After appearing in an interview claiming what he did was in self defence, the person who killed the Patriot Prayer antagonizer was killed by police while they were attempting to apprehend him in Washington.
This is a drastically different approach that was taken with Rittenhouse.
Regardless of this guys actions, his rights (and life) were taken away from him as US federal marshals acted as judge, jury and executioner in his apprehension. This was also after Trump rage tweeted about it.
It is these types of double standards that needs to be addressed, yet police don’t seem to grasp it.
I don't necessarily believe this guy's self-defense claim anymore than I do Rittenhouse. People taking guns to volatile protests are, in my mind, actively seeking a reason to use them. 99% of people aren't carrying them. And there is a big difference between smashed windows and blowing someone's head off.
That said, I have no doubt the cops were looking for any pretext to take this guy out as quickly as possible. They will freak out over an autistic kid walking home from a grocery store and call medics to inject him with a ketamine dosage that eventually kills him. What chance does someone like this have of getting out alive??
The blowback to the Atlantic story was predictable. Serial liars manning the barricades to say it wasn't true and more "fake news". Last night both the AP and Washington Post confirmed the story. This afternoon, an even bigger nail in the coffin of that defense was hammered in, as two separate FOX News reporters are now also confirming.
This interview relates to the point I was making yesterday about the extent to which character is taken into account in assessing the president. There's general agreement there are character flaws, but one of the interviewees is strongly for Trump, based on his stated policies. That's contrasted with a couple who previously supported Trump, but are concerned that his character deficiencies have real-world impacts ...
This interview relates to the point I was making yesterday about the extent to which character is taken into account in assessing the president. There's general agreement there are character flaws, but one of the interviewees is strongly for Trump, based on his stated policies. That's contrasted with a couple who previously supported Trump, but are concerned that his character deficiencies have real-world impacts ...
I'd argue that since a US President is able to move troops in the armed forces anywhere he pleases at any time, the fact that he views them as gullible, worthless meatbags is indeed a grave policy concern.
It reveals how he views humanity in general. He believes at his core if you play by the rules and don't cheat to get ahead, you are, to him, a sucker and a loser. So I'd ask supporters to think long and hard about how he views THEM, because it's the EXACT same way. Howard Stern had it 100% right when he said Trump wouldn't let any of his rally-goers within 100 yards of one of his resort properties.
Discussions between the UK and EU about a trade deal have been ongoing since March, but are now starting to hit the headlines again. Apart from the concentration on Covid-19, that's also because of the increasing recognition that time is running out and there may be no deal.
Although the UK has formally left the EU, the existing rules and regulations continue to apply until the end of the transition period at the end of December - so effectively Brexit has made no difference thus far. There will though be differences from January, particularly if no ongoing deal is agreed.
The general view has been that a deal needs to be agreed by the end of October, in order to have time for all countries to ratify it before the end of the year. However, the UK is now ratcheting up the pressure by saying a deal should be agreed by 15th October. In addition, it now appears that the UK will introduce its own legislation to remove some key aspects of the deal already made to leave the EU. This is described as a fallback position in the event no trade deal is agreed, but even if that's true it's pretty inflammatory. I'm not sure how the UK can really expect other countries to believe they are now negotiating in good faith, while saying that they are preparing to breach a previous agreement if a new one is not signed. I've been very critical of this sort of tactic from the US in recent years and I hate it that the UK is going down the same route.
Remember also that there is no mandate for leaving without a deal. All of the discussion leading up to the referendum result was that a new deal would be done and, while it remains too close to call whether people still support Brexit in principle, there has always been a clear majority against leaving without a deal.
Discussions between the UK and EU about a trade deal have been ongoing since March, but are now starting to hit the headlines again. Apart from the concentration on Covid-19, that's also because of the increasing recognition that time is running out and there may be no deal.
Although the UK has formally left the EU, the existing rules and regulations continue to apply until the end of the transition period at the end of December - so effectively Brexit has made no difference thus far. There will though be differences from January, particularly if no ongoing deal is agreed.
