Links - 30th June 2021 (2)

Richard M Eaton On Indian History | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtraAlthough the word Sultan is an Arabic word, the kind of mystique of the Sultan drew upon much earlier Persian ideas of the Shah, or the Shāhanshāh, the King of Kings...by the time the Sultan idea reaches India, in the 12th and 13th centuries, it has already picked up these ancient Persian ideas of an of an absolute monarch, of the whole mystique of the crown, the scepter, the throne, the idea of a hereditary monarchy. The idea that the Shāhanshāh is the shadow of God, all of these ideas are then imported to North India, by way of these Turks. And it's very important to remember it seems to me here, that since the Sultan was identified, juxtaposed to the Caliph who was the religious authority, the Sultan did not necessarily convey the idea of Islamic power or Islamic authority, to quite the contrary, we have the idea of a Sultan as a ruler of all subjects, regardless of what their religion might happen to be...even non Muslims could claim the title of Sultan, which is exactly what does happen in India. We find in the 13th and 14th centuries, a number of states popping up in various parts of India, where the Hindu ruler would claim to be a Sultan. And that, it seems to me is rather dramatic proof or dramatic evidence that the word Sultan had been kind of drained from any explicit association with the Islamic religion and had come to mean simply a, the most powerful term that one could imagine for a ruler...
[On the Mughals] ‘Although they were a dynasty that had originated in Central Asia, although they had originated in, on land power, based on cavalry, when they come to India, what you really see with the Mughals is a merging of two different worlds. A Central Asian world where power is understood as something that is very mobile, mainly through cavalry, where wealth also is mobile, because these were, the Mughals have come from pastoral peoples who moved with their sheep and their goats and their horses and their camels. And wealth was understood as something which moved. And they come to India. And they encounter a world in which wealth was static, was stored up in temples, which were well endowed with, with land. A world that was agricultural and not pastoral, where wealth was understood in terms of grain. And so what the Mughals really represent is a merging of these two different worlds. A pastoral world of Central Asia where wealth was mobile, and an agricultural or agrarian world of India, where wealth was fixed…
Although we call them and they continually call it Muslim dynasty, in fact, they become more and more ethnically or at least culturally Rajput. They adopt Rajput style of self presentation, the way in which the Mughal Emperor, for example, presented himself before his people. Leans on symbols and notions of authority which come directly out of Rajput culture. For example, the tradition of presenting oneself at dawn as the sun is rising before one's population, it's called a darshana, where one is seated above the ground level, and the people are below. This is very much an Indian and more specifically Rajput political institution, which was simply taken over by the Mughals’"

Stella Dadzie On The Resistance Of Enslaved Women | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘One of the myths I think, that surrounds the enslavement of women, particularly in the context of the West Indies, is that men did all the hard labor. And one of the things that's emerged from revisiting plantation records, which were kept in quite a lot of detail. What we see is that on many of the large estates, particularly in Jamaica, but across the West Indies, women form the vast majority of the field gangs. So there's been lots of debates about why that was, it could be that women were seen to have more stamina, as opposed to physical strength. And that may well have been a factor. Certainly, in terms of the buying and selling prices of women, it's fairly evident that their labor was seen as equal, there was very little differential between the price of a man and the price of a woman. But I think one of the most important aspects is, you know, if you think about abolition, 1807, the actual source of the enslaved was cut off. Slavery itself continued, but the actual trade across the Atlantic ceased. And what that meant is that suddenly black women, for the first time in their history, perhaps, were being encouraged to breed'...
'Speaking about women who were kind of forced into close proximity with their oppressors, many enslaved women were forced into or entered into sexual relationships with their oppressors. And you have a very interesting take on this, because you suggested that it could be quite nuanced, and the experiences in those situations can't just be branded with one brush. How do you think that we should view those, those relationships or situations?’
‘Well, you know, if you, if your starting point is that survival is a form of resistance, then you can begin to understand those women who either bought into the role of the concubine or took advantage of the little power that they were given to, survive and live to tell the tale. And I think it's very easy, particularly through a sort of black nationalist lens, to try to present enslavement as one sided or one dimensional. It wasn't. And obviously, in a society where colorism was so entrenched, where the closer you were, in terms of your appearance to white, the more chance you had of being given a halfway decent survival rate. What you see is quite a lot of women, both black but, but also mixed race women, who not only had slaves themselves, if they managed to be freed, but who also were accused of quite significant brutality. Now, that's an uncomfortable truth. But it has to be placed in the context of the time, as does any violence that we talk about, because as I say in the book, when we talk about the violence that was meted out to slaves, that was by no means unique to the West Indies, and they were still putting people's heads on poles and disempowering them alive in the courts of British palaces. So, within that context, you know, the brutality was horrendous, but it wasn't unique. But yes, what you see is that women, women sometimes bought into that, and women are sometimes accused of perhaps trying too hard to emulate their white overseers and oppressors’"
Presumably collaborators with the Nazis were resisting by surviving

Jim Leary How Medieval People Moved Around The World | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘We probably forget nowadays, just how important pilgrimage was particularly in the, in the medieval period, in Britain, you would have had people going, you know, *something* entire households going out on pilgrimages at particular times of the year, you know, particular holy days, and it would have been a rather fun time, I mean, there is almost sort of a festival on, a festival feeling around some of these pilgrimage centers during Holy Days, and you would have gone with your, your household and perhaps some neighbors, and you would have made a nice day of it, or maybe a long, you know, longer than that. And, and it would have all been, you know, rather rather fun. Of course, there's a, there's a flip side of that, which is wherever you have, mobility is freedom, there's mobility as restriction. And so people were often forced to go on pilgrimages as penance for committing some crime, you know, adultery, or whatever it might be. So, you know, it wasn't always fun for everyone and others may have gone sort of, with, you know, with, with their sackcloth, on and or barefoot or whatever... We have the, the Statute of Winchester. 1285, which means, which restricts people moving around at nighttime, as a, you know, you might be caught by the nightwatch. And what are you doing up at this time? Because if you're not sleeping, then that means you're probably sleeping during the day and, and therefore very limited economic value to people. You know, so, so this restriction is a big, a big part of, restricting mobility is a big part of controlling the people’"
Strange. I thought the profit motive was the fault of capitalism

Elena Woodacre On Tudor Queens On Screen | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘One of the things that we can clearly see in terms of our interest in and perhaps our more recent interest in Queens on screen, and women in power in the early modern period, is our interest in women in power today... Now, that is obviously changes the way that we look back on the past and the way that we look at women and power and authority and governance in the past as well. But it also helps pique our interest as well. And we are whether we are doing it deliberately, deliberately or subconsciously, making those connections between women in power today and women in power then. The question is, because feminism and because that's part of our modern makeup, it's part of our modern landscape. It's part of our, we're picking it up by osmosis again, however you feel about it. And that goes into the films that we make as well. And one of the kind of dangers of that is that we are kind of turning the queens of the past into proto feminists, that we're looking to make the women of the past kind of demonstrate values and behaviors that resonate with us, but may not have been something that they could have identified... I mentioned how many dissertations I've had on Anne [Boleyn]. My former PhD supervisor, when, when she was teaching undergrads basically said, I will not have another dissertation on Elizabeth I. Leave her alone. Yeah, she's had enough.’"

The Regency Era, Everything You Wanted to Know | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "[Jane Austen’s] also known for not writing about what she didn't know. So famously, she doesn't have any scenes where there are just men in the room, because she'd never, she would never know what how men would talk to each other, when there's no women present. So there's a real legitimacy there. But it makes it a very limited view. So it's confined to the upper classes, and the sort of upper middle classes. It’s to domestic concerns, to the female experience. And then we can see these glimpses of darker corners of the Regency world, she doesn't really delve into that reality of poverty and infant mortality and disease and war and all of this. And that's a conscious decision on her part, she doesn't want to make things up, and she doesn't want to dwell on misery… it is a great starting point. But it's important to remember that they are fiction, and her stories are the product of a woman's imagination, and they're also designed to appeal to people, and, and to sell books, essentially, and among a particular type of audience, and I think that can get lost in the fandom that surrounds her. And one thing I would say is that I would recommend anyway is to if you're interested in Austen, to really read her letters as well as her fiction, because you actually get a better sense of the reality of her life and what it was to be a woman of her class in that time. And she's got a really wicked sense of humor. So she's making jokes about going into London and being seduced into a life of sex work by brothel keeper. And she jokes about a woman having a miscarriage because her husband is so ugly, and it's just this side is wicked, really side of Austin that is completely sanitized and polished, and never made it into the novel. So it's best to see that side of her that's probably not deemed fit for public consumption."

Stephen Bourne On Black Britons In WW2 | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘How much racism did black people encounter during the Second World War? And what kind of reception did they get from the, from the wider British public?’
‘I would say, as I've said in the book, on the whole, although there were racist attitudes, some of them quite virulent… for the duration of the war, the British people, with some exceptions, embraced the West Indians and the West Africans that came to this country to support them in wartime, because they, most of them would be in uniform. And that really helped break down the barriers. The same thing happened when the thousands and thousands of African American GIs came to this country and were treated appallingly by the American military. They were segregated, the British didn't like that. I mean, you see, we didn't segregate in the armed services. I'm not saying the armed services were always perfect. The RAF, for example, would not recruit men of color, until 1941... But once black people were in uniform, or were seen to be doing war work, whether it be air raid warden, or stretcher bearer, they were respected, I think, on the whole.’
‘Now, as you as you just mentioned, you write in the book, that the arrival in Britain of tens of thousands of American GIs had a sort of quite an impact on the experiences of black people in Britain. I just wanted to go into a little bit more detail on that, please.’
‘The African Americans. Well they brought, the Americans, the American military, brought with them their racist practices. As I say they were segregated. And a lot of the British people try to protect them and support them, and some of the black West Indians and, and others. Black British people, were very supportive of them. And so you had instances where there was friction, I think it was in 1944, the famous battle of Bamber Bridge. And that involved a lot of friction between the white American military police and the black Americans who are going to the local village pub, and integrating and making friends. And it caused a lot of friction that the white military police did not approve, and it ended up in violence, terrible situations. And there were examples of that. They, of course, the Americans, at that time had outlawed or had always outlawed mixed marriages that, you know, in Britain, we did not do that. We did not outlaw mixed marriages. So black and white could marry. It may not have been socially acceptable in some quarters, but it was not outlawed. But in America, it was. So if a white woman was seen with an African American GI, it could cause all sorts of problems. But what I discovered in the course of the research, was that I think it was 1942. You had instances where white American GIs would see a Jamaican or Trinidadian walking along Oxford Street with a white girlfriend and they would literally cross over the road and punch him. Assault him. And it got to such a level of violence towards non-black-Americans. Like black British or or Caribbean or African men, servicemen that they, the government almost introduced a little badge, a Union Jack badge for black British, Caribbean origin, West African servicemen and women to wear so that white American GI could differentiate. And if they saw them wearing this little Union Jack badge, they knew it was hands off. They didn't introduce it, but it got that close’"
Americans imposing their cultural context on the whole world is not new. But this is a new nadir

History Of Medicine: Everything You Wanted To Know - HistoryExtra - "‘As vaccination becomes an accepted practice, slowly in the 19th century, states start to want to make people get vaccinated, and that immediately creates anti vaccination movements. So there were in the middle of the 19th century, British working class anti vaccination movements that just didn't want the state ruling their bodies. Very like today, and a lot of conflict about whether or not they could resist. And it's a template for I think where we are today, in terms of people arguing that the state should not have the right to inject something into their bodies… The humoral system lasted for about two millennia. And I think one of the appealing parts about it is that it's pretty simple in some ways, like I just explained it. You can have a much more complicated explanation. But the way it worked, it sort of fit with lived experience pretty well. It explained, for example, that women are colder and wetter than men, they don't burn off their food as well. And because they don't burn off their food as well, they have to menstruate, that's going to get rid of that extra stuff. But we know that very skinny dancers, for example, might not menstruate. Why is that? Well, they're doing so much exercise that they're burning that off, and that's why they don't menstruate. So it seemed to work with lived experience. I think if you have a head cold and you're blowing your nose all the time, you can't think right. Well, that's phlegm, isn't it? You know, that's what you're blowing out into your hankie. It fits with how people lived in their bodies, and seemed to have a lot of explanatory power...
Many women were pregnant or lactating for a lot of their adult lives. And so they didn't menstruate nearly as often, and they were undernourished. And we know that that can also make women not menstruate. So our modern kind of every 28 days, you know, alleged regularity was probably not what premodern women experienced, was probably much sort of relatively rarer occurrence.’...
‘When did magic stop being considered medicinal?’
‘Ah, that's a lovely question. And of course, it all depends on what you mean by magic, right? I mean, if you think of magic as hidden causes, which is what it was usually meant to mean in an earlier time period, you know, it's still magical today. I can't explain to you how a CAT scan machine works, I might be in one and get scanned, but I can't tell you how it takes a picture of my insides, or, placebo effect. You know, the placebo effect works for many people, for some things. You know, we could consider that sort of magical. We have another explanation. It's psychological. But you could consider it magical. So it really depends on what you count as magical. But broadly speaking, I would say late 18th, early 19th century if I had to pick a time, but I think there are practices that probably continue that nobody around them maybe thought were magical, but they still did them. One of my favorite examples is actually from Bristol, which is, a woman in the 18th century who wore her doctor's prescription on a little piece of paper on a string around her neck. She didn’t get filled, she just thought that it had these magical properties. And it's just really small scale, but it tells you a lot about how ordinary people might have understood the power of the written word’"
Of course, all the feminists who mock men for not thinking that 28 day calendars are period calendars imagine that all women have 28 day cycles, and that women's periods are as regular as the cycles of the moon - even with modern standards of nutrition

Critical Race Theory and Hotels

The most ridiculous apologetics for Critical Race Theory (CRT) I've seen:

This isn’t hard : WhitePeopleTwitter

"I'm going to see if I can explain it a different way:

Imagine a guy who hates disabled people builds a hotel, so he bans all disabled people, and builds it in such a way as to specifically make access difficult for them. Years later he sells the hotel to a new owner who has no problem with disabled people. So you have a hotel where the owner has no problem with the disabled, and neither do any of the staff... however due to the actions of the previous owner, the hotel is still built in such a way that it doesn't accommodate them (no disabled parking, no ramps, no extra considerations, etc.) So although the people currently running it are not actively discriminating, they are operating a system designed to discriminate, and need to fix it even if they aren't to blame for it.

It's the same with racism. The discriminatory practices of the past still have ramifications today, and even if we aren't to blame for them we must recognize them."

(while the reddit thread was about systemic racism, I saw at least 2 shares of a screenshot on Facebook calling it "Critical Race Theory for kindergartners")

Amusingly, there're some people in the thread who point out that this is comparing black people to disabled people.

But anyway, even Vox admits that CRT is against colorblindness, objectivity, and neutrality.

If you don't want to believe Vox, believe Crossroads, Directions and A New Critical Race Theory, where "thirty-one CRT scholars present their views on the ideas and methods of CRT, its role in academia and in the culture at large, and its past, present, and future", which states that:

"Critical race theorists assert that both the procedures and the substance of American law are structured to maintain white privilege. The neutrality and objectivity of the law are not just unattainable ideals; they are harmful actions that obscure the law's role in protecting white supremacy."

So in reality,

Imagine a guy 100 years ago who hated disabled people built a hotel, so he banned all disabled people, and built it in such a way as to specifically make access difficult for them.

Years later, his son who had no problem with disabled people retrofitted the hotel to remove the barriers.

Then, the son of the original guy sold it to someone else who retrofitted it again to make it even easier for disabled people.

So you have a hotel where the owner has no problem with the disabled, and neither do any of the staff... however due to the actions of the original owner (and lots of bad publicity over what happened 100 years ago, much of it pretending that things are equally bad today), people still think the hotel is built in such a way that it doesn't accommodate them.

And people claim that because a person in a wheelchair wheeling himself up a ramp gets more tired and takes longer than an able-bodied person who can go up a few steps, this means the hotel doesn't accommodate disabled people.

So although the hotel accommodates disabled people, disabled activists are still trying to get more concessions (as well as for the current hotel owner to buy them off with pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensation.

It's the same with racism. The discriminatory practices of the past are still invoked for political benefit today, and even if there is nothing wrong we are still told that there is.

