 |
| share of voters who said the following events had a “major impact” on their worldview |
The article wants to focus on the movement within the Republican Party, but support for the Jan 6th commission, support for charging people, and pretty much every other factor regarding Jan 6th has been declining across the board. It is simply dishonest to suggest that all of this movement is just Trump gaslighting Republicans.
If you look at the chart above from Morning Consult, you will see that only 35% of Independents and 24% of Republicans are still viewing Jan 6th as a major impact event. The outlier are Democrats, who still act as if this was this was a second 911. In fact if you look at all of the major events listed there is no greater disparity between Parties than there is for the Jan 6th event.
So logically if you want to believe that one Party or the other has been gaslighted, then you will look at the outlier here. Democrats. They still want to believe that an unarmed group of rioters led by a crazy man with horns and a caveman outfit was a coup attempt to take over the Government. This is entirely an emotional argument pushed by hatred. Logic and common sense suggests that such an argument is not only wrong, but childishly immature on top of being wrong.
As time goes on and "history" of the objective is written, this will be seen as Democrats attempting to exploit events and only being successful within their own ranks.
33 comments:
SEE my last post and posts on the next thread down.
Ch UN-truth SAID:
They still want to believe that an unarmed group of rioters led by a crazy man with horns and a caveman outfit was a coup attempt to take over the Government. This is entirely an emotional argument pushed by hatred. Logic and common sense suggests that such an argument is not only wrong, but childishly immature on top of being wrong.
_________
LOL
It was all so entirely harmless that numerous of Trump's advisers and even family members kept BEGGING him to call it off lest he be blamed for it.
But he held out for hours, enjoying it, and still thinking it might lead to something good for him ---- until FINALLY even he got the message and told the rioters "we love you" but "go home now."
Ch, you continually make yourself look like the gaslighted one, because you have been.
No, actually, I don't think even you believe anymore the dishonest twaddle you desperately print here.
Sounds like James is admitting that it was political.
Was it you, myballs who said no one was armed? That there were no guns arrests?
(I guess you said it because Trump said it?)
Fact-check: Were Jan. 6 rioters armed?
By Gabrielle Settles, PolitiFact.com
Donald Trump: “There were no guns whatsoever” at the Capitol riot on Jan. 6.
PolitiFact's ruling: False
Here's why: President Donald Trump claimed on Fox News that there were no guns in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
During an on-air conversation with Trump on July 11, "Sunday Morning Futures" host Maria Bartiromo twice broached the topic of whether guns were present during the attack at the Capitol.
"They called it an armed insurrection, and yet no guns were seized," Bartiromo said before describing it as being among the "misinformation" spread about Trump’s presidency.
Later, she repeated the assertion: "They continue to call this an armed insurrection," Bartiromo said. "And yet no guns were seized, Mr. President."
"Right," Trump answered. "There were no guns whatsoever."
Trump went on to describe the events of Jan. 6 by saying that "people with no guns walked down" to the Capitol, that the building’s doors were open, and that there was a "lovefest" between the Capitol police and the insurrectionists.
Court documents, video evidence and news coverage directly contradict this characterization.
Many of those involved in the attack were armed, and several had guns that police later seized. The event was far from a lovefest: Five people died, including a Capitol Police officer, and more than 140 officers were injured in the day’s events. Video evidence shows both police officers and rioters being injured in the brawls. Rioters called for hanging then-Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Damage to the Capitol is estimated at $1.5 million and included ransacked offices, broken windows and doors, broken and stolen photography equipment, ruined statues, murals and furniture. A pending security funding bill provides dollars to cover related expenses, including tightened security and trauma counseling.
PolitiFact reviewed the case files of approximately 430 defendants who were arrested and charged for their actions at the Capitol. We found several defendants who police say were found to have brought firearms with them. Some were charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds, while others stashed them away while in Washington.
They included:
Lonnie Coffman of Alabama: Police found multiple firearms and weapons in Coffman’s possession. Coffman’s truck, which he had parked in the vicinity of the Capitol on the morning of Jan. 6, was packed with weaponry including a handgun, a rifle and a shotgun, each loaded, according to court documents. In addition, the truck held hundreds of rounds of ammunition, several large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, a crossbow with bolts, machetes, camouflage smoke devices, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails.
