse) is just so obviously poor that it’s easy to boil down the composite parts that make this line of reasoning fail quite quickly.

Trump has a mob of supporters who reject reason. He told them to rush the capitol in the pursuit of the Vice President doing something illegal. If you don’t start and end the discussion there, you’re in the wrong. There will no doubt be a commission on this. The mayor of DC will be in the footnotes.

 

[HuffyCane]

Your Murdoch manufactured point here is a distraction with just enough tinge of passive racism to qualify for the same idiot rhetorical playbook that has worked for far too long. I don’t think it will work the same in the future.

I know you’re not a racist, but the whole line of logic that blames a mayor who has no direct oversight of the Capitol building (it works in reverse) is just so obviously poor that it’s easy to boil down the composite parts that make this line of reasoning fail quite quickly.

Trump has a mob of supporters who reject reason. He told them to rush the capitol in the pursuit of the Vice President doing something illegal. If you don’t start and end the discussion there, you’re in the wrong. There will no doubt be a commission on this. The mayor of DC will be in the footnotes.

As you can see above, I do call out the President’s remarks. We will see where the inquiry into that goes.

There’s plenty of people in the non crazy media calling out the mayor. Including the Wall Street Journal that called for resignation or removal of the President and gave her a dose of the business too.

NBC isn’t kind either.

Neither are the people who do this for a living who will have a new boss in 10 days.

You are correct she does not have direct responsibility over the Capitol building or their police. But that force is so small, they depend on the city to supplement their services in countless ways. Everything from their single jail cell below the capital to having to use the intoxylizer for DUIs. It’s up to her personally to negotiate these agreements. And she was an active participant in this agreement. She didn’t send an errand boy or her Chief. She was on the calls. She’s scrambling for her political life. I’m curious why you refuse to see it or admit it.

Pentagon, D.C. officials blame each other over Capitol riot response

Confusion and finger-pointing continue between local and federal law enforcement agencies after Wednesday's siege of the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Gold*]

Because you are offering this as a substitute for Trump’s liability. just isn’t a major issue. It’s classic stupid right wing media whataboutism used to justify wrongful acts.

This is about the President and his nutty supporters. It’s about white privilege being a basis to reject reason. It’s about alternative facts and how Trump has used them to manipulate people into believing bull crap.

I believe the impeachment needs to go forward at all costs. We need to use this moment to have a 9/11 style response on fraud, most of which is perpetrated by right wing media all day long.

If the mayor of DC loses her job, then let the process play out. But what you are offering in response to the issue of the day is actual provincialism. And it’s wrong.

 

[drboobay]

I do agree with the idea that you should look first to incompetence before conspiracy to explain most things.

Incompetence and stupidity is widespread. The wherewithal to plan and execute a conspiracy is a rarer talent, and it is hard to keep it all quiet.

Ttump is culpable of a political crime of fomenting insurrection though regardless of legal culpability IMO. Lying to susceptible people to rile up their emotions, and speaking with "plausible deniability" about fighting the election results - impeachable for sure.

 

[HuffyCane]

Because you are offering this as a substitute for Trump’s liability. just isn’t a major issue. It’s classic stupid right wing media whataboutism used to justify wrongful acts.

This is about the President and his nutty supporters. It’s about white privilege being a basis to reject reason. It’s about alternative facts and how Trump has used them to manipulate people into believing bull crap.

I believe the impeachment needs to go forward at all costs. We need to use this moment to have a 9/11 style response on fraud, most of which is perpetrated by right wing media all day long.

If the mayor of DC loses her job, then let the process play out. But what you are offering in response to the issue of the day is actual provincialism. And it’s wrong.

Some fair comment there. I’m not focusing on the President for two reasons. Number one I don’t have a professional background in what he did or didn’t do. I’ve never written a speech for a President. (Though I have written policy documents and helped prepare a Presidential candidate for the New Hsmpshire debate.)

I do know a great deal about municipal policing agreements and the security environment on the Mall.

So I’ve focused there.

I think everyone on here can see and judge for themselves why they think what he did was wrong or not. I know we both think there is cause for alarm there on many different levels.

But a more productive discussion into why what happened eventually succeeded in happening necessarily includes a discussion of who participated and the unique and complex circumstances behind it. I hope it results in a discussion whether the legislative branch should even have a police force.