Links - 30th June 2021 (1)

JFK: The Path To Power | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘It's clear that voters take to this guy. There's something about him even as a young politician, that voters just like. There is a certain reticence, a certain shyness, but also a charisma and a charm that comes through even in these halting speeches. And it may be notable that female voters in particular, even in that first race in 1946, are drawn to his candidacy and he gets a lot of support from female voters...
[On his being a womanizer] I think it becomes reckless, at least to a degree... something that we see in John F. Kennedy from an early age. A deep interest in, in girls and women. And he I think, is taught by, maybe that's the wrong word. His father strongly says to both of his older sons, to Joe Jr, and to Jack in effect, I expect you to follow in my footsteps here, to view women as objects to be conquered. And, you know, Joe, when the boys were young, Joe would even bring mistresses home, which must have been so confusing to them, to see their father bring a woman into the house, who's not their mother, who's also there. That must have been confusing. And I say that not to excuse what goes on because if I'm going to argue on the one hand that Jack Kennedy is his own man, when it comes to politics, and his career, he could certainly also be his own man when it comes to how to treat women. So I can't have it both ways. But the father's example, certainly, certainly, certainly matters.’"

Toussaint Louverture's Extraordinary Life | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘Prior to the revolution, and after he had been emancipated... he himself, briefly was a slave owner? And should that in any way affect our judgment of him?’ ‘One of the few documents that have survived indeed, from the, I think it's the early, it's either the late 1770s, or the early 1780s, is exactly a kind of title deed, which shows that for a relatively brief period of time, Toussaint Louverture owned, or at least, managed about a dozen slaves. It's also come to light recently, or at least a possible fact has come to light that one of them may have been someone called Jacques Dessaline, who actually went on to become one of the great generals of the of the Saint Domingue revolution, and after Toussaint died, he becomes one of the leaders of the new Haitian Republic. So and Toussaint always had a rather complicated relationship with this. I mean, of course, this would have certainly have added to the complexity of their relationship. If, if it turned out to be true, that Toussaint had for a brief moment, owned him as a slave. I think, I don't know that it should necessarily change our view of Toussaint himself, because I think he was, as I say, part of a structure in pre revolutionary Saint Domingue, where slavery was not just the norm, but it was the only form of, it was the only mode of production, the only form of social relations that were imagined. And so if you wanted, if he Toussaint wanted to move forward, this was the only way in which he could advance his own interests. I guess the question that one should ask that point is how did he treat his slaves?... by the time of the Revolution, and when Toussaint becomes a leading figure in the revolution in the 1790s, there is no evidence that his slave ownership is something that is held against him by his his loyal and devoted followers'...
‘What were, as far as we know, Toussaint’s views on race and racial equality?’
‘Well, I think what's really interesting about him on that front is that he is not someone who, to use contemporary language, he's not really interested in identity politics. He's not someone who defines himself primarily, through with ethnicity. He's someone who believes that ethnicity matters only, insofar as it is needed to underline the importance of equality. So he’s a republican. He’s a classical republican in that sense. And, and I suppose, ultimately, I mean, if it doesn't sound too paradoxical, his view was that race should not matter. His view was that what he wanted to do was to build a political community in which people treated each other as human beings, as human beings who possess certain basic rights, and those rights had to be upheld for everybody. And that's, and so race only comes into the picture, when those rights are being infringed upon’"
Of course, only white people get judged harshly by SJWs

Ken Follett’s Anglo-Saxon adventure - HistoryExtra - "‘Talking about the end of the 10th century, beginning of the 11th century, true England is being ruled as a single country, theoretically. And, but this is a relatively new thing. It certainly hasn't settled down. And quite what people, how people identified is not clear to me. I'm not sure that we have a real concept of England until we get to the 16th century. And then Shakespeare, of course, articulates it with his usual verve and brilliance. But I don't recall, before that I don't recall any, anything much about, you know, we are English, England is our country, and all that. So, I think at this time, people probably still identified more with their county, or city or region, or even just the hundred in which their village was located. It's a, it's a jolly interesting question. I think, you know, what if, what would, what would those dark ages Anglo-Saxons say now, if you said to them, what group do you belong to? But I don't think there's yet any evidence that they say England.’...
‘A young Norman woman called Emma of Normandy, came to England and married the king, married, Ethelred, Ethelred the unræd. She was, she was, I think, 18 when she married him, and she appears in the book... Emma was a very interesting woman, she married Ethelred when, when he died, she married the next king of England, who was Canute. And then one of her children was Edward the Confessor, who was the next king of England. So there was a Norman woman who was absolutely at the heart of English politics for a very long period of time. And I would guess, was extremely powerful. I mean, you can't, you know, it's not very likely that somebody who lived that life was a shrinking violet, I imagine ,that I certainly imagine her as being a woman of power and influence in the English court. So it's, she is an example of how, despite the rhetoric of the time, which is all about women being inferior, and overemotional and feeble, and all that, despite all that sort of thing, even in the Dark Ages, women could become very powerful people... I suspect it, basically it has always been acceptable, because we are constantly reading about princesses and countesses, abesses, you know, the nun who was ruler of a convent might be extremely rich and, and employ many people and have tremendous influence in in the area, which she owned or the convent owned, but she certainly had the rights of ownership. So, and it was commonplace, I think every, when a Lord, when a nobleman went to war, somebody had to mind the shop. And most of the time that would have been his wife. That would be who he trusted, that would be who knew the territory, who knew who the reliable people were and who the dishonest people were, and all that sort of thing. So I, it seems to me that, that women have, have always played that kind of role, even though it wasn't always acknowledged...
By this point, slavery had died out in Normandy, pretty much. That there might have been a few slaves left, but it was very uncommon by this time, if not completely stamped out. And in England, it was commonplace and and if we're to believe the Domesday Book, 10% of the English population was slaves. That's a big percentage, and it's a proper slave society. And, and the Normans were past that stage. Probably. This is something that historians speculate about, but it seems plausible to me. The church was against slavery, not on human rights grounds, but because slaves are always used for prostitution. And the church was certainly against that’"

Kate Summerscale On A 1930s Ghost Hunt | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘We don't really think of the 20th century as a type of paranormal activity and the supernatural because it seems too modern for that almost. What can you tell us about the world of paranormal investigation in the 1930s, and why the 30s was such a key time for this?’
‘Well, there was a huge rise in spiritualism after the First World War, which was a belief that the dead could communicate with the living, principally through seances. And at the same time, there was a kind of parallel science of the spiritual and the people who worked in Psychical Research, the ghost hunters, some of them were very serious about really finding scientific explanations for paranormal events. And there was a lot of overlap between the Psychical Research and psychoanalysis, for example. All these sort of experimental sciences that were partly to do with physics in some cases, and partly to do with psychology. So there was a lot of sort of fringe work, and they were all sort of equally mistrusted and fascinating to the public. And the newspapers were full of reports about experiments in telepathy and astral projection, and fortune telling, and astrology. And so it was, it was a fringe science, but very much aspiring to be a science, and taken seriously by many, including the likes of Arthur Conan Doyle. And Sir Oliver Lodge, who was a great pioneer of radio waves. And I suppose it was a time when there was, people started to have radios in their homes, when most people did, and telephones and even televisions, and all of these devices had some kind of almost supernatural quality to the way you could, your voice could be disembodied and transported across continents. And so there was some sort of plausibility to the idea that the ghosts might exist and we just hadn't discovered the method of transmission, the way in which the dead were able to speak to us and convey their messages.’"

Medieval turning points - HistoryExtra - "‘Historical periods are made by historians… some historians have argued quite powerfully that Gregory the Great, he's not really part of the medieval world. He's really part of the kind of antique world, kind of prolongation of the ancient world, which is called late antiquity. And that's because his mindset is really still Imperial. He still thinks in terms of Roman Empire'...
‘What is the difference between the late antique and the and the early medieval? What's what's the, how did the mindsets alter?’...
‘Different historians will give you different answers to that. And I think lots of it really depends where you're looking at Gregory from, so I think it makes a lot of sense to look at Gregory from the perspective of you know, of Christian Rome, the kinds of the Rome of Constantine the Great and so on thinking forwards. If you are looking at him backwards, it becomes more early medieval. He really sits on the cusp, okay, he can be thought of as both… it's really about his conceptual frame of reference… his missions to the English is critical part of that. The English were not, the people he thought of as English, were not really in the Empire anymore… the person who actually receives the mission... probably wouldn't have thought of themselves as English at all... Gregory the Great by sending missions to the English actually kind of promotes and to some extent, creates an English identity’...
‘The distinction we need to make those between societies with slaves and slave societies... medieval Europe is not a slave society. In that, while there are kind of people who are chattel slaves, especially by the way, I might add, women. So women seem to have been disproportionately affected by this kind of slaving. That is not the main form that unfreedom takes. In most of Europe, most people were unfree to some extent, but it was a very fluid concept, and they weren't, they were not slaves in the sense of which you've been talking about.’"

Claudio Saunt On The Dispossession Of Native Americans | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘The stated reason… was that this was the actually the best thing for the victims of the policy. of the subjects of the policy, that if, if they were not moved, they would not survive. And they had these metaphors that they repeated over and over again, that Indians, indigenous Americans were like, a bank of sand on the ocean shore being worn away by the waves, or, similarly, they said, they were like a mountain of snow in the sun melting away, and if they weren't moved, that they were just going to vanish and disappear. So it was done for their own good... You know, if you if you take them at at their word, sure, you might believe that but if you if you listen to the folks who were the who were the victims of the policy, they that they pushed back… they insisted we are not vanishing, they said we, we are in fact thriving... the best demographic evidence available suggests that the populations, indigenous populations, though clearly they had declined. But by the 1820s, 1830s, the populations were largely stable, if not actually increasing’"
So much for the myth of Native American genocide

Black radical: William Monroe Trotter | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘Some of his methods sound surprisingly modern. Can you tell us how you protested the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation?’...
‘Trotter was really somebody who believed in mass protest. So that meant getting as many people as you could to confront seats of power… he stages protests in Boston, he, you know, confronts the mayor of Boston at the time, Boston was known as a pretty puritanical city, in terms of banning lots of things. So they would ban you know, one play because the woman showed her ankles on the stage, all these sorts of things. And so Trotter was pointing out if anything should be banned is this film, which has sort of racial and political repercussions, and this sort of led to countless protests at the theaters in Boston. Eventually the mayor did end up staying the showing of the film, and other cities across the United States followed suit, but Trotter, what made him distinct was his focus on the fact that this was a lie, right? That the way the film portrayed black people had no basis in fact, whereas other people who argued against the film, namely the NAACP, argued that well, it was an opinion, right. You know, censorship should probably happen, but why don't we just find another film by black people to counter the truth of this film, and Trotter very astutely pointed out that there is no basis for saying the Klan is a good organization, and that that's the way the film should be attacked, not as a work of art that is being censored but as a work of propaganda that was leading to further racial violence and political division.’"
The First Amendment wasn't always that powerful, it seems

Ancient Wisdom With Neil Oliver | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "‘The human race has been through the same sort of problems again, and again, and again, you know, human populations have been invaded by strangers, or they in turn, have invaded the neighbors. They've had wars, they've had outbreaks of pestilence and plague, you know, they've had tyrannies, they've had benign kingship, they've had democracies, the whole thing just keeps on coming around and around and around. If you don't pay attention to history, it can be even more stressful, because you might think that what's happening to us in the 21st century is unique, and especially bad. If you look back at history, you see it, it's happened to people before us many, many, many times. And I feel that if you look back at other times, and see how people coped with situations, there's just a reassurance to be had from knowing there is nothing new. Our species has been dealing with the same big challenges again, and again and again. And here we are... We have conquered so many diseases. We have lifted billions of people out of poverty. Here in much of Western Europe, we have lived in what is by comparison to others, a very tolerant and peaceful society. And yet, even given all of those incredible gifts, so many people it seems to me are depressed, are on antidepressants and beta blockers, and they're finding it hard to cope with a daily reality’"
Yet, humans like to feel special. So this might not be comforting after all

Vincent Brown On Tacky's Slave Revolt | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra - "1761. And it was at the time Jamaica, Britain's most profitable, most militarily significant, and best politically connected colony in the Americas. One often thinks of the 13 British colonies in North America that broke away from the British Empire and the American Revolution, without remembering that on the eve of the revolution, Britain actually had 26 colonies in America. And by far, the most profitable and politically significant of them were those colonies in the Caribbean, with Jamaica being foremost among them. So this revolt by enslaved Africans, at the very heart of the British Empire in America was a serious event. And it also occurred during the Seven Years War"

Links - 28th June 2021 (2) (Mulan)

The Mulan 2020 Remake Is Basically Jamie Oliver’s Egg Fried Rice With Chilli Jam And No 'Wok Hei' - "The 1998 Mulan movie was groundbreaking in its feminist message and all-Asian characters.  The art style also set it apart from other Disney classics by referencing Chinese ink painting. Pale green backgrounds and snow-capped cliffs were used to create a poetic setting for Mulan’s quest. In Chinese painting, waterfalls and cliffs overshadow human figures to depict that self is found in the larger context of nature or society as opposed to individualism. This underlying philosophy cradles Mulan’s risk in impersonating a man for a bigger ideal—to help her father protect China.   According to its IMDb page, the animated film was largely written and directed by Westerners. Yet, it showcased enough understanding of Eastern philosophy and aesthetics to enchant viewers from the East and West alike. The 2020 remake, however, falls apart on all levels."
Given that the 1998 version is well received despite being largely made by white people suggests that the insistence on yellow people doing everything is cynical identity politics

 Meme - "Remove beloved and iconic songs to make more "serious" adaptation of original Chinese ballad"
"Produce movie with 4 white screenwriters, a white director, and a white costume designer"
"Turn Mulan from ordinary girl who proves herself with her wits and hardwork to a witch with mystical oriental powers"
"The movie gets roasted to hell and back by both Eastern and Western audiences"
Plus this uses the clown in makeup meme but with Mulan makeup stills

Facebook - "This Mulan remake has unbelievably terrible writing. Who the fuck is gonna believe an Asian father would hug his child, let alone apologize to them?"

Why China Hates Disney's 'Mulan' Has Nothing to Do With Politics - "Even though Disney bent over backwards to create a live-action “Mulan” that would appeal to China, disgruntled Chinese viewers have dubbed it “the worst ‘Mulan’ in history,” saying that it feels “wooden” and offensively inauthentic... Numerous viewers across all platforms slammed the new “Mulan” as being worse than another blockbuster that tried and failed to work both sides of the Pacific. “Even ‘The Great Wall’ is better than this,” one wrote. “After watching ‘Mulan,’ I want to apologize to [‘Great Wall’ director] Zhang Yimou and [its star] Jing Tian.”The most fundamental flaw, most felt, was that Disney’s new heroine starts out from childhood already equipped with superhero-like abilities, thanks to her extraordinary reserves of “qi,” the force that she cultivates and controls to excel as a fighter.Turning her into a superhero removes Mulan’s everywoman appeal, and leaves her with no room to grow as a character, huge swathes of Chinese viewers said.“It feels that this Mulan was born with eight-pack abs,” one wrote. “She has no shortcomings — and even small shortcomings can be overcome immediately. She’s lost the complexity of the animated version of the character, who is both a cute little girl and a powerful heroine. She has no process of gradual growth.”.. Surprisingly perhaps, many viewers have a nostalgia-tinged fondness in China for Disney’s 1998 animation. A good number bemoaned the loss of the animated film’s songs, humor and the dragon character Mushu... Disney’s new “Mulan” was initially celebrated in the West for being a landmark for Asian-American representation, thanks to its all-Asian cast. Yet many of the elements seemingly included to boost its authenticity have fallen flat with their target mainland audience.One viewer wrote that the script’s constant repetition of the terms “loyal, brave, and true” felt like “a Google Translate take on Chinese.”“The whole film is just shouting empty slogans. Where are these qualities even reflected in the film?” he asked, questioning the logic, for instance, of why Mulan simply throws away all of her protective armor in the middle of a battle. The choice is obviously nonsensical, but it is also highly unfilial, since the garb is a treasured heirloom from her father... In the wake of other films like “Crazy Rich Asians” and Lulu Wang’s “The Farewell” that were hailed as milestones for Asians in the U.S., but which failed to resonate in China, “Mulan” is most revealing entry  yet in Hollywood’s rolodex of unsteady attempts to bridge the cultural gap between the mainland and the West."
Presumably the Chinese are sexist for not liking "strong female characters"

Disney’s Mulan hit with bad reviews in China as pirated copies circulate online ahead of theatrical release - "“It’s like that feeling when you go to a Western Chinese restaurant and have a pretty weird Chinese meal,” one user said of the new Mulan on Q&A site Zhihu... “It’s a Western film with a Chinese backdrop,” one Zhihu user said. Others added that Mulan’s chi is essentially treated the same as the Force in Star Wars... Other Chinese viewers also complained about some of the characters’ make-up, saying it reflects Western stereotypes of China rather than being a reflection of actual Chinese culture... “I don’t regret my $35 spent,” wrote one Douban user, possibly referencing the price in Canada or Australia. The reviewer gave the film four stars out of five. “It depicts a lot of beautiful Chinese scenery and has bright colours.”... Some reviewers characterise Liu’s Mulan as wooden. The criticism is also shared in China, where many film-goers like Liu for her elegance and beauty rather than her acting."