Court records and video surveillance footage show that Coffman, who had ties to militia groups, parked the vehicle near the Capitol at 9:15 a.m. that day. The documents say that after he got out of his pickup truck at 9:20 a.m., he joined a crowd of people who walked directly to the Capitol building.
He was detained later that evening as an unnamed woman was driving him back toward his truck. Police questioned Coffman and searched him, finding two more handguns on his person. None of the weapons were registered, documents state.
Guy Reffitt of Texas: Reffitt was charged with bringing a handgun onto Capitol grounds. Court documents showed that Reffitt, reported in court documents to be a member of the militia group Three Percenters, told his family he brought his gun with him and that he and others "stormed the Capitol."
Christopher Michael Alberts of Maryland: Alberts brought his handgun onto Capitol grounds. An officer saw that Alberts had a gun on his hip and alerted fellow officers. When Alberts tried to flee, officers detained him and recovered the loaded handgun along with a separate magazine.
The total number of people who carried firearms with them that day may not ever be fully accounted for because the majority of those involved in the siege were not arrested on-site but were tracked down by law enforcement days, weeks and months later.
It’s also worth noting that the definition of "armed" is not legally limited to guns — it refers to any weapon used for defense or offense and used as a means of protection. Other items used as weapons Jan. 6 included bats, crutches, flagpoles, skateboards, fire extinguishers and chemical sprays.
We reached out to Trump’s team to ask for evidence behind his statements but did not hear back. We also reached out to Fox News for comment but did not get a response by deadline.
_____
Our ruling
Trump said there were "no guns whatsoever" at the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and that "people with no guns" walked down to the Capitol.
Court records and news reports show that many insurrectionists were armed, and several were charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds or stashed nearby while in Washington D.C. In addition, rioters had weapons other than firearms and used them during the attack.
We rate this claim False.
Some of the "peaceful protesters" were outfitted in protective armor and carrying wrist twists to use on captured congress persons.
Wow, James you are continuing to spread your form of hate.
Please stop.
Work for unity. Like I do everyday.
Propane has become propain.
Up 56 cents per gallon from last year.
AOC Lays Wreath At Her Grave On January 6th
BRONX, NY—United States Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez visited Woodlawn Cemetery this morning to grieve in quiet dignity at her own grave on the 1-year anniversary of her death on January 6. She was seen openly weeping and tearing her clothes by the photo crew she brought with her.
AOC, who was killed in the Capitol’s House Chamber by murderous Trump supporters, left a wreath where her body had been peacefully laid to rest. Though she made no official statements, eyewitness testimony claims she “looked mournfully off into the distance” as if contemplating the fleeting brevity of life.
“She just looked so brave and helpless,” said Jim Acosta from the scene. “I could see that she was clearly hurting. I don’t know how she gets up in the morning, especially since she’s already dead. What a fighter.”
Once her camera crew confirmed they had several good shots, she wiped her eyes, slowly walked to her brand-new Tesla, and drove off—leaving a crew of professional mourners in her wake.
Visitors to the cemetery are advised to socially distance and mask up while mourning the loss of America’s greatest congresswoman. For those mourning remotely, a contribution can be made to AOC’s 2022 campaign.
The Three Socialist here failed to report this.
"😂
Initial jobless claims⬆️Jan. 207,000🤡Bidenomics "
protective armor
Made of cardboard.
As time goes on and "history" of the objective is written, this will be seen as Democrats attempting to exploit events and only being successful within their own ranks.
You know, at one level it really is hard to blame them.
Their legislative agenda is a fucking train wreck that slammed into a dumpster fire, their standard bearer is in such significant cognitive decline he quits each day by 1PM, and his running mate sucks so bad her approval is significantly WORSE than his. ALL policies - foreign, domestic, economic, and Covid are epic failures. There is literally nowhere a democrat can turn within this administration for even the tiniest nugget of anything that resembles good news.
So yeah, the cynical and logical take on this is to not be surprised that they're gaslighting the fuck out of the democrat faithful to divert their gaze from what everyone else can see - the collapse of this presidency and the democrats tenuous grip on power in DC.
You are a traitor.
POLITICO founding editor John Harris writes the Altitude column, offering perspective on politics in a moment of radical disruption.