I don’t think anybody here with good will doesn’t think the President was a proximate cause of what happened. The level of his culpability and whether there were other proximate causes is open to debate. I’m not inclined to believe there are other proximate causes, but it’s possible. Foreign involvement could lead to real or proxy war and I don’t to think about that.

So I’m sorry if my comments are being misinterpreted as apologizing in some way or taken as an attempt to minimize culpability. My opinions are the opposite of that.

But I do think any productive discussion into who had the last clear chance to prevent this, or who could have prevented it, necessarily includes a discussion of the relationship between the Capitol Police and the Mayor. And that means to review her conduct and motivations before during and after the event for those reading this were shocked by what they saw and either wondered why this happened or why the President was allowed to create that event, depending on how you view it.

So I’m not ignoring the anarchists getting on the train, Im not ignoring the conductor helping them on the train after it was moving, I’m not ignoring the scale, and I’m not saying it’s Mrs Palsgraf’s fault. But when Mrs Palsgraf wants to know why there’s a scale on her head, you gotta talk about the bomb, the scale, the railroad company, and the city that didn’t inspect the station and told them in advance the scale was OK. Whether the city is responsible or the person that gave the bomb to the anarchists is self evident,

 

[drboobay]

Another thing that few are talking about prominently is Trump's reaction once the break in started.

It goes to clarifying his state of mind. Anyone who was completely clear of devious intent would have been appalled. Such a person would have used any and all means to call off the mob. Obviously all we got was a mealy mouthed tweet about respecting police.

 

[watu04]

A Trump aide reports that Trump’s initial reaction to the TV coverage of the invasion of the Capitol building was giddy but later changed to anger because some of the rioters looked like ‘white trash’. Their appearance hurt his ”brand”.

No one‘s reputation has escaped damage by an association with Trump.

 

[astonmartin708]

Some fair comment there. I’m not focusing on the President for two reasons. Number one I don’t have a professional background in what he did or didn’t do. I’ve never written a speech for a President. (Though I have written policy documents and helped prepare a Presidential candidate for the New Hsmpshire debate.)

I do know a great deal about municipal policing agreements and the security environment on the Mall.

So I’ve focused there.

I think everyone on here can see and judge for themselves why they think what he did was wrong or not. I know we both think there is cause for alarm there on many different levels.

But a more productive discussion into why what happened eventually succeeded in happening necessarily includes a discussion of who participated and the unique and complex circumstances behind it. I hope it results in a discussion whether the legislative branch should even have a police force.

I don’t think anybody here with good will doesn’t think the President was a proximate cause of what happened. The level of his culpability and whether there were other proximate causes is open to debate. I’m not inclined to believe there are other proximate causes, but it’s possible. Foreign involvement could lead to real or proxy war and I don’t to think about that.

So I’m sorry if my comments are being misinterpreted as apologizing in some way or taken as an attempt to minimize culpability. My opinions are the opposite of that.

But I do think any productive discussion into who had the last clear chance to prevent this, or who could have prevented it, necessarily includes a discussion of the relationship between the Capitol Police and the Mayor. And that means to review her conduct and motivations before during and after the event for those reading this were shocked by what they saw and either wondered why this happened or why the President was allowed to create that event, depending on how you view it.

So I’m not ignoring the anarchists getting on the train, Im not ignoring the conductor helping them on the train after it was moving, I’m not ignoring the scale, and I’m not saying it’s Mrs Palsgraf’s fault. But when Mrs Palsgraf wants to know why there’s a scale on her head, you gotta talk about the bomb, the scale, the railroad company, and the city that didn’t inspect the station and told them in advance the scale was OK. Whether the city is responsible or the person that gave the bomb to the anarchists is self evident,

Even if nobody in congress or DC or surrounding states asked for a single additional armed guard as you argue... (which aren’t the reports I’ve seen) you still can’t ignore the fact that at no time in the past has a president or his party encouraged this kind of behavior. There would have been no riot had Trump accepted the courts decisions and the decisions of the congressional leaders. There would have been no riot if he and his stooges hadn’t told their followers to March on the capitol. There shouldn’t have needed to be any armed guards to prevent this type of thing because it shouldn’t have happened in the first place.