Facebook - "when a cast that includes Harvey Fierstien, Lea Salonga, Eddie Murphy, and Donny Osmond, accompanied by the songs of Matthew Wilder and David Zippel, tells the story of Chinese people  more effectively than one with an all Asian cast, then some very bad choices were made.Mulan (2020) fails as both a cultural and fictional film.As a storytelling medium, it fails because of many reasons.From a technical perspective, the pacing is all over the place; with long, dragging shots of people crossing the room, but quick cuts of shots necessary for establishing the story such as Mulan’s left-behind comb. It’s clear that this film prioritized which shots were pretty as opposed to which shots were important or moved the story forward.The writing of this film is some of the laziest I’ve seen in these Disney revivals. Everything is needlessly spoonfed to the viewer, almost condescendingly... There is no Phoenix in Chinese mythology. There IS an immortal bird called Fenghuang, but it’s not a firebird that dies in a fire and resurrects from the ashes, but rather a bird that signals a new emperor or a new era. Not a phoenix that rises from the ashes. The phoenix as a bird that resurrects is a Western concept, so the Emperor telling Mulan to get up mid-battle and “rise like a phoenix from the ashes” makes zero sense, then have Mulan sprout eagle wings while charging at Bori Khan in what the director probably deemed to be a good cinematic idea... From the first scene of this version, Mulan is shown to be a martial arts prodigy, so her joining the army in her father’s stead is not only an expected and predictable move, but rather disappointing because there is no growth for her from that point on.Mulan as a character here has little to no stakes in the matter... In this telling of the Ballad of Mulan, the titular character is really just a lens to take us through the landscape of Ancient China as imagined by Niki Caro. From the beginning of the film, they have made it clear that they want the main themes to be “Loyal, Brave, and True” (which are engraved on Mulan’s father’s sword). Whether these concepts are effectively executed throughout the film is a different story.What does it mean to be “true”? In this film, it means to admit to being a woman, because only then can you unlock and control your chi. In this telling of Mulan, she willingly admits to being a woman beacuse it makes her a better fighter. Yes. Let that idiocy sink in for a minute. We good? Good, because the movie is not.The confrontation of Mulan and the witch Xian Lang is meant to bring out the theme of “true” because everytime Xian Lang and Mulan meet, there is an exchange about how they are both alike. Alike in what sense? Could it be the power they each have? Their uncontrollable chi? No. They are alike because they are women. Groundbreaking. Xian Lang tells Mulan she will fail because she is not true to herself, so she removes her armor and charges into battle without any gear. The logic went out the window here, but it made for a nice poster for the movie... For a film that droned on to spoonfeed its audience, it failed to effectively talk about the four virtues it harped on about, we were not taken through Mulan’s character’s journey, it is still unclear what womanhood and manhood have to do with anything, and we’re even farther from the ballad than the 1998 animated film.“Dishonor on you, dishonor on your cow” (Mulan, 1998)"
Feminist script-writing = no character development

Faceboo - "I've already explained to a few people in my life why I, someone whose livelihood depends on Asian representation in the arts, am actively boycotting Mulan...
Firstly, and perhaps the most important one—Mulan was filmed partly in Xinjiang, the same place that currently holds the "largest network of concentration camps seen since the Holocaust". In the credits, Disney thanks the people responsible for the modern-day ethnic cleansing happening in China... The production team? It's completely white. Yes, in our 2020. Even the animated version from 1998, literally my birth year, did better than this and had a Chinese screenwriter onboard (thank you Rita Hsiao!)... I don't know how a creative team can so exhaustively re-envision a Chinese tale into something so incredibly.. /white/. "Chi" suddenly becomes gendered (as opposed to something EVERYONE HAS). Mulan's hair is worn down and in a Eurocentric style to denote femininity, even though the same hairstyle in Chinese culture would denote madness or grieving. The FBI motto is engraved onto Mulan's sword"
Apparently having an Asian cast isn't enough - the high level crew need to be Asian too

Everything You Wanted To Know About The Legends Of King Arthur

Everything You Wanted To Know About The Legends Of King Arthur | HistoryExtra Podcast - HistoryExtra

"‘Was the Anglo Saxon expansion as violent as depicted in Arthurian legend? So Harrison's talking about these Germanic peoples who were thought or considered by some to have come in and and occupy something of a vacuum in the, in the aftermath of the Romano British period.’...

‘It's now an enormous and unresolved debate among experts in the post Roman, early medieval period. The problem is the dramatic contrast between the literary evidence and the archaeological. In the literary evidence, there is absolute unanimity among the sources on both sides, the native British and the Anglo Saxon, that the Anglo Saxon occupation was an extremely violent and traumatic event or series of events, with massacres, the storming of fortresses and the widespread displacement of people. And the linguistic evidence also backs that up because large areas of the island change quite rapidly from speaking a form of Welsh or the Roman Latin to speaking English with very few loanwords in English from the Welsh, suggesting the two people simply don't mix. But in archaeology, there's very little trace of violence, and farming systems, field systems, estate boundaries seem to carry on very much unaltered from one age to the next. And so at present most archaeologists are arguing for a slow and peaceful occupation by limited numbers of Anglo Saxon incomers. And the historians are still faced with texts that tell them the exact opposite. So we're a really interesting situation of an unresolved problem at the moment. And as yet, I can't see a way out of it.’...

‘What, if any of the Arthurian story can we be fairly certain of as fact?’

‘Just one thing, and that's the Battle of Mount Baden… because of a near contemporary text. The list of complaints against current kings of the British by a man called Guilders, which mentions the battle and mentions the battle because it anchors the time at which Guilders himself was born. So this battle is a historic fact, the real problem is that we're still not certain if there was a historical Arthur actually linked to it and he won it. We haven't yet found a credible contender to win it instead of Arthur. But it's the one point at which history and the early Arthurian story connect.’...

‘What is a hero for one generation is not a hero, for for the generation coming after that. So what tends to happen as you go through literary history is that once famous heroes undergo a process that we call epic degeneration. They decline. This you see throughout Arthurian literature. For instance, Gawain, who we might think of as one of the great knights, and is certainly an exemplar of heroism. In the earliest romances by *something*, becomes in the later romances, something of a womanizer and a traitor. It's the same with Lancelot. I've mentioned Lancelot as being one of the great knights being driven to greatness by love of the Queen. But in the Quest of the Holy Grail, he is the person who cannot achieve the Grail quest. And he is eclipsed by his son who is spiritually pure. So I would say maybe Galahad the knight I just mentioned is the only knight in the Arthurian legend who cannot be said to decline in any way because he is taken up to heaven. And that's the end of him’

‘Okay. Do you think it's fair to say that Arthur himself is a victim of epic degeneration during the course of these stories?’

‘Yes, he is. I think you could perfectly well say that. In the chronicle tradition, he is the great conquering King. And what you see in the later romnances is that his role as much more passive. And in Chretien’s late and unfinished romance, which is the story of the Grail, Arthur is even shown as nodding off. He falls asleep as he’s, as he presides over the round table.’...

‘You're an expert in magic and things like that. You've studied it a lot. Does the place of Merlin and the things he gets up to, does that inform us much about attitudes to to magic in this period?’

‘Yes, because the image of Merlin changes constantly. There is no doubt that medieval scholars had a real problem with Merlin, because on the one hand, officially, magic is not something which respectable people do. There's no such thing as a respectable wizard, or magic. That is, a series of apparently superhuman acts carried out with supernatural power by human beings must be the work of the devil, because otherwise the person would be a saint and the Act would be a miracle and powered by God. But Merlin is clearly regarded as a good thing, by the Arthurian tradition. And so medieval authors bent themselves and the story into all sorts of shapes, trying to keep Merlin respectable.’...

‘Why do you think the stories of Arthur still resonate today?’...

‘Well, I think partly Arthur represents a moment of sort of imaginary greatness of Britain. You know, when Britannia ruled the waves and so on. If you wanted to think of a king who conquered, who unified not only Britain, but went out to conquer most of Europe, then of course, you have a fine, you have a fine model there in King Arthur. I think the Arthurian romances offer a very different kind of interest. And it's the taste for adventure. Which isn't, which isn't really to do with, with prowess or control, it's often to do with, with finding your destiny. Discovering what fate has in store for you. Whether an adventure or a chance moment is going to lead you to destiny. Those are different kinds of impulses. But the reason we like them is that they obviously answer to the human interest.’...

‘Another appeal of the legend is that there are so many colorful characters involved in it. Both female and male, of very different kind, that they can provide a galaxy of different plot situations and relationships between them. Arthur has so many satellites orbiting him. And even in the Middle Ages, people took different attitudes the same characters who could be treated as extremely attractive in some stories and extremely unattractive in others. But also Arthur is so variable in his own nature. One extreme, he is the Butch hero of the Historia Britonnia, who can single handedly bump off 960 Saxons in one day. At the other extreme, he becomes Tennyson's put upon wimp. He can be mixed up with the most elevated kind of religion, or the most sordid kind of domestic sexual intrigue. He can be a Welsh hero, a British hero, or an English hero, or even for that matter, a Breton one. Arthur is infinitely malleable, while at the same time retaining the central core of associations, geography, characteristics and companions that give you a sense of solid tradition.’"

Links - 28th June 2021 (1) (Capitol Riot)

The Coming Coup? - "As if 2020 were not insane enough already, we now have Democrats and their ruling class masters openly talking about staging a coup. You might have missed it, what with the riots, lockdowns and other daily mayhem we’re forced to endure in this, the most wretched year of my lifetime. But it’s happening.It started with the military brass quietly indicating that the troops should not follow a presidential order... as nationwide riots really got rolling in early June, the sitting Secretary of Defense himself all but publicly told the president not to invoke the Insurrection Act. His implicit message was: “Mr. President, don’t tell us to do that, because we won’t, and you know what happens after that.”All this enthused Joe Biden, who threw subtlety to the winds. The former United States Senator (for 26 years) and Vice President (for eight) has not once, not twice, but thrice confidently asserted that the military will “escort [Trump] from the White House with great dispatch” should the president refuse to leave. Another former Vice President, Al Gore, publicly agreed. One might dismiss such comments as the ravings of a dementia patient and a has-been who never got over his own electoral loss. But before you do, consider also this. Over the summer a story was deliberately leaked to the press of a meeting at which 100 Democratic grandees, anti-Trump former Republicans, and other ruling class apparatchiks got together (on George Soros’s dime) to “game out” various outcomes of the 2020 election. One such outcome was a clear Trump win. In that eventuality, former Bill Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, playing Biden, refused to concede, pressured states that Trump won to send Democrats to the formal Electoral College vote, and trusted that the military would take care of the rest.The leaked report from the exercise darkly concluded that “technocratic solutions, courts, and reliance on elites observing norms are not the answer here,” promising that what would follow the November election would be “a street fight, not a legal battle.” Two more data points (among several that could be provided). Over the summer, two former Army officers, both prominent in the Democrat-aligned “national security” think tank world, wrote an open letter to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in which they urged him to deploy the 82nd Airborne Division to drag President Trump from the Oval Office at precisely 12:01 PM, January 20, 2021.About a month later, Hillary Clinton declared publicly that Joe Biden should not concede the election “under any circumstances.”... why are the Democrats—publicly—talking about the conspiracy?Because they know that, for it to succeed, it must not look like a conspiracy. They need to plant the idea in the public mind, now, that their unlawful and illegitimate removal of President Trump from office will somehow be his fault.Never mind the pesky detail that the president would refuse to leave only if he were convinced he legitimately won. Remember: Biden should not concede under any circumstances. The second part of the plan is either to produce enough harvested ballots—lawfully or not—to tip close states, or else dispute the results in close states and insist, no matter what the tally says, that Biden won them... The third piece is to get the vast and loud Dem-Left propaganda machine ready for war. That leaked report exhorted Democrats to identify “key influencers in the media and among local activists who can affect political perceptions and mobilize political action…[who could] establish pre-commitments to playing a constructive role in event of a contested election.” I.e., in blaring from every rooftop that “Trump lost.”At this point, it’s safe to assume that unless Trump wins in a blowout that can’t be overcome by cheating and/or denied via the ruling class’s massive propaganda operation, that’s exactly what every Democratic politician and media organ will shout... The events of the last few months may be interpreted as an attempted color revolution that failed to gain enough steam, or as a trial run for the fall. Is the Trump Administration prepared?"
Maybe this is why they're so obessed with calling the Capitol riot a coup

American Underground Journalistic Forum - Posts | Facebook - "Remember on November 7, 1983 that the May 19th Communist Organization detonated a bomb in the senate in an attempt to kill Republicans. Susan Rosenberg was arrested for this. She was pardoned by Clinton. She is now an administrator for Black Lives Matters and now does fundraising and administrative work for BLM. Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
I guess Bombing the US Capital to kill Republicans is different. I have heard new Reports all weekend long about how Last Wednesday was the worst day in American History.... What is Bombing the US Capital... Chopped Liver??"
It's only bad when "Republicans" do it

Mainstream media and Democrats falsely conflate violent Capitol Hill riot with peaceful Trump rally - "Women for America First, the organization that requested the permit on Nov. 24, held financial ties to America First Policies, the pro-Trump advocacy nonprofit formed to advance the president's policy agenda during his time in office."Now do the BLM money and protests that led to burning and looting in multiple cities on many businesses," former Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell commented. "Be consistent in your assumptions and outrage." Bloomberg News attempted to attribute the violent aftermath of the Washington seize to outgoing President Donald Trump's last-ditch effort to stop the purported steal of the 2020 presidential election.Trump's censored video statement even called for peace in the nation's capital after pro-Trump protesters stormed the Capitol building that fateful day and clashed with federal forces... As Grenell pointed out, Antifa's plans for "direct action" tend to foreshadow ensuing riots. The gatherings are assembled on social media hours, days, and weeks in advance—yet the mainstream media refuses to cover the correlation and ignores the far-left movement's widespread destruction. Vice President Kamala Harris, once California's chief prosecutor, cheered rioters on, but she was not accused of championing violence nor was she lambasted by the press for her repeated statements... Harris urged the public to fund the bail of suspects arrested during the George Floyd riots. "If you're able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota," Harris had tweeted at the beginning of June, promoting the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), which has bailed out defendants from Twin Cities jails charged with murder, violent felonies, and sex crimes."
Pretty sure more than 93% of pro-Trump events were peaceful, but of course that logic only works for what liberals like

FLASHBACK: Leftists rioted in DC during Trump's inauguration in 2017 - "Ahead of Inauguration Day, the political left appears to have memory-holed the incidents surrounding President Donald Trump's 2017 inauguration, when leftist demonstrators vandalized and rioted in the nation's capital. They are choosing now to rebuke violence committed by right-wing groups in the wake of the Capitol Hill riot, without any acknowledgement of their past actions... At the time, the US attorney's office sought to charge all 230 of the protesters who took to the streets on Inauguration Day in Washington, DC, with felony rioting.80 suspects were slapped with the heavy charges, which included massive penalties of up to $25,000 and 10 years in jail, the New York Post reported."And guess how much media coverage this got? Nothing," commented conservative activist Kyle Kasahuv."Every Democrat in office during this must condemn, apologize, and resign," he said, echoing the latest calls by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and others, who have stated that Republican reps who did not vote to certify the Electoral College vote should resign"
Violence is only bad when it's "right wing"

FBI official: No shots fired by rioters, no firearms recovered during siege on U.S. Capitol - "No firearms were recovered on the U.S. Capitol grounds on Jan. 6 during the riot, and no shots were fired by the demonstrators, an FBI official on Wednesday told Congress."
No wonder the left is so hysterical. They should just have burned down businesses instead

Byron York on Twitter - "Oh, come on. If Republicans try it, they would likely adopt as their model the House Democrats who, on January 6, 2017, tried to disrupt certification of Electoral College results."
Trying to prevent an election being certified is only treason when it's a Democrat president being inaugurated

When Mob Inciters Become Lions of the Left - WSJ - "The Chicago Seven were countercultural heroes in the 1960s. They thumbed their noses through one of the country’s most notorious political trials, taunting the judge and making a mockery of the proceedings with flippant courtroom pranks. Aaron Sorkin wrote and directed a movie about them last year, “The Trial of the Chicago 7,” which will probably win a few Oscars.One thing people forget about the Chicago Seven is that most of them were guilty. Jerry Rubin admitted as much later: “We wanted disruption. We planned it. . . . We were guilty as hell. Guilty as charged.”The crime they were accused of was crossing state lines to incite a riot. The defendants believed that Vice President Hubert Humphrey’s 1968 nomination for presidency was illegitimate. Nominations in those days were decided not by primaries but by backroom deals among party power brokers. The antiwar movement believed that a more democratic process would have produced a candidate opposed to the Vietnam War... In February 1970, a jury convicted the five ringleaders—Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, David Dellinger and Rennie Davis. Peaceful protest is one thing, but attempting to disrupt a legitimate election procedure by violent intimidation is never acceptable. After last week’s incursion at the Capitol, can the rest of us finally agree?... Opposing violent disruption of legitimate political procedures should be something everyone can agree on. But it’s hard to commit to that basic principle when the left is still making rosy biopics about men who did exactly that. Ironically, the Chicago protesters ended up getting what they wanted. Humphrey was nominated, but by 1972 the Democrats (and the Republicans) had altered their nomination process to give greater power to the average voter rather than party insiders, just as the New Left wanted. After all, they had a point. The old method was undemocratic.It would be good for the republic if the millions of Trump voters who harbor doubts about the election were able to extract similar concessions. Tightening up voting procedures and reducing the use of mail-in ballots would make elections less vulnerable to fraud. But any legitimate points they had will now be ignored, thanks to the double standard that has existed since the 1960s: Only one side of politics gets to romanticize its violent revolutionaries. It would be better if neither did."
Trying to disrupt an election is only bad when it's done by the "right"

Journalist who covered 2020 riots DEBUNKS Kamala Harris's claim that police showed more restraint with Trump rioters than BLM - "In fact, police did use tear gas against rioters inside the Capitol Building, as well as pepper spray and flashbangs, as Townhall journalist Julio Rosas points out. One unarmed woman was fatally shot by police during the event as well. Harris's remarks echo those of Joe Biden, who said earlier on Thursday that "nobody can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protesting yesterday, they wouldn't have been treated very, very differently."... Harris' comments referenced the summer of riots which overtook American cities in 2020. Harris expressed support for rioters, going as far as to encourage her followers to donate to a bail fund for rioters in Minneapolis"

Perma-clown Anderson Cooper compared the Capitol riots to the RWANDAN GENOCIDE, again. - "the absolutely horrific Rwandan genocide killed approximately 800,000 people in just 100 days. The attack on the Capitol left exactly five dead, and was not, in fact, a genocide."