For most of my reporting career, to refer to some dispute or another — over a judicial nomination, perhaps, or an uproar over a proposed shopping mall near a battlefield — as “a new Civil War” was to reach for a metaphor.
On the anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol, we mark the evolution of journalistic cliche: Serious people now invoke “Civil War” not as metaphor but as literal precedent.
The Trump years, which it is now evident did not end with his presidency, have awakened a conflict so profound that, as in the 1860s, democracy, constitutional order and union itself are in peril.
A big deal, indeed. But also a puzzle: If this is a 21st century version of 19th century disunion, shouldn’t it be more obvious what the war, at bottom, is all about?
The Jan. 6 anniversary is a reminder that the chaos of the Trump years in one important respect — and perhaps only in one — is a historical anomaly. The country many times over has witnessed dissent and disruption far more violent than anything seen in recent years. But earlier episodes featured profound ideological and moral questions — easily visible to the naked eye, in the present and to historians afterward — that lay at the heart of the matter.
The real Civil War was about slavery — at the start, to restrict its territorial expansion, by war’s end to eliminate it entirely. Capitalists opposed to the New Deal knew why they loathed FDR — he was fundamentally shifting the balance of power between public and private sectors — and FDR knew, too: “They are unanimous in their hate for me, and I welcome their hatred.” The unrest of the 1960s was about ending segregation and stopping the Vietnam War.
Only in recent years have we seen foundation-shaking political conflict — both sides believing the other would turn the United States into something unrecognizable — with no obvious and easily summarized root cause. What is the fundamental question that hangs in the balance between the people who hate Trump and what he stands for and the people who love Trump and hate those who hate him? This is less an ideological conflict than a psychological one.
Donald Trump speaks during a rally protesting the Electoral College certification of Joe Biden on Jan. 6, 2021. | Evan Vucci/AP Photo
On the surface, of course, everyone knows what the Capitol mayhem and its acrid aftermath are about. One side unreasonably believes that President Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory was stolen, and the other side reasonably fears that former president Donald Trump’s followers are so slavishly under his spell that they are willing to hijack the legal apparatus guaranteeing free and honest elections in order to facilitate his return to power in 2024.
But the violent conflict spurred by the 2020 election flowed from years of conflict over every aspect of Trump’s rise to the presidency and his performance in it. In the nearly seven years since his presidential ambitions took flight in 2015, there has been a daily deluge of outrages and provocations, and a corresponding flood of explanations of what’s really going on here — why his partisans are so aggrieved, why they are so drawn to the most garish personality ever to occupy the presidency.
Efforts to explain Trump often rely on complex sociological or economic theories. He was a backlash to globalization and selfish elites. He exploited resentment of trade and the decline in real wages. He was the representative of people who disliked the cultural ascension of women and African-Americans and the diminution of working class white males. And so on.
All semi-plausible. All inadequate in the face of Trump’s zigs on one day and zags the next, and the obvious truth that most of his partisans are attracted to him less for any programmatic reason than for the sheer bombast of his performance — and especially that he offends his opposition.
The more the vitriol has risen the less consensus there is about the origins of anger. To the contrary, there is something closer to an establishment consensus that the search for root cause is folly — the Trump phenomenon defies explanation, and the threat posed by his demagoguery makes speculation about its origins an irrelevant distraction.
Violence at the Capitol is hardly unprecedented. At least the Puerto Rican terrorists who shot five representatives from the House gallery in 1954 had a clear agenda: “Viva Puerto Rico libre!” (Long live free Puerto Rico) shouted one of them. Sen. Charles Sumner of Massachusetts in 1856 was the superior of Donald Trump when it comes to vivid insult. Of South Carolina Sen. Andrew Butler, he said, he “touches nothing which he does not disfigure with error, sometimes of principle, sometimes of fact. He cannot open his mouth, but out there flies a blunder.” Butler’s nephew, Rep. Preston Brooks, was clear on why he caned Sumner on the Senate floor, and Sumner was, too. It was because he accused Butler of being in love with a mistress, “I mean the harlot, slavery.” They were arguing over the transcendent issue of their time.