You’re looking everywhere you can except the leaders your own party for somewhere to place the blame for this and there honestly isn’t anywhere. It wasn’t 16-35 year olds in a vacuum, it wasn’t the mayor of DC. It wasn’t Nancy Pelosi.

The only reason that Donald Trump isn’t behind bars right now is because the members of his party care more about maintaining what little political capital they have left more than they care about justice.

 

[HuffyCane]

For the one millionth time, I’m not arguing the “but for” test. I’m simply discussing what others on here have asked. And that is, despite the obvious problem and who caused it, why wasn’t there steps to still prevent it once it was underway. That’s the discussion. I don’t think anyone is suggesting Donald Trump is less to blame because of what the Mayor didn’t do.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

A Trump aide reports that Trump’s initial reaction to the TV coverage of the invasion of the Capitol building was giddy but later changed to anger because some of the rioters looked like ‘white trash’. Their appearance hurt his ”brand”.

No one‘s reputation has escaped damage by an association with Trump.

What did Trump think his riot would look like. His core followers ARE white trash, as he puts it.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

For the one millionth time, I’m not arguing the “but for” test. I’m simply discussing what others on here have asked. And that is, despite the obvious problem and who caused it, why wasn’t there steps to still prevent it once it was underway. That’s the discussion. I don’t think anyone is suggesting Donald Trump is less to blame because of what the Mayor didn’t do.

You guys seem to be crosstalking on two separate but related subjects.

 

[URedskin54]

Some of my favorite people are “white trash” but it’s been a long time since I’ve believed anonymously sourced stories about Trump comments. Our glorious media abused that privilege too often

 

[Gmoney4WW]

He's probably mad cuz the air force vet that sacrificed her life for the cause, looked too much like white trash.

 

[HuffyCane]

Some of my favorite people are “white trash” but it’s been a long time since I’ve believed anonymously sourced stories about Trump comments. Our glorious media abused that privilege too often

It’s believable. He didn’t hire DiGenova as his lawyer because he didn’t like his suit in the interview. Not because it must be obvious that he is insane, but because he looked “shabby.”

 

[URedskin54]

It’s believable. He didn’t hire DiGenova as his lawyer because he didn’t like his suit in the interview. Not because it must be obvious that he is insane, but because he looked “shabby.”

They are always believable, but there are too many “Anonymous Trump aide: Trump says vets are a bunch of retards trying to hump a doorknob” stories with zero follow up or corroboration.

 

[HuffyCane]

They are always believable, but there are too many “Anonymous Trump aide: Trump says vets are a bunch of retards trying to hump a doorknob” stories with zero follow up or corroboration.

Not to mention a lot of people in DC probably looking to sell info until they find their next job or throwing a bone to reporters while asking for their help finding another gig. I do still believe it though. Some of the other stories not so much. Iirc they basically confirmed the DiGenova story.

 

[URedskin54]

Not to mention a lot of people in DC probably looking to sell info until they find their next job or throwing a bone to reporters while asking for their help finding another gig. I do still believe it though. Some of the other stories not so much. Iirc they basically confirmed the DiGenova story.

Luckily there’s the last decade or so of his public statements and actions that we can draw from to form an opinion of him and don’t need to rely on leaks from one of Trump’s fluffers

 

[watu04]

Propublica article on White House involvement in security planning. Usually very accurate.

Before Mob Stormed the Capitol, Days of Security Planning Involved Cabinet Officials and President Trump

A Pentagon memo offers one version of events — six days of preparation for a rally that quickly spiraled out of control.

www.propublica.org

 

[HuffyCane]

Not much we can learn from this except two things:

1. Bowser says DOD set the size of the force snd their role. First I’m reading that. Not sure I believe it. But we know from the Dec 31 letter she said that force was under her control and adequate. She instructed them to be unarmed.

2. She specifically prohibited certain agencies from assisting MPD at the Capitol in the Dec 31 letter. She asked for their help on Inauguration Day about an hour ago across the city.

I think we are getting a clearer picture of the mistakes. Culpability a definitely different issue.

 

[rivalcane]

While I’ve strongly denounced the actions of these people to characterize their plan as “almost working” couldn’t be further from the truth. Civilians storming a building will not and cannot over throw the US government. We have the three branches of government, Supreme Court and US military. To say “this almost worked” is nothing but hyperbole imo. This action never had a snowballs chance in hell.