People for Bernie on Twitter - "You're either ANTIFA or pro-fascism. There is no middle ground. The question TODAY isn't which side are you on. That question has already been answered. We know who sided with fascism. Don't let them escape it."
Burning Beard on Twitter - ""You don't get to define what they are, respect their pronouns."
"You're either Antifa or Pro-fascism. There is no middle ground."
Not anti-fascist, without group affiliation. Antifa. You must be absorbed.
Man I love doublethink. It's like taking a bath in battery acid."
From a blue check mark, naturally

Slate on Twitter - "Non-violence is an important tool for protests, but so is violence."

Nancy Pelosi on Twitter - "Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts."
From 2017
Baseless accusations of rigged elections are only bad when they come from the right

James Lindsay - Posts | Facebook - "We are witnessing the birth of a new cultural-national mythology. The New World Order will be based upon the myth that the Democratic Party narrowly stopped a "Nazi" coup of the United States by Trump and his "violent insurrectionists" to keep us on the "right side of history.""

Sally Kohn on Twitter - "I don't like violent protests, but I understand them. And those wagging their fingers against violent protests need to read up on their American history."
Sally Kohn on Twitter - "The mobs storming the capitol right now are neither patriots nor revolutionaries. They are traitors and cowards, trying to upend our democracy by force because they fear peaceful change and not getting their way."

Riots are destructive, dangerous, and scary — but can lead to serious social reforms - Vox - "To prevent more violent uprisings and protests, we need to take their causes seriously."
Everyone who stormed the Capitol should be arrested - Vox
Yes, both were written by the same person, German Lopez

Donald Trump Has Free Speech Rights, Too | American Civil Liberties Union - "A judge recently held that Donald Trump may have committed incitement when, at a campaign rally in Kentucky last year, he called on his audience to eject protesters who were subsequently manhandled by the crowd. While it’s a closer case than most, I don’t think those words can clear the high bar for what constitutes incitement...In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the court ruled that the First Amendment permits liability for incitement only when speech is intended and likely to cause imminent and serious lawlessness...The Brandenburg test is named after Clarence Brandenburg, an avowed racist convicted for holding an Ohio KKK rally in the late 1960s. The Supreme Court overturned his conviction, despite the rally’s talk of “revengeance” against Jews and Black people, and held that “abstract advocacy of force” was protected speech that did not amount to incitement.A few years later, in a short opinion relying entirely on Brandenburg, the court struck down another state conviction — this time of an anti-war protester who a cop overheard yelling, “We’ll take the fucking streets later.” The court again held that advocacy of generic illegal action was not incitement.And perhaps the high water mark for incitement law is NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware, in which the court upheld civil rights icon Charles Evers’ right to deliver “emotionally charged rhetoric” at a 1966 rally. Evers was advocating that a crowd of supporters boycott racist, white-owned businesses, and during his passionate speech, he promised that “we’ll break the damn neck” of anyone who broke the boycott. Citing Brandenburg once again, the court held that there was no evidence “that Evers authorized, ratified, or directly threatened acts of violence” — even if he suggested such violence might be justified.So the history of modern incitement jurisprudence begins with a KKK leader’s free speech rights and extends to a Vietnam War protester and a great civil rights icon"
But Orange Man bad, so he was inciting violence by saying that he would continue to contest the election results

Candace Owens on Twitter - "These images capture the horrific scene that took place outside of the Capitol building today. Truly disgraceful. Oh wait—my mistake. These are actually from the BLM “protests” over the summer."

ahl on Twitter "This was the Capitol last June President Trump had to be escorted into a bunker. The media called this "peaceful," and condemned Trump for dispersing the crowd the next morning. Kamala went on Colbert to call for more unrest. I'm so sick of the double standard"
Indeed, Trump even got mocked for being a 'coward'

Black Lives Matter protesters storm City Hall - "Black Lives Matter protesters stormed City Hall on Friday afternoon. What started out as calm vigil with some chanting outside the building, escalated as the group flooded up the stairs into the Mayor’s foyer.The only thing separating members of City Council from the screaming crowd was the thin glass wall between the mid-level terrace and council chambers."
It's only bad when Trump supporters do it. Burning, looting and murdering are good when liberals support the cause

Armed Black Panthers invade state Capitol in 1967 - "Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber."

Federal building vandalized during 'Abolish ICE' rally in Lower Manhattan - "Protesters are being accused of vandalizing a federal building in Lower Manhattan during an 'Abolish ICE' rally Wednesday.NYPD says dozens rallied outside and inside of 26 Federal Plaza just before 6 p.m., calling for ICE to abolished."

Hundreds protest on Capitol grounds after Senate acquits Trump in impeachment vote - The Washington Post - "10 women who locked arms and demanded that senators vote to remove Trump from office.The group, which broke off from an early-afternoon tour of the building, sat beneath the dome as a tour guide in a red jacket tried to draw visitors’ attention to the bronze and marble statues of famous Americans and former presidents.“Trump is guilty,” the women’s chants echoed through the hall as about two dozen supporters — wearing black shirts with messages such as “Trump leads a mob of thugs” and “Remove Trump” — raised their fists in solidarity.Bright flashes and the sound of camera shutters bounced off the walls as other tour groups were briefly caught in the commotion: Capitol Police officers encircling the demonstration as the women shouted in unison, “Acquittal is a coverup.”"

Tension between police and protesters flares in front of the White House before vandalism and sporadic fires - The Washington Post - "By nightfall, nearly 1,000 protesters were circling the perimeter of the White House grounds, which was fortified with law enforcement vehicles, metal barriers and rows of armored Secret Service, D.C. police and U.S. Park Police.Sweating, packed closely together and shouting through masks worn to protect themselves from the deadly coronavirus still consuming the Washington region, the protesters launched fireworks and threw bottles at the officers, who swung batons and fired pepper-spray projectiles to push them back... As demonstrators made little headway in their efforts to approach the White House, they dispersed into smaller groups through downtown D.C., burning and breaking windows as they went. A CVS, optometrist’s office, liquor store and Indian restaurant several blocks from the White House were looted.Around Farragut Square, City Center and Georgetown, they smashed the facades of businesses with rocks and baseball bats."

Protesters pound the doors of the Supreme Court following Kavanaugh confirmation - "A throng of protesters pushed past a police line, storming up steps to pound on the doors of the U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday after the Senate confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh."Hey, hey! Ho, ho! Kavanaugh has got to go," the protesters chanted as they flooded the steps of the court, many with fists raised in the air, others with arms linked."

Dan O'Donnell on Twitter - "Absolutely disgusting behavior by conservatives today. Oh wait, this is a picture of thousands of liberals who took over the Wisconsin Capitol in 2011 and were praised for doing so because they were protesting against Republican Governor @ScottWalker"

Thousands storm Capitol as GOP takes action - "Thousands of protesters rushed to the state Capitol Wednesday night, forcing their way through doors, crawling through windows and jamming corridors, as word spread of hastily called votes on Gov. Scott Walker's controversial bill limiting collective bargaining rights for public workers... hundreds of protesters gathered outside the locked King Street entrance to the Capitol, chanting "Break down the door!" and "General strike!"... a Dane County Circuit Court judge ordered dozens of protesters who occupied the Capitol for more than two weeks to leave... Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said he had instructed Madison Police Chief Noble Wray not to allow his officers to participate in removing demonstrators from the building... Some door knobs and door handles were removed... The budget repair bill was stalled in the Senate since the body's 14 Democrats fled Wisconsin on Feb. 17 in a desperate gambit to slow or stop passage of the measure, which affects about 175,000 public employees."
I have seen many people claim that what was wrong with 6 Jan was violent rhetoric, period, the storming of a government building, the attempt to intimidate members of the government and/or the smashing of windows. But apparently taking over a government building, damaging government property in the meantime, to intimidate government officials is only wrong when the "far right" do it. Or somehow it's only wrong when it's a federal government building in DC (though that, of course, has happened too, with the attack on the White House)
Apparently it's ok to tell security to let "protesters" take over a government building - as long as it's for left wing causes
I remember people mocking Republicans for fleeing to stop a bill (to prevent a quorum), but somehow no one cares when Democrats do it

Women's March on Twitter - "We were planning to shut down the Capitol Building but the authorities were so scared of this #WomensWave that they shut it down for us. 1000+ women, survivors, and allies have gathered in the Hart Senate Building. Every hallway. Every floor. #CancelKanavaugh #BelieveSurvivors"

Republican lawmakers caught helping pro-Trump mobs at U.S. Capitol, Oregon statehouse
It's only wrong when Republicans do it

Facebook to staff: Avoid company-branded clothing for own safety
I saw a claim that this said a lot about Trumpers. Yet, Facebook sent out the memo despite no evidence of Facebooker being harassed (by "Trumpers" or otherwise). To my knowledge, no politicians have called for harassing Facebookers. On the other hand, Democrats have called for harassing people they disagree with - and people have indeed been harassed. So that conclusion is bizarre, to say the least. Weird how it's only paranoia when the "right" does it

From Charlottesville to the Capitol: how rightwing impunity fueled the pro-Trump mob | US Capitol breach | The Guardian - "The mob that stormed politicians’ offices and the Senate floor in Washington DC on Wednesday did not appear to be a disciplined cadre of extremists, but instead a “mishmash of random people”, said Hampton Stall, a researcher who monitors American militia groups and who spent the day analyzing video footage, photographs and news reports...It was less clear whether many of the people who had forced themselves inside the Capitol building had a clear strategy for what to do afterwards, some researchers said. “I don’t think they had a plan once they got inside the Capitol,” Joan Donovan, the research director at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, said. “If you were organized, you would have occupied, you would have had food, you would have had supplies, you would have demanded things.”"
Even the Guardian is pretty open that this was no "coup". I guess at least they have distance, being across the pond

The Roleplaying Coup - "It was not a coup, if by a coup one means the illegal and violent seizure of power. Illegal and violent the day most certainly was, but there was no question of seizing power by sending a cosplay gallery of motley characters to the Senate chamber. Even as a pretext for military action from Trump, the event was hardly suitable. A coup is a different kind of political act altogether. Turn to Turkey in 2016 for an example... By the end of the evening, as the Senate reconvened in somber tones, the insurrectionists were spotted having cocktails in the lobby of the Grand Hyatt. Meantime, and as events on Capitol Hill developed, the Dow rallied 400 points to close at an all-time high. Not bad for a coup. This was not theater, because a play is a safe and riskless activity, but it was roleplaying, which can be decidedly more dangerous for the participants—five people have died in these events. The “coup” ended, appropriately, when the main plotter was banned temporarily from social media. It was not a coup in the real world, but it was experienced as one by those taking part. More interestingly, those shocked by the events in the Senate were no less captured by the fantasy and might still believe that a real coup was attempted and defeated. In Washington, you can apparently now have the full “coup” experience in just a few hours. The action takes place in a kind of virtual reality, where terrible accidents can and do happen, but more tragic consequences to the political regime and the viewers at home are somehow prevented. Does this mean that the Capitol extravaganza was trivial or unimportant? Not at all. In some strange way it was more significant than a real coup. A coup would at least make sense, while the almost complete replacement of serious politics by subterranean fantasy and roleplaying induces a sense of vertigo. Our traditional way of relating to the world has increasingly collapsed. Nothing seems real, and doubts persist about what to think or say in the face of this new situation... Think of Trump not as an autocratic ruler, a politician dealing in hard facts, but as someone who lives so enmeshed in his own dream life that he now expects events in the real world to follow automatically from those fantasies... Barack Obama initially tries to see Trump as an authority figure—even a proto-fascist—only to confess his puzzlement... Later in the interview, Obama comes closer to the truth, though predictably he recoils from accepting it. Trump is not a figure of authority but a figure of freedom—freedom understood as the realization of every desire, no matter how extreme, in the here and now—and therefore someone representing powerful and growing forces in contemporary American society."

Known Antifa members posed as pro-Trump to infiltrate Capitol riot: sources - "At least two known Antifa members were spotted among the throngs of pro-Trump protesters at the Capitol on Wednesday, a law enforcement source told The Post.The Antifa members disguised themselves with pro-Trump clothing to join in the DC rioting, said the sources, who spotted the infiltrators while monitoring video coverage from the Capitol.The infiltrators were recognized due to their participation in New York City demonstrations, and were believed to have joined in the rioting so that Trump would get blamed"

REPORT: Far-right, fringe groups stormed the US Capitol, not mainstream Trump supporters - "The Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) at Rutgers has released its findings of the insurrection attempt at the US Capitol, finding that "virtually all violent vanguard elements” of the rioters who stormed the building consisted of members from "predominantly far-right, fringe groups," not mainstream elements of Donald Trump’s base of supporters."

Utah activist inside US Capitol says woman killed was first to try to enter House chamber - "A Utah activist who faces criminal charges in connection with a Provo protest he organized in June said he attended a pro-Trump rally that turned into a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol in order to see "the truth" about the protests for himself and the organization he represents... Sullivan, who is the founder of Insurgence USA, a social justice group that calls itself anti-fascist and protests police brutality, was detained... He said the protesters who stormed the Capitol were all ages and genders."There were kids, there were women, there were old, old men," he said, "and they were all participating in this insurrection at the ... Capitol. ... It should awaken you to the anger that people might have that's seriously, you know, a problem. And maybe they need to address it."Sullivan, 26, faces two criminal charges stemming from a protest he organized in Provo last June.Charging documents say Sullivan recorded several hours of the protest and is seen in the recordings "kicking vehicles and threatening drivers" and directing protesters to block intersections.During that protest, a Provo man, 60, was shot in the elbow after protesters blocked his vehicle. Sullivan later admitted to police that he knew who the gunman was but failed to report it to authorities, according to the charges."
Those who want to deny the NY Post's about law enforcement saying that there were antifa infiltrators - since if the NY Post says the earth is round, that means it's flat - will just ignore John Earle Sullivan

Utah activist says woman killed was first to try and enter House chamber - "some of the 40-minute video he posted to his social media sites contradicts his assertion that he and another woman were “only filming” the actions and not participating as he can be heard in the video encouraging people to join them as they push their way through police barricades.Just after people broke into the building, Sullivan — wearing a gas mask and wielding an iPhone on a stabilizing stick — and a woman who said Wednesday that she was making a documentary on Sullivan, are on the first porch area outside the entrance looking back over the throngs of people around the Capitol. They can be heard encouraging people to climb the wall, saying, “Come on. Let’s go!”... He can be heard saying, “We’re all part of this (expletive) history” as they enter the rotunda around 15 minutes in, and he says to his companion, “2021! (expletive) This is insanity. I am shook. What is this? What is this painting, you know? King (expletive) bro (expletive)!”... At about 17 minutes into the 40-minute video, someone yells, “Do not deface the statues!” Sullivan can be heard saying, “I can respect that. Well, people might burn this down, not going to lie. Might be too late for that.”"