The transcendent issue of this time — no matter the specific raw material of any given news cycle — is the belief that one half of the country suspects the other half is contemptuous of them, and responds with contempt in turn. “Seinfeld” was not really, as was often said, “a show about nothing.” It demonstrated instead that with the right characters and frame of mind, you can make a show about anything that might happen in daily life. Donald Trump has shown that you can use the same approach to create a national crack-up. The violent rabble that crashed the Capitol a year ago showed that crack-ups are fertile ground for crackpots.
Are you starting 2022 in an optimistic mood? You might take solace in the argument that it’s hard to have a real civil war without a real cause — a great question that will be resolved by the outcome. Trump’s moment in national life will die out because he always has lots to say but no longer has anything meaningful to say.
Or perhaps recent years have steered you toward escalating pessimism. Perhaps the squalor of modern politics flows from ancient truths of human nature. People are easily manipulated with appeals to prejudice and paranoia, never more so than when technology has led to massive growth in the industry of commercialized contempt. A country that can have a civil war with no one really knowing what the conflict is about is one in which the muscles of governance are pitifully atrophied.
My statement was not intended as an absolute. One handgun would then mske it incorrect. But in a mob of thousands, a few is essentially that. If this is all you have to cling to in argument, then you are better off saying nothing.
Biden says Trump 16 times but it wasn't partisan. And the socialists here accept it.
Court records and news reports show that many insurrectionists were armed, and several were charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds or stashed nearby while in Washington D.C. In addition, rioters had weapons other than firearms and used them during the attack.
We rate this claim False.
Five times I counted Politicos put false and misleading statements into the artIcal to support their argument. Starting with the lie "Police Officers killed in riots."
No police officers died during the riot. They died of PTSD, stroke, and heart attack. The only person to die that day was Ashley Babbitt. She was killed for exercising her free speech rights by a Capitol police officer.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
You are a traitor.
Did you plagiarize this too alky, or did you write this all by yourself???
LMAO.
THWAP!!!
Here comes the alky-lanche of plagiarized gaslighting comments.
Lookout below!!!
LOL.
Roger and James talk of a United States.
So , boys, show us how you will unite.
Here comes the alky-lanche of plagiarized gaslighting comments."
Yep
James is attempting to overtake Alky.
July, 2022, Alky says he is getting married and moving into a new home.
Is he going to swindle this new wife , like he did Lydia?
Left her penniless, yet, she won.
She survived!
So Reverend...
all of this doesn't change the fact that 70% of the population that are not crazy partisan Democrats not only do not believe that Jan 6th was an "insurrection" - 70% of non-Democrats don't even see it as a significant event that had a major effect on things.
Apparently whether or not someone called Donald Trump about the riot doesn't change most people's opinion on whether or not unarmed people led by a crazy guy in horns and a caveman outfit could take over the country.
Seriously Reverend....
How long are you going to be gaslighted into believing these people had planned a coup to take over the Government, when all of the investigations have shown the opposite and the people being charged are being charged with obstruction of congressional action... or in the most recent cases, literaly being charged with Parading on Capital grounds.
Do you believe that violent overthrows of government generally include a whole bunch of people "parading"?
Funny thing Reverend
You demand "proof" that there was election fraud. Even when people have been charged with fraud, you still demand that that is not proof of anything.
But as it comes to the Jan 6th riot... even though the FBI has not found any coordination or pre-planning of events. Even though there is no proof anywhere that anyone had a plan to "take over the Government". Even though no-one has been charged with any sort of insurrection or coup.
Even as you are in the minority (a shrinking minority) who is gaslighted into believing it was an attempted takeover...
You still don't demand any "proof" of your allegations. You apparently believe that proof of an insurrection comes from... someone calling the Trump?
Why hasn't prosecutors used those phone calls as proof that these rioters were trying to take over the country and should be charged with conspiracy and treason?
Are you wrong or are the prosecutors wrong, Reverend?
So Roger....
I am a traitor for pointing out that only 35% of Independents and 24% of Republicans even see Jan 6th as something that had a major impact on anything?
Why do you suppose that this angst over Jan 6th is almost exclusively from partisan democrats.
Is everyone else "crazy" as you like to see anyone who disagrees with your opinions?
Suddenly James had to depart.
OPINION COMMENTARY
Republicans’ Jan. 6 ResponsibilityThe GOP has a duty to condemn the riot and those who refuse to acknowledge it.
By
Karl Rove
Jan. 5, 2022 6:15 pm ET
Rioters storm into the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 6, 2021.