I agree with you, the protesters are completely wrong and should be charged. An out of control congress that spends 4 year trying to undo the results of an election are more dangerous to a coup.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

but it’s been a long time since I’ve believed anonymously sourced stories about Trump comments.

Luckily there’s the last decade or so of his public statements and actions that we can draw from to form an opinion of him and don’t need to rely on leaks from one of Trump’s fluffers

Besides he has pissed everybody off that didn't work for him beyond yesterday, and went through so many staffers...

Their has to be a large supply of legit leaks...

 

[HuffyCane]

Propublica article on White House involvement in security planning. Usually very accurate.

Before Mob Stormed the Capitol, Days of Security Planning Involved Cabinet Officials and President Trump

A Pentagon memo offers one version of events — six days of preparation for a rally that quickly spiraled out of control.

www.propublica.org

The fall guy didn’t fall too long.

Not a good look for the Mayor.

Or Congressional leadership.

This is gonna get worse for Pelosi and crew before it gets better.

They appropriate $460 million for 2,200 police officers to patrol 16 acres. The City of Tulsa has around 800. But due to union restrictions and other snafus, they can’t work a large crowd without the city. This is gonna get ugly. I’m telling you.

I wasn’t aware Murdoch bought NPR btw.

Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Requests For National Guard Denied 6 Times In Riots

Steven Sund contradicts reports that help was not requested, saying security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed calls for assistance ahead of and during the attack on the Capitol.

www.npr.org

 

[astonmartin708]

The fall guy didn’t fall too long.

Not a good look for the Mayor.

Or Congressional leadership.

This is gonna get worse for Pelosi and crew before it gets better.

They appropriate $460 million for 2,200 police officers to patrol 16 acres. The City of Tulsa has around 800. But due to union restrictions and other snafus, they can’t work a large crowd without the city. This is gonna get ugly. I’m telling you.

I wasn’t aware Murdoch bought NPR btw.

Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Requests For National Guard Denied 6 Times In Riots

Steven Sund contradicts reports that help was not requested, saying security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed calls for assistance ahead of and during the attack on the Capitol.

www.npr.org

It looks worse for the head of the army who wouldn’t allow the national guard for something like 5 hours in despite being begged to.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

It looks worse for the head of the army who wouldn’t allow the national guard for something like 5 hours in despite being begged to.

What to do about a lack of leadership from your leader.(Even worse when he is the problem.)

We've never put in bonafide safeguards against a leader working against us. All the safeguards were put in with the idea that several people from the inside, would be astutely working for us and have those working next to them doing the same.

 

[Gold*]

The more that has seeped out on this, the worse it gets. The overwhelming amount of law enforcement officers were heroic and put their lives at risk to defend our Constitution. This was a barbaric attack. One officer was beaten to death with a fire hydrant. They deserve our praise, honor, and support.

This was also very much premeditated and there are ridiculous records showing that. One story that has come out is that panic buttons were removed from some offices before the riots began. Credible people are saying that he rioters came on tours accompanied by certain nutty representatives earlier last week. They had plans to do great destruction. It’s a miracle more people weren’t hurt or killed. See point one above.

One more observation: a lot of us haven’t considered what sedition, treason, and terrorism mean here. Let there be no doubt that the Proud Boys, QAnon, the KKK, and others are domestic terrorist organizations. You lose a lot of civil rights when you commit these acts. Much of the debate about moderation on privately owned forums is misplaced. Many of these same people wanted no rights for foreign terrorists after 9/11. But they want to protect the right of this trash to promote further insurrection.

 

[HuffyCane]

I had the opportunity to view in person the arraignment of one of the more publicized cases. The guy thought it was a joke until about half way through it when he realized he wasn’t going home. (And at his age and the conditions of most prisons, he might not be going home ever.)

You could see the concern grow organically on his face. I won’t speak for the guy but I’m guessing his emotions up to that point was “I’m white. They won’t send me to prison.”

As I said the day this happened, once they announced there was a coordinated bombing, I knew the people that did this were well funded and directed.

It was clear to me then, and it’s becoming more clear. The people on both the right and left, who think the defendants will get a slap on the wrist for this, are sadly mistaken. They dont have a lot of visibility into what US Attorneys office and federal crime courts prioritize. Even if this wasn’t on the news and it was five people at the Kansas Capitol in Topeka, you are going to be facing substantial custody time.