'We came close to half of the House DYING!' AOC says Trump MUST be held accountable for MAGA riot
Of course, liberals will just swallow her nonsensical claims uncritically

Peaceful Protesters With ‘Room for Rage’ Sympathize With Aggressive Tactics - The New York Times - "A forceful campaign by federal law enforcement in Portland, Ore., has prompted an escalation in tactics from some protesters, while others wonder whether they are losing their focus."
Opinion | Trump incites mob at the Capitol on the same day as Democrats take Georgia - The New York Times
Evidently only liberal causes have 'room for rage'

HYPOCRISY: Left-wing media suddenly cares about riots and attacks on federal buildings after covering for Antifa all year - "BLM also set fire to the historic St. John's Episcopal Church in Washington, DC, before vandalizing it and attempting to take over its grounds. No one was particularly concerned with the church until Trump stood before it and made a speech while holding a bible... Protestors opposing the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court took the Capitol in 2018, and instead of being called terrorists, they were basically lauded as stunning and brave... The Women's March were all in then, too. Now, not so much. As part of the protests against the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice, the protestors occupied Sen. Chuck Grassley's office. Media pretty much loved it. CNN's Jake Tapper derided the protestors on Wednesday, but it was only a few short months ago. In June, he was super on board with the "peaceful protestors" burning, looting, and vandalizing American cities... In June, a Seattle man and self-proclaimed "warlord" evicted the police from their precinct, decided he and his cadre of armed militants were the police, and vandalized the building... The riots that led to widespread arson and destruction in Kenosha, Wisc., were called "fiery but mostly peaceful," which isn't a phrase that actually makes any sense when it comes to the willful of arson of businesses and structures. Chris Cuomo derided anyone who thought protests were supposed to be peaceful back during the summer of outrage, when big media shilled for Antifa and BLM like it was their righteous job... MSNBC was all in on the riots. While standing before a burning building, Ali Velshi wanted to make sure viewers knew that it was "...mostly a protest," and "not generally speaking unruly." The Wednesday rally in Washington, DC, that drews thousands of people, a few hundred of which splintered off and caused mayhem, however, was a "mob," and Velshi instructed journalists not to "sugar coat" their language or "normalize" it. He was guilty of both things while cities burned."

Thread by @APStylebook on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "A riot is a wild or violent disturbance of the peace involving a group of people. The term riot suggests uncontrolled chaos and pandemonium.
Focusing on rioting and property destruction rather than underlying grievance has been used in the past to stigmatize broad swaths of people protesting against lynching, police brutality or for racial justice, going back to the urban uprisings of the 1960s. Unrest is a vaguer, milder and less emotional term for a condition of angry discontent and protest verging on revolt."
September 30 2020

AP: Records: Trump allies behind rally that ignited Capitol riot
January 17 2021
WHOOPS

Vox Writer Says Liberal SCOTUS Justices Should Encourage People to Take to the Streets by Cortney O'Brien - "If the Supreme Court tries to steal the election, I hope that Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan abandon all the normal judicial rhetoric about "respectful" disagreement and use their dissents to call people into the streets. — Ian Millhiser"
Violence is good if it hurts Trump

Trump’s election fraud falsehoods have cost taxpayers $519 million — and counting - Washington Post - "Although more than $480 million of the total is attributable to the military’s estimated expenses for the troop deployment through mid-March, the financial impact of the president’s refusal to concede the election is probably much higher than what has been documented thus far, and the true costs may never be known."
When your TDS makes you engage in creative accounting by blaming the cost of your TDS on Trump

Robert Mueller's Russia probe cost nearly $32 million in total: DOJ
TDS means any amount spent is worth it. Anyway the value of being able to lie about what it says is priceless: there're still many people with TDS claiming today that the Mueller report proved collusion with Russia - despite the report expressly refuting that conclusion

Investigators struggle to build murder case in death of US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick - "Investigators are struggling to build a federal murder case regarding fallen US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, vexed by a lack of evidence that could prove someone caused his death as he defended the Capitol during last month's insurrection.Authorities have reviewed video and photographs that show Sicknick engaging with rioters amid the siege but have yet to identify a moment in which he suffered his fatal injuries... medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true."
Liberal logic: he died after the Capitol riot so it was the fault of the rioters (even if there's no proof) so it was Trump's fault (even if the causation is tenuous)

U.S. Capitol police officer died of a stroke unrelated to Jan. 6 siege, says medical examiner

Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes - "The ashes of the officer, 42, had been brought to lie in state in the Capitol's historic Rotunda in February. It was widely assumed that he'd died from his injuries that came during the January 6 attack; he died the next day.  Since 1852, only about three dozen distinguished Americans have 'lay in state,' including Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.   The most recent politician to lay in state in the Capitol Rotunda was U.S. Rep. John Lewis, the civil rights leader whose casket was place there last July.  Even President Joe Biden took a moment of silence in front of the urn carrying the cremated remains of the fallen cop, reaching out and touching the wooden box before holding his hand to his heart. He was accompanied by First Lady Jill Biden.   The category of 'laying in honor' was created in 1998 in order to recognize distinguished Americans outside of the political realm: Sicknick was the fifth American to receive the honor reserved for people who aren't political leaders... Washington DC Chief Medical Examiner Francisco J. Diaz, however, found no evidence that Sicknick suffered any adverse reactions to chemical irritants that he was sprayed with by some of the rioters."
I saw some people claiming that the tear gas caused his stroke. So much for that

The Media Lied Repeatedly About Officer Brian Sicknick's Death. And They Just Got Caught. - Glenn Greenwald - "It was crucial for liberal sectors of the media to invent and disseminate a harrowing lie about how Officer Brian Sicknick died. That is because he is the only one they could claim was killed by pro-Trump protesters at the January 6 riot at the Capitol.  So The New York Times on January 8 published an emotionally gut-wrenching but complete fiction that never had any evidence — that Officer Sicknick's skull was savagely bashed in with a fire extinguisher by a pro-Trump mob until he died — and, just like the now-discredited Russian bounty story also unveiled by that same paper, cable outlets and other media platforms repeated this lie over and over in the most emotionally manipulative way possible... As I detailed over and over when examining this story, there were so many reasons to doubt this storyline from the start. Nobody on the record claimed it happened. The autopsy found no blunt trauma to the head. Sicknick's own family kept urging the press to stop spreading this story because he called them the night of January 6 and told them he was fine — obviously inconsistent with the media's claim that he died by having his skull bashed in — and his own mother kept saying that she believed he died of a stroke. But the gruesome story of Sicknick's “murder” was too valuable to allow any questioning. It was weaponized over and over to depict the pro-Trump mob not as just violent but barbaric and murderous, because if Sicknick weren't murdered by them, then nobody was (without Sicknick, the only ones killed were four pro-Trump supporters: two who died of a heart attack, one from an amphetamine overdose, and the other, Ashli Babbitt, who was shot point blank in the neck by Capitol Police despite being unarmed). So crucial was this fairy tale about Sicknick that it made its way into the official record of President Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate, and they had Joe Biden himself recite from the script, even as clear facts mounted proving it was untrue. Because of its centrality to the media narrative and agenda, anyone who tried to point out the serious factual deficiencies in this story — in other words, people trying to be journalists — were smeared by Democratic Party loyalists who pretend to be journalists as "Sicknick Truthers,” white nationalist sympathizers, and supporters of insurrection... Because one of the first people to highlight the journalistic truth here was former Trump official Darren Beattie of Revolver News and one of the few people on television willing to host doubts about the official story was Tucker Carlson, any doubts about the false Sicknick story — no matter how well-grounded in truth, facts, reason and evidence — were cast as fascism and white supremacy, and those raising questions smeared as "truthers”: the usual dreary liberal insults for trying to coerce people into submitting to their lies... you're seeing why there is so much resentment and so many attacks on platforms like this one that permit journalists to report and analyze facts and dissect media narratives without being constrained by liberal orthodoxies and pieties and while remaining immune from liberal pressure tactics: it's one of the few ways that real dissent to their lies and propaganda can be aired. Truth matters. Noble lies are never justified no matter the cause, especially in journalism. But these employees of corporate media outlets have been taught the exact opposite model: that their primary obligation is to please and flatter the partisan agenda and political sensibilities of their audience even if it means lying or recklessly spreading unproven theories to do it. That is their profit model. And they have trained their audiences to want and expect this and that is why they never feel compelled to engage in any self-critique or accountability when they get caught doing this: their audiences want to be lied to — they are grateful for it — and would prefer that they not admit they did it so that their partisan interests will not be undermined. What is most depressing about this entire spectacle is that, this time, they exploited the tragic death of a young man to achieve their tawdry goals. They never cared in the slightest about Officer Brian Sicknick. They had just spent months glorifying a protest movement whose core view is that police officers are inherently racist and abusive. He had just become their toy, to be played with and exploited in order to depict the January 6 protest as a murderous orgy carried out by savages so primitive and inhuman that they were willing to fatally bash in the skull of a helpless person or spray them with deadly gases until they choked to death on their own lung fluids. None of it was true, but that did not matter — and it still does not to them — because truth, as always, has nothing to do with their actual function. If anything, truth is an impediment to it."

CNN got Brian Sicknick's cause of death wrong, buried the correction - "CNN made a report on Tuesday where they finally acknowledged that the death of Officer Brian Sicknick was not caused by a fire extinguisher. They buried it in the eighth paragraph and have done nothing to publicize it.The story has not been shared by any of the many public personalities at CNN, despite how many of them originally didn't get it right in public."
No wonder so many people still believe the fake news. Then again there're people who still claim the Mueller report proved collusion. So motivated thinking is very powerful

What the left wants to ignore about slain Capitol Police officer - "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described Sicknick’s death as a reminder of the need to “protect our country from all threats, foreign and domestic.” President-elect Joe Biden suggested that whoever backed Trump supports “an all-out assault on our institutions of our democracy.” The day’s violence, it seems, has become an all-purpose excuse to denounce and silence anyone not sufficiently anti-Trump.Yet neither Biden nor Pelosi reckoned with an uncomfortable fact: Sicknick was a Trump supporter himself, as his friend Caroline Behringer announced shortly after his death. Far from sharing the views of the #Resistance, he had written letters to his congressman opposing Trump’s impeachment. Like many Trump supporters who are now being censored, he believed that the system is fundamentally rigged in favor of a narrow elite. He had used fiery rhetoric, even called for regime change in America.The people who claim to honor Sicknick have elided these facts. Acknowledging them would undermine their effort to label the 75 million Americans who supported Trump as a domestic threat. Already, unelected Silicon Valley billionaires are using Sicknick’s death to justify censorship of views he expressed. Liberals are cheering the limitation of free speech. Leftists are applauding the exercise of corporate power. What could lead a man like Sicknick to support Trump? Must it be white supremacy, conspiracy theories or one of the other reasons usually cited by the media?... After serving his country and observing the workings of its government, Sicknick had come to believe that America is governed by a self-interested, unresponsive and unaccountable oligarchy. There is ample evidence to support his beliefs. Biden and Sen. Chuck Schumer, both of whom voted to authorize the invasion, have suffered no consequences for their folly.  Nor have the countless other supporters of the invasion who populate Congress, K Street and the think tanks.The sampe people who launched a costly and failed war in Iraq now hope to humiliate and silence Trump’s supporters. But the concerns that led to the rise of Trump won’t disappear until our failed elites pay for their mistakes.When they smear Trump voters, they dishonor Officer Sicknick’s memory."

Capitol officer who killed Ashli Babbitt not likely to face charges - "The Capitol police officer who shot a woman attempting to breach the speaker’s lobby during the Capitol Hill riot is reportedly not likely to face charges after a preliminary decision by investigators in the case."
She wasn't a thug, so there won't be any candlelight vigils or "say her name" protests even though she was unarmed

Critical Spectator - Posts | Facebook - "“Show me where It says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful?”
“Protesters should not let up!”
“If you see anybody from that Cabinet [...] you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”
“There needs to be unrest in the streets, for as long as there’s unrest in our lives.”
"If they even TRY to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg ;' we burn the entire f*cking thing down.”
“I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country. And maybe there will be...”"
“I am asking for everyone at the US. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!"
"Only one of these people got banned on social media and practically erased from digital existence on the mainstream platforms. Can you guess which one? Nothing shows the double standards better than the record of what various people have said over the years. Of course the list of quotes could be longer - from peddling lies about Trump's collusion with Russia to downplaying the worst riots in American history as "peaceful protests" or manipulating medical recommendations to keep them going even as millions of people were told to stay at their homes because if they dared to leave them or, heaven forbid, left their mask behind, they were literally mass murderers.This sort of language isn't new and predates Trump's presidency.The anti-police, anti-white rhetoric gained momentum earlier - particularly during Barack Obama's presidency, which was concluded with a shootout with a black sniper during BLM protests in Dallas in July 2016. A man gaslighted by race hustlers from Washington into believing white people and police officers are mortal enemies of black Americans. So, he took his handgun and a rifle and decided to shoot as many as he could - killing five and injuring eleven in the process before perishing himself to a blast from a bomb delivered by a police robot.In June 2017, an elderly white man, known for angry rants about GOP and Trump i.a. "Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co." - attacked a baseball practice of the Republican team, ahead of a congressional charity game they were due to take part in.He managed to hit six men, injuring two of them critically, before being shot fatally by Capitol Police officers present. If it hadn't been for them (protecting House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who had to undergo several surgeries afterwards) the toll could have been a lot worse.Somehow none of these incidents made the Democrats reflect and tone down their rhetoric. On the contrary, everything bad happening in the country has consistently been pinned on Trump and Republicans, even though Democrats have had lasting control over America for most of the past century - including holding the grip on its most populous and still most dangerous cities, plagued by ever worse social issues like homelessness or drug abuse and recent spikes in already high crime rates (by global standards).They keep provoking ever higher tensions, downplaying even the most violent and destructive riots, sure in the support they receive from both the mass media and the Big Tech. Plus their new acquisition - fact-checkers, coming to the rescue by twisting the interpretation to suggest something was "taken out of context" - even though they then proceed to take any and everything Trump says out of context themselves.How much more damage, how many more lives is it going to cost for these people to change course? How blind are they to the destruction they are leaving in their wake?"
Since War is Peace, clearly Trump was the only one inciting violence

The media are manufacturing a terror threatd - "The storming of the Capitol, like much else over the past four years, has been blamed on misinformation. In this case, the culprit was President Trump’s bogus claims about election interference.But Trump is not the only one guilty of making hugely misleading claims. The mainstream press has reacted to the Capitol riot with extreme scaremongering.On Saturday, it was reported that a man with a loaded gun and fake ID was arrested in Washington, DC. He had tried, apparently, to pass through a security checkpoint that had been set up for Joe Biden’s inauguration... later reports clarified that the arrested man did not have a fake ID. And he produced a credible story for what happened: he was working as hired security in Washington and had forgotten his weapon was in his car when he drove from Virginia, where he has a license for it. He said he had got lost in Washington, which may explain his appearance at the checkpoint (with ID that did not authorise him to pass through it). It is also reported that two of the three charges against him have been dropped. He will seemingly now only be held accountable for carrying a weapon without a license in Washington. In other words, the breathless fear about a man with a gun potentially involved in a far-right plot was wide of the mark.Meanwhile, the Associated Press ran the following headline: ‘FBI vetting Guard troops in DC amid fears of insider attack.’ Readers were supposed to be terrified by the prospect of the National Guard going rogue, attacking the inauguration and carrying out a coup. But as journalist Michael Tracey has highlighted, in the actual text of the article, military figures said ‘no evidence of any threats’ had been found and that ‘the vetting hadn’t flagged any issues that they were aware of’. So much for that extremist conspiracy, then.Journalists have clearly whipped themselves into a frenzy in the wake of the Capitol siege and are making basic errors. CNN, for instance, was forced to make a humiliating correction at the end of last week. It dramatically reported that amid the Capitol chaos, Democratic representative Ted Lieu had grabbed a ‘crowbar’ as he left his office – to defend himself from the vicious Trumpist mob. In actual fact, he had grabbed a ProBar – an energy snack"

Christopher Stanton Georgia - "The man who was charged with stealing Nancy Pelosi’s hard drive during the capital protest, killed himself with a shot to the chest few days ago. Apparently they are not even trying to hide it anymore."

Matt Walsh on Twitter - "After one right wing riot, the Left impeached Trump, kicked him off social media, sent dozens to federal prison, and instituted a military occupation of DC. After hundreds of left wing riots, Republicans frowned disapprovingly and Trump tweeted about law and order."

Michigan Democrat threatens Trump supporters on Facebook Live and calls on 'soldiers' to make them 'pay' - "“So this is just a warning to you Trumpers: Be careful, walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you,” Michigan state Rep. Cynthia Johnson said... “Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay.”"
Definitely not a threat of violence. And even though she is an elected representative, we must pretend that she is insignificant

Jennifer Rubin says U.S. must 'burn down the Republican Party,' leave no 'survivors' - "Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin says President Trump can be defeated if Americans “collectively, in essence, burn down the Republican Party.”"