PHOTO: SHANNON STAPLETON/REUTERS
We’re in an acrimonious period of partisan tribalism and have been for some time. Both parties are guilty of overwrought denunciations of their political opponents. My criticisms are often aimed at Democrats; on the anniversary of Jan. 6, I’m addressing squarely those Republicans who for a year have excused the actions of the rioters who stormed the Capitol, disrupted Congress as it received the Electoral College’s results, and violently attempted to overturn the election.
These apologists say those who stormed the Capitol were innocent patriots, tourists visiting the seat of the national government to petition their elected representatives peacefully. We’re told that these harmless, ordinary Americans are being persecuted as political prisoners.
Let’s stipulate that while the thousands who went to the Capitol a year ago were wrong to insist the election was stolen, most weren’t violent as they exercised their First Amendment rights to gather peacefully on the Mall—just as I had seen liberals gather to protest both inaugurations of President George W. Bush.
But last year there were several thousand protesters willing to use force to disrupt Congress in its constitutional duty to receive and certify the electoral vote. Some went to Washington with that purpose in mind. Others were swept up in the moment’s savagery, led astray by stronger wills with dangerous motives.
The leaders of this group were intent on committing violence, some having planned to do so for weeks. Many wore tactical gear. Some came armed with chemical agents, flagpoles, batons and sticks. They broke through barricades and assaulted approximately 140 police officers, in some cases with an officer’s own shield or gear. They smashed doors and windows, illegally entered the Capitol, ransacked offices and searched for leaders of Congress, and made dire threats about what would happen if they found them.
I am really sorry that you are so unhappy Roger.
Hopefully in 2022 you can get over your issues and start to live a happy productive life that is not consumed with hate, angst, and wanting to call everyone crazy.
Hopefully in 2022 you can get over your issues and start to live a happy productive life that is not consumed with hate, angst, and wanting to call everyone crazy.
Or a traitor.
Note that "alky originals" have basically been reduced to 3 - 5 words.
Everything other than that is a plagiarized copy/paste.
Kamala Harris Was at DNC When Pipe Bomb Found
January 6, 2022 at 6:09 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 71 Comments
“Then-Vice President-elect Kamala Harris was inside Democratic National Committee headquarters on Jan. 6, 2021, when a pipe bomb was discovered outside the building,” Politico reports.
“Harris’ presence inside the building while a bomb was right outside raises sobering questions about her security that day. It also raises the chilling prospect that the riots could have been far more destructive than they already were, with the incoming vice president’s life directly endangered.”
HARMLESS, PEACEFUL PROTESTERS MUST HAVE ACCIDENTALLY DROPPED IT THERE.
Reverend...
You mean where it says the post has been deleted BY THE AUTHOR?
Not the Administrator....
__________
No, that is not what has been happening. I have put up several posts and seen them accepted as posts, only to have them to have disappeared when I returned.
'
For example, this is the third time I posted the following only to have it didappear:
I will just say this: As for the collusion matter, I will say that I never commented much on it, but was waiting for the investigation to be commpleted, so you can't accuse me of playing the collusion card.
This is now the fourth time I put this up and it disappeared all three times before. And with no indication in the sidebar it had been removed either by the author or the administrator.
Ted Cruz Apologizes for Calling Capitol Rioters ‘Terrorists’
January 6, 2022 at 10:52 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 250 Comments
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) went on Tucker Carlon’s show to say it had been a “mistake” for him to call the Jan. 6 attack at the Capitol a “terrorist attack” after he received pushback from supporters of former President Trump.
Said Cruz: “As a result of my sloppy phrasing, it’s caused a lot of people to misunderstand what I meant. What I was referring to was the limited number of people who engaged in violent attacks against police officers.”
Jonathan Chait: “Cruz thought the sweet spot for him was to position himself as a champion of Trump’s non-violent efforts to discard the election results while strongly condemning its violent aspects. Not for the first time, and probably not for the last, he misjudged the political market.”
Aaron Blake: “It did not go quite so well. But it did at least provide an extremely apt picture of the current state of the post-Jan. 6 GOP — on the evening of Jan. 6 itself, no less.”
________
I put that last post up last night and it kept disappearing.
Someone is a coward who does not believe in free speech.
Post a Comment