Maxine Waters mocks: I threaten Trump supporters 'all the time'

EXPOSED: Democrats outraged by anti-Cuomo tweets only to discover they were originally anti-Trump statements by Maxine Waters - "New York Lieutenant Governor Kathy Hochul intoned the recent Capitol Hill riot of Jan. 6 to condemn Waters' apparent statements, saying that "This is encouraging violence against public officials - plain & simple. Absolutely disgusting. No tolerance for this. Haven't we learned the lessons from Washington D.C. just weeks ago?"... NY State Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar had nothing but condemnation for Waters, saying "This kind of incitement to violence against government leaders must stop. Especially after the recent seige at the U.S. Capitol, we must condemn these types of threats. They endanger our democracy. This is not who we are and we can do better." What Waters said in 2018 was "Already you have members of your Cabinet that are being booed out of restaurants, who have protesters taking up at their house saying 'no peace, no sleep,' 'no peace, no sleep.' And guess what? We're gonna win this battle because while you try and quote the bible, Jeff Sessions and others, you really don't know the bible. "God is on our side," Waters said, invoking an age-old mantra to gain supporters to a cause... "And if you see anybody from that Cabinet  in a restaurant, at a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them that they're not welcome anymore, anywhere..."Democrats didn't have a problem when these words were slung at the Trump administration, but in 2021, when they were repurposed by Twitter account CuomoWatch, Democrats had nothing by condemnation for them."

More than 60 Secret Service officers and agents were injured near the White House this weekend - "More than 60 US Secret Service Uniformed Division officers and special agents were injured starting Friday night through Sunday morning near the White House as protests rocked Washington, DC, following the death of George Floyd... CNN teams were on hand for much of the protests and witnessed protesters throwing objects at officers and pulling temporary fencing away from them"
I still see people with TDS claiming the Capitol Riot was awful because a police officer was killed by a rioter who hit him with a fire extinguiher (even though that fake news has been debunked)
Of course law enforcement casualties are only bad when that can be used to smear the Right

Cuomo: Trump 'better have an army to protect him if he comes to NYC' - "New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Wednesday all but threatened President Trump’s safety if he returns to New York City in a rant responding to an exclusive story by The Post that Trump is looking to pull federal funds from “lawless” cities including New York."
Definitely not threatening violence!

CENSORSHIP: CNN discusses plans to ban conservative news organizations, influencers - ""Disinformation expert" Alex Stamos and CNN's Brian Stelter discussed how communications companies need to be more proactive in preventing conservative news outlets and influencers from reaching people in a particularly Orwellian segment on Reliable Sources... "CNN calls for their competition to be shut down one week after they gave a platform to a domestic terrorist," tweeted Posobiec, referring to the fact that CNN gave a massive platform to John Sullivan, who has now been arrested and charged by federal authorities... CNN passed off a dangerous and violent Antifa supporter and BLM activist as a journalist, that same man who has since been charged in connection to the Capitol riot. Even more recently, CNN falsely reported that a Virginia man was arrested near the Capitol with "fake inaugural credentials" and a loaded gun. In reality, the man had a Park Police pass, and was cleared of any wrong doing... Over the last four years, CNN has been at the heart of many hoaxes from the disgraceful Covington kids racism hoax to the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax to the completely debunked Russia collusion hoax. It appears that CNN wants to lie to you and they want to eliminate all voices that will call out those lies."

href="https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2021/01/18/cnn-reporter-n2583286">CNN Reporter Suggests Cable Providers Ax Certain Conservative Channels - "Stamos had discussed the “problem” of conservative news channels during his interview with Stelter, and lamented that people have too much freedom in choosing their news."

Hank Wade on Twitter - "Man it’s too bad we didn’t have an extra 25,000 troops last summer to help protect the innocent people who had their businesses burned to the ground."

James Lindsay - Posts | Facebook - "As crews in Washington, DC, started dismantling some security fencing within hours of President Biden's inauguration, it remained clear that security in the nation's capital will likely never return to its pre-insurrection form" "Nothing fascist to see here. No hysteria and paranoia on sale." American Democracy Died on Capitol Hill - "If it were only a matter of Trump’s misbehavior, this disaster would be survivable. The trouble is that the popular belief in a vast and nefarious conspiracy has a foundation in fact: Starting before Trump’s term in office his political opponents abused the surveillance powers of the intelligence community to concoct a black legend of Russian collusion on the part of his campaign. The mainstream media, staffed overwhelmingly by Trump’s enemies, slavishly repeated this black legend until large parts of the population refused to believe anything it read in the newspapers or saw on television... the biggest problem isn’t Trump’s misbehavior, egregious as it is, but the eruption of popular rancor against the constitutional system that has made America a model of governance for the world. Leftist mobs last spring burned police stations and destroyed shopping districts in a rampage against supposed systemic racism, and Trump supporters desecrated the Holy of Holies of American democracy, the chamber of the United States Senate.Behind the minority of violent actors is a majority that believes the system is rigged against them – whoever “them” might be. The Democrats say that the system is rigged against African-Americans, women, and other minorities, and the Republicans say that a global elite has rigged the system against middle-income Americans. “Rigged elections” has the same resonance as “systemic racism.” These by-words imply that disagreement is prima facie proof of villainy: To deny that there is systemic racism is to be a racist, and to deny that elections are rigged is evidence of complicity in a vast plot. A quarter of Americans believe that COVID-19 was a planned conspiracy of one kind or another, according to the Pew Survey; just under half of Americans with a high school education or less believe this. One out of three believes that a “deep state” is trying to undermine Trump. I reject the first and believe the second: my colleagues at Asia Times and I have regular access to virologists in a number of countries with scientific credentials and no political agenda to pursue, and can sift scientific evidence and opinion. By contrast, I know personally enough of the actors in the so-called “deep state” to conclude that they are acting in concert to wreck the Trump Administration. I also know many of the writers who have exposed the “deep state,” including Andrew McCarthy and Lee Smith, to trust their bona fides. I denounced this conspiracy repeatedly... Sometimes there is a conspiracy and sometimes there isn’t. But Trump’s political supporters, bombarded daily by fake news about Russian collusion and other alleged misbehavior, have come to distrust any criticism of their president. If Trump was right that the whole impeachment business was an extra-legal conspiracy on the part of his enemies, why shouldn’t they believe that the election was rigged?... Public trust in America’s democratic institutions has collapsed.There is extensive evidence of vote fraud, but (in my view) not sufficient evidence to justify preventing an orderly transition of power. I have difficulty believing that the Democrats invented votes for Biden and destroyed votes for Trump while at the same time Republican candidates for the House of Representatives showed a surprising gain. In the U.S. presidential system, voters choose the executive and the legislature separately, and they do so on the same ballot. Why would the Democrats, whose local political organizations depend more on the Congress than on the presidency, fake votes for one and not the other? Aha, say the conspiracy theorists: the mainstream Republican Party doesn’t like Trump any more than the Democrats, so it conspired with the Democrats to elect legislators while cheating the president. That is possible, but improbable in the extreme: It would require a conspiracy involving thousands of people sworn to secrecy. No such conspiracy is possible. The trouble is that the American public can’t be asked to apply a high degree of discernment to the probability of different sorts of conspiracies. A handful of FBI and CIA agents could create a false narrative about Russian collusion with the help of the infamous Steele Dossier, and the credulous media broadcast it out of rancor against Trump. Stealing an election through interference in tens of thousands of polling stations would require a conspiracy on an industrial scale."

Lindsey Graham says he 'will get to the bottom' of Pelosi's handling of Capitol security during siege: 'It was her job' - "The sergeant at arms of the House is under the direction of Pelosi and is responsible for securing the Capitol along with the Capitol Police."

Jake Tapper on Twitter - "US says Capitol rioters intended to 'capture and assassinate' elected officials"
Reuters on Twitter - "No 'direct evidence' of plot to kidnap or kill lawmakers in U.S. Capitol attack: Justice Department official"

James Lindsay - Posts | Facebook - "Ladies & gentlemen meet the new GOP: Republican Party officials, far-right militants, white supremacists, members of the military and adherents of the QAnon myth that the government is secretly controlled by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophile cannibals."
"Ladies and gentlemen, meet the editor-in-chief of... checks notes... Skeptic Magazine."
On Michael Shermer

Poso on Twitter - "If Trump had said something that 'incited violence' CNN would be playing it over and over"

Clear proof Trump's speech incited the riot and that Republican were responsible!

Escape The Echo Chamber - Posts | Facebook - "The Capitol Police knew that armed extremist groups were intending to attack Congress days before January 6th and the leadership did not prepare for it.  This undercuts the argument that the assault was spontaneous due to incitement by Trump."

Impeachment is more dangerous than Trump - "The most apt parallel for the second impeachment of Donald Trump may not be any other of the three previous presidential impeachments, including his own just over a year ago. It may instead be the PATRIOT Act, which was passed in the heated emotional aftermath of the September 11 attacks, with negligible debate afforded to the long-term implications of what Congress was enacting. Reason and deliberation had given way to a collective desire for security and revenge, and thus the most sweeping curtailment of civil liberties in the modern historical record was approved. Those who departed from the swiftly assembled consensus could expect to be denounced as sympathisers to terrorists.  Likewise, if you deign to raise concerns about the implications of this sudden impeachment sequel — or any of the other extraordinary actions taken in the past week, such as an ongoing corporate censorship purge of unprecedented proportions — you can expect to be accused of defending or supporting the “domestic terrorists” who carried out the mob attack on the Capitol... I witnessed countless instances of political speech expressed by activists, journalists, and others during last summer’s protests and riots which under the same standard could have been deemed to have “foreseeably resulted” in “lawless action”, such as attacks on police or destruction of property. But there was always a presumption that the speech was nonetheless protected under the First Amendment. The new “Trump standard” codified by this impeachment could have drastic implications for the the future, should it be applied more widely throughout US jurisprudence. Impeachable “incitement” is also unlikely ever to include statements by a president “encouraging” violence by way of, say, military force... the most significant consequences from what occurred would arise not from the intrusion itself, which was dispersed by agents of the state in a matter of hours. Rather, the real consequences would stem from the predictably rash over-reaction. The more extreme the characterisation of last Wednesday’s events, the more emotional ammunition that lawmakers have to demand whatever extreme remedial action they had been ideologically committed to pursuing anyway. This goes well beyond the expedited impeachment, and into the corporate censorship purge which has now radically altered the principles undergirding the open internet...   Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the most high-profile member of the Left-wing Congressional “#squad”, has claimed that she narrowly escaped assassination at the Capitol and has thus been “traumatised”. Evidently she will be publicly working through this “trauma” on Instagram. It is also her contention that half of the House of Representatives (over 200 people) had been on the verge of mass execution. This style of political rhetoric has already been marshalled by “AOC” and others to demand corporate censorship on a vast scale, and successfully so; last week she tweeted pressure on Apple and Google to expel the alternative social media platform Parler from their app stores, and the corporations quickly obliged.  Amazon, falling like a domino, then completely terminated Parler from its web hosting service — effectively killing the site. As perhaps the country’s most influential Democrat by online following, AOC is someone who these tech corporations have an interest in appeasing, especially as Democrats enter full control of the federal government on 20 January. Her exceedingly dramatic recounting of what transpired during the mob intrusion is a powerful tool in her arsenal. Curiously, the most putatively “progressive” members of Congress seem to be the most exercised about resurrecting concepts that sound like Woodrow Wilson suppressing dissidents in wartime. Mondaire Jones, a highly touted “progressive” incoming freshman Congressman, took to fulminating on the House floor during the impeachment proceeding about “treason and sedition”. Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney further declared from the floor of the House that Trump had “wilfully incited an armed insurrection”. Which is again another curious characterisation, because while a Capitol Police officer was in fact killed in the melee, the only person against whom armed, deadly force was used against was Ashli Babbitt, a Trump-supporting Afghanistan and Iraq War veteran who was shot dead at point-blank range by an officer.  Any rational observer who has the capacity to detach from the temporary passions of the moment should be able to recognise that the United States government was never at risk of being “overthrown” by the chaotic band of yahoos who stormed the Capitol. All they accomplished was to delay the certification of Joe Biden’s victory by a few hours...   Reminiscent of the post 9/11 period, the “crisis” of the past week has been seized upon to execute a pre-existing agenda. Impeachment, purges, the militarisation and lockdown of the Capitol — it’s only the beginning, and it’s all happening with hardly even a peep of criticism or moment for reflection. Given this historical continuity with the events of 2001, it was therefore fitting when Steny Hoyer, the Democratic Majority Leader in the House, went out of his way Wednesday afternoon to herald the valour of Liz Cheney — daughter of the architect of US policy after 9/11, Dick — who was one of the ten Republicans to vote along with Democrats to impeach."
Woodrow Wilson was a progressive after all

Gabbard: Dems' New War on Terror Will Target Conservatives - "Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) raised the alarm about the Democrats’ disturbing crackdown on “domestic terrorism” in the wake of the Capitol riot on January 6. She warned that the domestic terror bill that House Democrats have proposed would “undermine our constitutional rights and freedoms,” and lead to law enforcement targeting “almost half of the country.”...   “When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he’s spoken with or heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements similar to the insurgencies they’ve seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this ‘unholy alliance’ of religious extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians”... Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald warned that Brennan is suggesting using “the tools that they used to take ISIS off the internet, the tools they used to destroy al-Qaeda,” against political movements opposed to the Left...   The former congresswoman mentioned H.R. 350, the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021, and tied it to the growing demands on the Left that Trump supporters must be “deprogrammed.”  “This whole effort, whether you’re talking about this bill or people saying that we have to deprogram these Trump cultists and people who voted for Trump because they’ve been radicalized, all of this just goes to further tear our country apart,” Gabbard warned. “And it moves towards the thing Joe Biden said in his inauguration speech that shouldn’t happen, which is a dehumanization of your opponent.”... Biden seems likely to support this domestic terror agenda. On the campaign trail, Biden said he plans to prioritize passing a law against domestic terrorism. His blatant double standard in vocally condemning the Capitol riots while coddling the antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters who burned cities this past summer does not bode well for a balanced implementation of any terrorism law. Indeed, Biden has arguably demonized conservative Christians who oppose LGBT activism. In 2018 at an LGBT activist group, he attacked people who have “tried to define family” in the U.S. as “the dregs of society.” At the CNN LGBT town hall in October 2019, Biden called for a kind of terror watchlist to monitor organizations that oppose same-sex marriage and transgender identity. Biden firmly supports the Equality Act, which would outlaw discrimination against LGBT people. While Americans do not support discrimination, laws like this have been weaponized to punish Christians for refusing to celebrate same-sex weddings.   Biden’s domestic terror agenda may echo that of Attorney General Dana Nessel (D-Mich.), who targeted conservative groups in her announcement launching a new “hate crimes” unit. Nessel condemned “hate groups” in Michigan, referencing the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a once-noble civil rights organization that has weaponized its history in bankrupting groups like the Ku Klux Klan to brand mainstream conservative organizations “hate groups.”...   Former employees have described the “hate group” list as a “con” to bilk donors. They have noted that the list does not explain how many members are in each “hate group” and that some “hate groups” consist of one person or barely exist.   Yet Nessel specifically cited the SPLC’s list of “hate groups” in launching her “hate crimes” unit, and Nessel is far from alone among Democrats in relying on the SPLC. At least eight Democratic senators have cited the SPLC to condemn President Donald Trump’s nominees. Kamala Harris, now Biden’s vice president, attacked Trump judicial nominee Allison Rushing for participating in ADF events. This came after Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) had compared ADF to the Cambodian dictator Pol Pot. Even a former ACLU president, Nadine Strossen, stood up for ADF, vehemently disagreeing with the SPLC’s accusation, yet these Democrats continue to cite it."

The capturing of the Capitol - "Downtown DC had been transformed into a brazenly fortified, militarised zone unlike anything in living memory. Roads were blocked off by oversized armoured vehicles which had been stationed for maximum visibility. The boarding-up of endless storefronts — a result of both the Covid-related economic downturn and prolonged riot-induced anxiety — added to the sense of dystopia.  Soldiers patrolled with large rifles slung around their shoulders, directing traffic and checking the “papers” of motorists. One Guardsman from Pennsylvania told me that “legitimate business” was the standard by which they were to adjudicate whether cars would be allowed to pass through... I did not see a single protester anywhere in the city on Inauguration Day, much less any “insurrectionists” or “armed rebels” trawling around, as had been so gravely forecast. The FBI (then still technically under the jurisdiction of Donald Trump) had warned that all 50 state Capitols were at severe risk, and therefore also needed to fortify their defences with military deployments and obtrusive fencing and barriers. Then the day came and went, and… nothing. In both Albany, NY, and Sacramento, CA a total of one Trump hat-wearing man showed up at each.  And so Joe Biden was sworn in without incident, appealing for “unity”, while the city surrounding him was essentially under full-scale military occupation...   It was the refusal of American media to question the necessity of these extraordinary measures that will be one of the longest-lasting consequences of the entire bizarre affair. It confirmed that journalists will uncritically accept extravagant shows of intrusive state force, so long as the political incentives are correctly aligned. During the riots in the summer, the US media generally reacted with horror to the prospect of the American military being deployed to allay “civil unrest,” with many claiming that it would be tantamount to white supremacy for soldiers to deter arson attacks against small minority-owned businesses and private residences. But place DC under complete military occupation as a final rebuke to Trump and his shameful supporters, and the show of state force is to be celebrated rather than adversarially probed. Particularly with Democrats now controlling the House, Senate, and Presidency, the wisdom of this occupation is probably never going to be examined in any meaningful way. Will we ever learn how much it cost taxpayers? Doubtful.   The rationale for the occupation was made all the more questionable by the feckless behaviour of Trump, who, after the goofball mob intrusion at the Capitol, essentially retreated from public view: the opposite of what you’d expect from a tyrannical ruler desperate to cling to power. He admitted defeat, denounced those rioters who’d been under the illusion that he was some kind of Messiah, and actively discouraged any further action that could be remotely described as “insurrectionary”.   Perhaps his Twitter ban has shattered his world more than we thought. As he slunk away to Florida on Wednesday morning in humiliation and disrepute — the first former president to not attend his successor’s inauguration since the also-impeached Andrew Johnson in 1869 — the hysterical fantasies of him leading some bonafide “coup” attempt dissipated into confirmed absurdity...   The idea that Trump’s ideological emptiness was ever going to result in a genuine “seditious conspiracy” to overthrow the government, or could ever challenge the full weight of the American national security state, was a total farce. And although it has now congealed into unassailable mythology, the further idea that what occurred at the Capitol on 6 January amounted to anything more than a temporary self-defeating mob outburst should be put permanently to rest.  But what is not a myth is that such an event can be quickly seized upon to institute all manner of reactive authoritarian measures. Imagine if Trump had deployed that kind of force to suppress protest and imagined “threats” ahead of his second inauguration. There would have been a meltdown of epic proportions, and rightfully so. But because this was done to bookend Trump’s rule and usher him into ignominious retirement, everyone seems content to just move on.   Either way, he’s gone. The Left-liberal establishment has successfully restored itself to power after five years of all-consuming mania, which has probably inflicted irreparable damage to the collective psyche of the body politic. “Fascism,” in other words, was defeated — with a gargantuan military crackdown. Whether the irony will ever be noted remains to be seen."

Calls for 'permanent' fence around Capitol spark backlashl - "The idea was also condemned by DC Mayor Muriel Bowser and DC Council member Charles Allen. "What we saw on the 6th was horrendous, but it also included so many failures of the US Capitol Police. To just build an unscalable perimeter fence and turn the people’s house into a fortress from the people is just wrong""

'This is not freedom': militarized US Capitol a sign of forever wars coming home - "The images of a heavily militarized Washington have left local residents disoriented, and prompted condemnation from military veterans in Congress... The US government response to Trump supporters storming the Capitol is already beginning to mirror the tactics of America’s global war on terror, with discussions of placing the invaders on “no fly” lists, and a former intelligence official suggesting that the lessons learned fighting al-Qaida could now be used against domestic terrorists."
Of course, liberals are against Islamists being on no-fly lists, but support Trump supporters being on them

The U.S. Capitol was put on lockdown for a LITERAL dumpster fire, and if that isn't a metaphor for our civilization, I don't know what is.

Civil Liberties Groups Warn About Expansive New Police Power After Capitol Riot

We Should Be Very Worried About Joe Biden’s “Domestic Terrorism” Bill - "Joe Biden used to brag that he practically wrote the Patriot Act, the Bush-era law that massively increased government surveillance powers. Now he’s hoping to pass a further “domestic terrorism” law once in office. The danger is real that the January 6 Capitol attack will be used as an excuse to severely curtail our civil liberties... This particular episode aside, Biden’s career and voting history suggest a decidedly dodgy record on civil liberties. In 1996, he voted for Bob Dole’s Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act—deemed by legal scholar Lincoln Caplan to be “one of the worst statutes ever passed by Congress” thanks to its undermining of habeas corpus. Though he eventually took to criticizing the administration’s surveillance programs once they became unpopular, Biden’s positions later in the Bush era often earned him only middling ratings from the ACLU.   Given this history, and recent events, Biden’s purported plan to introduce a new domestic terrorism law gives us plenty of reason to worry. As in 2001, the ground currently looks fertile for such legislation to find a big (and potentially bipartisan) constituency even if its contents prove repressive or heavy-handed. The Trump era, with its incessant valorizing of security and intelligence officials and general atmosphere of emergency, has worryingly seemed to lay the groundwork for something resembling a second Patriot Act to find support among liberals — especially if they’re encouraged to believe its sole targets will be figures associated with the likes of QAnon"

Megyn Kelly partially blamed CNN, media for Capitol riot - "Megyn Kelly argued CNN and other media outlets partially share responsibility for the Jan. 6 deadly riot at the US Capitol — claiming the public “lost trust” in what she characterized as a lack of objective reporting of former President Trump."

Anderson Cooper compares Capitol siege to Rwandan genocide where 800,000 people were killed - "Kinzinger didn’t push back against the comparisons during the interview."

Some US military view BLM protests, Capitol attack equally - "During military training sessions to address extremism in the ranks, some service members have challenged why the Pentagon is not treating the violence during racial injustice protests last summer as equal to the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.  That the two events are viewed as equivalent by some troops has caught the Pentagon’s attention in its effort to educate service members that extremist views and activity — on either side of the political spectrum — go against the oath they took when they joined the military"
Actually they're right. Burning down cities and killing more people with the support of the establishment is much worse

Now WaPo Has Finally Admitted Trump Did Not Incite The Capitol Riot - "The article, published Tuesday, the day before Biden’s inauguration, declares in its headline “Self-styled militia members planned on storming the U.S. Capitol days in advance of Jan. 6 attack, court documents say”... CNN acknowledged last week that the storming of the Capitol was planned prior to Trump’s speech"
This will just be used as "evidence" that Trump is so evil that he inspired pre-meditation

Dems serve GOP lawmakers Cruz and Hawley with ethics complaints over Capitol riot - "Drunk on their new power, Democrats in the Senate are now aiming their partisan volleys at their GOP colleagues. Senate Democrats have lobbed ethics complaints against both Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz. The accusation is that these two lawmakers "coordinated" with those who organized the Trump rally on Jan. 6... The complaint conflates the events of the peaceful rally held in support of outgoing President Trump with the unlawful actions of those rioters who stormed the Capitol in an attempt to block the vote to certify the Electoral College results"

Even Bill Maher can see through the left's little game of lumping all Trump supporters in with the Capitol rioters - "Have you noticed that Bill Maher has been teetering on alt-right over the past few years?  I guess we shouldn't be surprised, since he hosted a show called Politically Incorrect for 8 seasons, but the guy used to be considered a hardcore lefty.  Maher has recently come into the spotlight for speaking out against woke culture, transgender bathrooms, and the #metoo movement. He has made comments about Islam that really don't sit well with liberals, especially Ben Affleck.  He's even called out liberals' panicked response to Covid-19, and happens to be a bit of an "anti-vaxxer."  Maher triggered the left back in 2017 when he invited alt-righter Milo Yiannopoulos to be on his show. He has also given a platform to other alt-righters, including Ben Shapiro, Steve Bannon, Ann Coulter, Ben Domenech, Jordan Peterson, and Dennis Prager. You're really not supposed to do this on the left, even if you bring the "fascists" on just to argue with them. I've even heard liberal friends of mine say recently that they "don't really like Maher's show anymore," which really shows you how far the left has shifted the Overton window."

The Capitol siege and facial recognition technology. - "Watching the Capitol rioters be arrested may be satisfying. But the role of facial recognition technology here is alarming, given the risks of false identification and the technology’s inherently biased design. Crisis is often used to increase the reach of surveillance technologies. Many who consider the use of facial recognition technology ethically wrong in the context of policing take a different stance when it’s in the hands of researchers and journalists trying to identify neo-Nazis and insurrectionists. This could end up further entrenching facial recognition technology at a time when we should be working to ban it."

Inside the Capitol siege - "Nobody talks about what the crowd’s grievances were. ‘Stop the Steal’ is the aspect that everybody likes to focus on because it is widely considered bogus. But there are other underlying issues that make a crowd gravitate towards a simplistic unifying call like that.  Anti-globalisation was hugely important. People were railing against Big Tech and against being censored, which we are seeing even more since the events of 6 January.  Are we safer if we send millions of people to corners of the internet, to encrypted chat rooms instead of being out and organising publicly like they do on Parler or Facebook or Twitter? Those are questions that I think we should be asking right now. The problem is, our media are not asking those questions. The narrative of the day’s events was set in motion before anybody in the media had even talked to anybody on the ground. I would call out every single publication and ask how many Trump supporters on the ground they spoke to for their story.   The people in the crowd did not feel represented. And that’s easy to prove if you go to CNN’s coverage or that of any other mainstream media outlet – they didn’t interview the people who were there.   An activist journalist, who was not present at the protest, tweeted that if it had been Black Lives Matter supporters breaching the barricades, they would have been shot with live rounds... When I got to that tweet, I had already heard that a woman had been shot and killed. The activist keyboard warriors tried to make everything about race. But something in our gut says this wasn’t about race... We can’t take the racial lens to everything and insist on it permanently without evaluating the evidence on the ground. When I went to Tulsa, Oklahoma on 20 June, I reported on pro-Trump activism. These were not neo-Nazi or ethno-nationalist groups like we saw in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017. I combed the crowd for two days and the only thing I found was one guy who had an ‘88’ tattoo, which is code for ‘Heil Hitler’. Does one person with an offensive coded tattoo in a large crowd make an entire movement racist?  I learned then not to do what everybody is still doing now – taking the person with the Confederate flag at the Capitol, say, and judging everyone from that. These things need to be interpreted within the context of the person and what they mean.   But we don’t have that nuance on the left, because we are not even talking to those people. We have already judged them. We have decided that they are not worth talking to. The narrative is in, and we all have to get on the ‘right side of history’"

Investigative reporting professor says man photographed with lectern at Capitol was not a Trump voter - "According to Professor Ted Bridis, the man in the photograph is Adam Christian Johnson of Florida. Voting records show that he has not voted in any elections since 2002 and is not a registered Republican.  Members of the news media have argued since Wednesday that the riot which overtook Capitol Hill, was incited by President Donald Trump. While some Trump supporters in the crowd have been positively identified, it now appears that others who were present such as Johnson had no affiliation with Trump or the Republican Party, and were seeking to cause frivolous destruction."

After Capitol Riots, Sesame Street Pulls All Episodes Featuring The Letter 'Q' | The Babylon Bee

It is obscene to compare the Capitol riot to Kristallnacht - "From the moment those oafs broke into the Capitol, commentators were dredging up the spectre of the Thirties. ‘This is definitely fascism’, outraged observers cried, just like they did when Trump was first elected, when Brits voted for Brexit, when populist parties did well in Italy and Germany, and even when some Labour Party politicians talked about the importance of place and family. (‘Do you mean blood and soil!?’, the tedious fascism-obsessives said.)   Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken this historical illiteracy to dizzying new heights – or lows. In a weird Twitter video in which he waves a sword around while rebuking Donald Trump and slamming the Capitol Building mob, Schwarzenegger says the events of last week reminded him of Kristallnacht in 1938. ‘Wednesday was the Day of Broken Glass right here in the United States’, he said, to rousing cheers from the Twitterati and liberal media. Arnie is ‘absolutely right’ to compare the breaching of the Capitol to Kristallnacht, said a writer for the Guardian.  The historical ignorance on display here would be funny if it wasn’t so deadly serious. Kristallnacht, or Night of the Broken Glass, was a violent, sustained and militaristic pogrom against Jews in Nazi Germany in November 1938. It was well organised. It was spearheaded by the Sturmabteilung, the first paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party, who were assisted by many racist German citizens. They used clubs and hammers to destroy synagogues and Jewish-owned businesses. More than 90 Jews were slaughtered in this orgy of racist violence and 30,000 were arrested and placed in concentration camps. This all happened in the space of two days. This barbaric act is widely considered to be the starting point of the Holocaust... There is no comparison whatsoever between Kristallnacht and what happened last Wednesday. Kristallnacht was a huge militaristic effort that covered a whole country; Wednesday was a small protest. Kristallnacht was organised by the military wing of the governing party; last Wednesday was the work of handfuls of stupid citizens who had no backing from anyone in officialdom, including Trump, who has denounced them. Kristallnacht was a targeted racist assault against a group of people; Wednesday was a chaotic and very brief interruption of a political process...   Schwarzenegger isn’t alone, of course. A few months ago CNN’s Christiane Amanpour compared Trump’s style of governance with Kristallnacht. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has accused Trump of running concentration camps on the border with Mexico. And across the liberal media for the past four-and-a-half years – and longer, in fact – all sorts of ideas, people and groups that the chattering classes disapprove of have been branded Nazi-like. ‘It’s like the 1930s’ has become the morally infantile cry of a political clerisy so wounded by the populist defiance in the votes for Brexit and Trump. If this stuff was just historically inaccurate, that would be bad enough. But it’s worse than that. This all feeds into the scourge of Holocaust Relativism, into the idea that the Holocaust wasn’t such a big deal. After all, if Kristallnacht happens every five minutes, and if Trump or Salvini are literally like Hitler, and if Brexit Britain has the feel of 1930s Germany, then all those things that happened in the 1930s can’t have been so bad; clearly they were just political upsets and tensions, like those we have experienced in much of the Western world in recent years... such Holocaust Relativism is a hop, skip and a jump away from Holocaust Denial. Indeed, the starting point of Holocaust Denial is the idea that the events of the Thirties and Forties weren’t that bad"
Only liberals get to make inappropriate Holocaust comparisons

Schwarzenegger: 'Wednesday was the Day of Broken Glass right here in the US' What were the BLM riots? Pogroms?

Acting Australian PM compares Capitol attack to BLM protests and says Twitter ‘censoring’ Trump - "Australia’s acting prime minister Michael McCormack called the Capitol attack on Wednesday “unfortunate” and compared it to last year’s Black Lives Matter protests"

Don’t exaggerate threat of the US Capitol’s ragtag rioters - "A coup is a conscious effort to illegally seize power from the government. These people couldn’t even believe they made it into the Capitol. They were like children finding a candy store unguarded.  And it wasn’t an insurrection, either, as Joe Biden and others are calling it. Except perhaps a pantomime insurrection, a cosplay revolt, a more heated version of those history aficionados who spend their weekends dressed up as soldiers of the American Revolution or the American Civil War... it’s about taking a stand against the threat inflation currently being engaged in by significant sections of the cultural and political elites. Their hysterical warnings of resurgent fascism, of small mobs threatening America’s apparently pristine democracy, can only lead to greater authoritarian controls on political action and even on political speech... Across the media, there is a striking disparity between the claims being made about the Capitol incursion and the photographs of it. The claims are extreme: this is fascism, they say; it’s like 1933; the far right is now usurping democracy itself. The German Foreign Minister even made a reference to the Reichstag Fire, the 1933 arson against the German parliament that the Nazis used as a pretext to seize power. But the photos show something very different. They show wide-eyed protesters, as bemused as the rest of us that they are inside the Capitol building. In some photos it looks more like an unscheduled tour of the Capitol rather than anything like a coup — the protesters even stayed inside the barriers as they walked along the carpet. They took selfies while sitting on the Speaker’s chair.  One of the modern-day Hitlers grins as he poses for a photo next to the statue of Ronald Reagan. If it wasn’t for the terrible tragedy that subsequently unfolded — five people have now died in the melee — one could be forgiven for thinking this was a badly timed public visit to the Capitol, accidentally occurring while representatives were present. It is important to note this disparity because it confirms that something very political is taking place right now. The threat inflation, the wild claims about a fascist coup, are transparent efforts by the cosseted political and cultural elites to endow their project with moral importance; to give their restoration of managerial, technocratic power after the four-year populist experiment — which is fundamentally the project that Biden and his influential supporters are currently engaged in — the gloss of historical urgency. It is mission creation. Worse, this narrative-building will allow the elites to circumscribe even more forms of political thought and speech than they already desire to do, on the basis that the latent fascism among the American rabble is likely to be stirred up by inflammatory ideas and commentary. Indeed, we’ve already been given a chilling glimpse of this post-incursion clampdown on “violent” speech in Twitter’s extraordinary decision to ban, outright, three of Trump’s tweets on Thursday and to lock him out of his account for 12 hours.  It strikes me that this unilateral use of corporate power by Silicon Valley to prevent the democratically elected president of the US from engaging with millions of his voters and supporters, to physically forbid him from partaking in online discussion, is a grave assault on democracy, too. More grave, I would say, than the immoral and anti-democratic incursion of the Capitol building. Already, right away, we are seeing that the threat-inflating response to Thursday’s events will likely have longer-lasting negative consequences for open debate and democratic norms than the thing itself. The elites’ condemnation of the riotous invaders rings hollow, too. These are the same elites who refused, for weeks, to condemn the savagely destructive rioting that gripped large parts of the US in the wake of the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Indeed, serious commentators condemned anyone who used words like “riots” and “looting”. CNN infamously referred to fiery assaults on buildings and livelihoods as “mostly peaceful” protests. Biden and other leading Democrats were silent. When protesters assaulted police stations and even a courthouse, in Portland, little was said. You cannot implicitly green-light BLM rioting for weeks on end and then condemn the violent lunacy in the Capitol and expect to be taken seriously. It is not whataboutery to draw attention to the elites’ meek response to earlier riotous behaviour. Rather, it is about understanding the growing dominion enjoyed by the new clerisy over the political narrative and even over language and words themselves. Their cultural and media supremacy means they increasingly have the power to narrate BLM rioting as not being rioting at all, while a violent incursion in the Capitol is literal fascism; it means they can say that anti-lockdown protests during a lockdown are lethal to public health, but anti-police protests are not; it means they can secure the silencing and even sacking of anyone who referred to the BLM violence as looting and who called for the National Guard to intervene, while cheering as police at the Capitol shoot protesters. It is this control of political narration, of thought itself, of the very meaning of words like riot, looting, fascism, peaceful and so on, that must be highlighted and confronted. Then there’s the double standards over democracy. British politicians who spent four years trying to trash the largest democratic vote in our country’s history — the vote for Brexit — are now condemning protesters in America for trying to trash a democratic vote. Labour’s David Lammy refers to Trump as an “enemy of democracy” — big talk for an MP who explicitly called on his fellow MPs to overthrow the “nightmare” of Brexit. Hillary Clinton supporters, too, spread conspiracy theories about Russia stealing the 2016 presidential election and cheered on the security state as it investigated Trump’s election. Did they think this behaviour would not have a long-term impact on respect for democracy? That it wouldn’t encourage cynicism towards America’s electoral process? Democrat conspiracy theorists and hardcore Remainer agitators should look a little more closely at the hotheads who stormed the Capitol — they might see a more clownish, fancy-dress version of their own anti-democratic selves staring back."

Liberals Tell Everyone To Calm Down About The Siege Since The Capitol Has Insurance | The Babylon Bee - "Liberals pointed out that often people can’t be heard unless they take action like this, and the whole siege was simply an expression of people who felt disenfranchised. “The real tragedy was the unarmed woman who was shot,” said left-wing online activist Veronica Neal. “This just shows we need to defund the Capitol police. If they weren’t there, this wouldn't have escalated.”  The siege has also gained support from some liberal members of Congress. “The point of protests is to make people feel uncomfortable,” said Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the world’s smartest socialist."

MEDIA WON'T SHOW YOU THIS: Trump Supporters Attempt to Stop People From Breaking Into Capitol Building - "“Don’t break the window!” shouted the Trump supporters.  Others thought that the people who were vandalizing were members of Antifa as they yelled, “No Antifa! No Antifa!”  The crowd cheered after the person was stopped from causing more damage."

Andy Ngô on Twitter - "The man responsible for the deadly Good Friday Capitol Hill attack was a devout follower of Louis Farrakhan & the black nationalist Nation of Islam group. Farrakhan has close ties to Democrat leaders. Will the media make sure they’re made to answer for those links? Of course not"

Dem rep trying to remove GOP members from house celebrated violent riots all summer - "House Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) has plans to introduce a resolution that would remove democratically elected leaders from Congress. Those who challenged the certification of the Electoral College vote have no place in the House, according to Bush, though they themselves were democratically elected... Bush, who came to prominence after the riots in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, during the wake of Michael Brown's death, advocated for "revolution" during the riotous summer of 2020... "Take a moment to learn the difference between 'peaceful' and 'non-violent.' There is no such thing as “peaceful” protest. Protests are *supposed* to be disruptive, even as we remain steadfastly committed to non-violence." Bush also claimed that "Any violence brought upon protestors from law enforcement is 100% premeditated and intentional.""

Libertarian Party UK - Posts | Facebook - "Support for the BLM protests was the most likely reason Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgensen slipped several points from Gary Johnson’s showing four years earlier. Opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer called it a "direct attack on democracy". Yes, he’s probably right, but what were the other riots then? A picnic in the park? Hypocrite of the Year award has to go to the Fijian Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who took power via a coup in 2006, expressing his faux outrage at the events taking place... How much are the likes of the BBC and CNN to blame for the escalation in the levels of aggression? Once you start to agree with the cause – an end to racism, perhaps – you give credence to the violent, Marxist thugs behind BLM. You also create a mindset of “Well, if they can do it, so can we.” Is it too much to ask for main stream media to go back to reporting on events instead of trying to influence them? In pinning the blame for race riots on police brutality, looters and murderers were almost exonerated. A riot is a riot and a murder is a murder, whatever the reason. If the media practice hypocrisy and try to assuage blame, it means they get left with blood on their hands."

Lee Fang on Twitter - "Liberals when armed gunmen exploited chaos to shoot and kill working class people last summer across the US: plz don’t call in the police and National Guard
Liberals when nutjobs storm Congress, threatening wealthy lawmakers, political elites: bring more police and arrest them!"

Kamala Harris Said Riots 'Should Not' Stop Last Summer - "The protests Kamala Harris spoke of were responsible for an estimated $1 – $2 billion in property damage between May 26 and June 8, 2020, and dozens of deaths, including that of retired St. Louis police officer David Dorn.  What would happen if Trump said of the protestors who stormed the U.S. Capitol Wednesday, “They’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop. This is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop. And everyone beware because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna let up and they should not.” But Trump never said anything like that. In fact, Trump urged his supporters to go home...   Kamala Harris didn’t condemn the BLM riots that plagued cities nationwide like Portland, Minnesota, Seattle, Atlanta, Chicago, and Kenosha until polling suggested that they needed to."

Michael Tracey on Twitter - "Trump has told them to go home. State agents are actively quelling the mob. This has no chance of preventing the certification of Biden, much less overthrowing the government. It’s still a wild scene but really, chill the fuck out"
Michael Tracey on Twitter - "Sure, a fringe of MAGA conspiracist loons are “attempting” to seize the reins of the most powerful state in world history by smashing some windows at the Capitol and taking selfies. Absurd"

Meme - "When protestors are taking pictures inside the capitol instead of burning it to the ground"
"???"

Facebook - "“Why didn’t they immediately, aggressively crack down on protestors to maintain order” etc. etc.  There’s many layers and moving pieces to what happened, but—like we saw with ANTIFA being allowed to run wild this summer—part of what you're seeing is the new state of the art in crowd control where the state hangs back and basically lets the crowd run wild, waiting for an organically discrediting event or critical infrastructure to be threatened. This is confusing for people who expect the government to maintain order. Order isn't their goal. Public safety isn't their goal. They're hoping someone gets hurt, waiting for it. They’re looking to give the yahoos a long enough rope to hang themselves with.  Letting the crowd run wild to the point of organically self-discrediting missteps also gives the state a pretext to drop the hammer hard, if and when need be, with much less public backlash. We’re now in an era of PR-led, optics-conscious policing.  Furthermore, this PR element of managing the optics is particularly important in highly emotional, politically charged and hyper-polarized rallies like these where the state knows the the world will be watching. They want to avoid having a Tiananmen Square-tier event and/or creating a bunch of radicalizing George Floydesque martyr-heroes.  That’s not all of it, of course, there’s many moving pieces in these overdetermined events, which is why they ultimately had to shoot at least one protestor, but it’s an under-appreciated element many seem to not understand."

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter - "The whole point of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable. Activists take that discomfort w/ the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small & grows. To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable... that’s the point."
So much for riots being the language of the unheard

Political violence must be denounced by the right — and the left - "  History, especially the history of the 20th century, teaches that that thuggery brings more thuggery, that street-fighting begets storm troopers.  When a significant segment of the political order rationalizes — to say nothing of encourages — riot, arson and looting, there is no reason to expect an opposing faction to respond any other way than in kind.  Acknowledging this isn’t an exercise in false moral equivalence, it’s a statement of simple fact. Make that: ominous, unavoidable, chilling fact."

Meme - "Leftists 2020:
"burn it all down"
"BRB, going to kill mitch mcConnell"
"ACAB"
"a riot is the language of the unheard"
leftists 2021:
"loitering in a government building is terrorism why aren't the police shooting them?"

Zack Bornstein on Twitter - "Obsessed with these Trump protestors who broke windows to get into the Capitol Building but then stayed inside the red ropes"
Some riot. Or even "coup"

The Yung Hegelians on Twitter - "Pentagon placed limits on D.C. Guard ahead of pro-Trump protests due to narrow mission"
"So not only did they know it was coming, but they deliberately cut security. They wanted a spectacle. They wanted a blank check for Biden to write a new patriot act to target protesters and political extremists"

Glenn Greenwald on Twitter - "Mr. Biden has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism"
"There's absolutely a new War on Terror being initiated -- it'd been lurking for awhile, but it's accelerating now for obvious reasons. This new one is aimed inward, domestically. It entails many of the same frameworks. They're saying it explicitly"

As the Insurrection Narrative Crumbles, Democrats Cling to it More Desperately Than Ever - Glenn Greenwald - "Twice in the last six weeks, warnings were issued about imminent, grave threats to public safety posed by the same type of right-wing extremists who rioted at the Capitol on January 6. And both times, these warnings ushered in severe security measures only to prove utterly baseless.  First we had the hysteria over the violence we were told was likely to occur at numerous state capitols on Inauguration Day. “Law enforcement and state officials are on high alert for potentially violent protests in the lead-up to Inauguration Day, with some state capitols boarded up and others temporarily closed ahead of Wednesday's ceremony,” announced CNN. In an even scarier formulation, NPR intoned that “the FBI is warning of protests and potential violence in all 50 state capitals ahead of President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration.” The resulting clampdowns were as extreme as the dire warnings. Washington, D.C. was militarized more than at any point since the 9/11 attack. The military was highly visible on the streets. And, described The Washington Post, “state capitols nationwide locked down, with windows boarded up, National Guard troops deployed and states of emergency preemptively declared as authorities braced for potential violence Sunday mimicking the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob of pro-Trump rioters.” All of this, said the paper, “reflected the anxious state of the country ahead of planned demonstrations.”   But none of that happened — not even close... Indeed, the only politically-motivated violence on Inauguration Day was carried out by Antifa and anarchist groups in Portland and Seattle... Completely undeterred by that debacle, Democrats and their media spokespeople returned with a new set of frightening warnings for this week. The date of March 4 has taken on a virtually religious significance for the Q-Anon movement, announced NBC News’ Ben Collins, who was heard on NPR on Thursday speaking through actual, literal journalistic tears as he recounted all the times he called Facebook to plead with them to remove dangerous right-wing extremists on their platform (tears commence at roughly 7:00 mark). Valiantly holding back full-on sobbing, Collins explained that he proved to be so right but it pains and sorrows him to admit this. With his self-proclaimed oracle status fully in place, he prophesized that March 4 had taken on special dangers because Q-Anon followers concluded that this is when Trump would be inaugurated. This is how apocalyptic cult leaders always function. When the end of the world did not materialize on January 6, Collins insisted that January 20 was the day of the violent reckoning. When nothing happened on that day, he moved the Doomsday Date to March 4. The flock cannot remain in a state of confusion for too long about why the world has not ended as promised by the prophet, so a new date must quickly be provided with an explanation for why this is serious business this time... These dire warnings also, quite predictably, generated serious reactions... Do you know what happened on March 4 when it came to violence from right-wing extremists? The same thing that happened on January 20: absolutely nothing... Perhaps the most significant blow to the maximalist insurrection/coup narrative took place inside the Senate on Thursday. Ever since January 6, those who were not referring to the riot as a “coup attempt” — as though the hundreds of protesters intended to overthrow the most powerful and militarized government in history — were required to refer to it instead as an “armed insurrection.”  This formulation was crucial not only for maximizing fear levels about the Democrats’ adversaries but also, as I’ve documented previously, because declaring an “armed insurrection” empowers the state with virtually unlimited powers to act against the citizenry. Over and over, leading Democrats and their media allies repeated this phrase like some hypnotic mantra. But this was completely false. As I detailed several weeks ago, so many of the most harrowing and widespread media claims about the January 6 riot proved to be total fabrications. A pro-Trump mob did not bash Office Brian Sicknick’s skull in with a fire extinguisher. No protester brought zip-ties with them as some premeditated plot to kidnap members of Congress (two rioters found them on a table inside). There’s no evidence anyone intended to assassinate Mike Pence, Mitt Romney or anyone else.  Yet the maximalist narrative of an attempted coup or armed insurrection is so crucial to Democrats — regardless of whether it is true — that pointing out these facts deeply infuriates them... What we know for sure is that no Trump supporter fired any weapon inside the Capitol and that the FBI seized a grand total of zero firearms from those it arrested that day — a rather odd state of affairs for an “armed insurrection,” to put that mildly. In questioning from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) on Thursday’s hearing, a senior FBI official, Jill Sanborn, acknowledged this key fact... The key point to emphasize here is that threats and dangers are not binary: they either exist or they are fully illusory. They reside on a spectrum. To insist that they be discussed rationally, soberly and truthfully is not to deny the existence of the threat itself. One can demand a rational and fact-based understanding of the magnitude of the threat revealed by the January 6 riot without denying that there is any danger at all.  Those who denounced the excesses of McCarthyism were not insisting that there were no Communists in government; those denouncing the excesses of the Clinton administration’s attempts to seize more surveillance power after the Oklahoma City courting bombing were not denying that some anti-government militias may do violence again; those who objected to the protracted and unhinged assault on civil liberties by the Bush/Cheney and Obama administrations after 9/11 were not arguing that there were no Muslim extremists intent on committing violence.  The argument then, and the argument now, is that the threat was being deliberately inflated and exaggerated, and fears stoked and exploited, both for political gain and to justify the placement of more and more powers in the hands of the state in the name of stopping these threats. That is the core formula of authoritarianism — to place the population in a state of such acute fear that it acquiesces to any assertion of power which security state agencies and politicians demand and which they insist are necessary to keep everyone safe... And as Democrats and liberals now gear up to demand a new War on Terror, this one domestic in nature, it should be no surprise that the rhetorical leaders of their effort now are the same lowlife neocon and Rovian slanderers — Bill Kristol, David Frum, Steve Schmidt, Nicolle Wallace, Rick Wilson — who demonized everyone who questioned them as part of the first War on Terror as traitors and terrorist-lovers and subversives. It is not a coincidence that neocons are leading the way now as liberals’ favorite propagandists: they are the most skilled and experienced in weaponizing and exaggerating terrorism threats for political gain and authoritarian power. Ultimately, if this “armed insurrection” and threat of domestic terrorism are so grave, why do media figures and politicians in both parties — from Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney — keep lying about it and peddling fictions? Politicians and media figures do that only when they know that the threat, in reality, is not nearly as menacing as they need it to be to fulfill their objectives of political gain and coercive power."

The REAL Nikki Moonitz on Twitter - "I'm over the ridiculous narrative that Jan 6th was anywhere on par with 9/11, Pearl Harbor, The Civil War, etc. Only complete idiots would believe that b.s. The only person killed was a Trump supporter, by a Capitol officer. Jan 6th pales in comparison to the BLM & Antifa riots."

'You'll Never Beat The Government With Just Guns,' Says Party That Also Believes Government Was Almost Toppled By Unarmed Mob On January 6 | The Babylon Bee

𝙀𝙡 𝘽𝙧𝙤𝙢𝙖𝙨 ♛ on Twitter - "Wait so White supremacists stormed the capital to overthrow the White supremacist government but were stopped by the white supremacist police force and are know being tracked down by the white supremacist fbi ?? Very confused"

Media bias and Democrat zeal may turn Trumpists into martyrs - "Could Ms Babbitt come to be seen as a martyr? In Britain, the idea of police shooting unarmed protestors (so far as we know she was unarmed) is regarded with horror. Even in the much more trigger-happy United States, it is usually controversial. The mantle of martyrdom is often conferred on unarmed people in such situations, as it was last year on George Floyd in Minneapolis.  Just now, the wider world is rightly so shocked by the invasion of the Capitol that it is not thinking about how Trump supporters might react. But it should be obvious that people who have a long-standing anger against the “mainstream media” (MSM) will contrast MSM denunciations of police violence against Black Lives Matter demonstrators with the same media’s attitude to the killing of Ms Babbitt... President-elect Biden calls for “healing” once he takes office. It will be much, much harder to heal America if people think his administration wants to punish and suppress opponents"