The general view has been that a deal needs to be agreed by the end of October, in order to have time for all countries to ratify it before the end of the year. However, the UK is now ratcheting up the pressure by saying a deal should be agreed by 15th October. In addition, it now appears that the UK will introduce its own legislation to remove some key aspects of the deal already made to leave the EU. This is described as a fallback position in the event no trade deal is agreed, but even if that's true it's pretty inflammatory. I'm not sure how the UK can really expect other countries to believe they are now negotiating in good faith, while saying that they are preparing to breach a previous agreement if a new one is not signed. I've been very critical of this sort of tactic from the US in recent years and I hate it that the UK is going down the same route.
Remember also that there is no mandate for leaving without a deal. All of the discussion leading up to the referendum result was that a new deal would be done and, while it remains too close to call whether people still support Brexit in principle, there has always been a clear majority against leaving without a deal.
No one can rival the US and UK in thinking they can dictate their terms to the rest of the world. Both countries were sold a fraudulent bill of goods by way of right-wing populism, and they both (to different degrees) have gotten the same result. Disastrous responses to the virus, and leaders who are a laughingstock on the world stage who no one with any sense trusts as far as they can throw them. I can't imagine why anyone would have ever believed Boris Johnson was operating in "good faith", or that Brexit itself was sold in any way that resembles the actual truth.
The last two conservative governments have proven themselves absolutely incapable of making said deal. Because maybe (just maybe) they know the actual consequences as well as the opponents do, and they want the issue in the abstract, not the reality of owning what would actually happen if it went all the way. Continue to beat the nationalist drum and rage against the EU in perpetuity, while still enjoying all the functional benefits of being a member without having to SAY you are a member.
So, yeah. This is MASSIVELY illegal and if the statute of limitations hasn't run out, DeJoy should be facing prison time for this bullshit. However, in the current climate, he likely won't even have to step down. This country is in the thrall of total gangsters from top to bottom:
That's why he was chosen. It's like in Breaking Bad when Walt was looking for a criminal lawyer, not just a defense attorney you know what I mean.
DeJoy was picked because he was a scumbag. You can say that GOP does not getting on the slimeballs they keep infecting the government but they obviously do research these guys. They scrape the bottom of the barrel and find the guys who are crooked as hell. They keep doing that as long as we key them.
Trump has a number of ongoing legal cases with the potential for embarrassment in the run-up to the election. One of those relates to the accusation of rape by E Jean Carroll. It's unlikely that could still be criminally prosecuted because of the time elapsed since the alleged incident (in 1995 or 1996), but Carroll has been trying to get round that by bringing a defamation suit in relation to Trump's denials. A particular point in question has been a New York ruling requiring Trump to provide a DNA sample - for checking against the dress that Carroll said she wore at the time.
I found this article giving a bit of information about precedents. I think he has enough of an argument that, if Trump gets a friendly judge, they will go along with it. Even if that doesn't happen though, Trump should be able to string the case out long enough to avoid having to comply with the requirement to provide DNA before November.
Is he capable of it? Sure, I think so anyway, not sure it matters anymore. No that sounds really callous, not sure it will change anything. I had a friend before the last election defend him and his “locker room talk”, she has since ceased talking to me. She is not the only girlfriend I have lost because of him. I don’t know what at this point could get his supporters to jump ship but I don’t think this is it.
What amazes me is how very many things he will one day have to answer for when he is no longer president. He has a pile stacked so high that if he doesn’t win the election I don’t see how he will ever crawl out from underneath it. I want to see that day with all my heart.
Not why I am posting though or what this is about. I fear that this last four years has changed things irrevocably in the government, and not for the better. He has changed things and set precedents that will have a lasting effect. How much has this childish megalomaniac changed my country? What will the next despot do?
Republicans are cool with spending tax dollars to help Trump get away with rape.
The party of "family values" ladies and gentlemen. Broke the "Law" and Trump "Orders" a pardon.
What a scummy national disgrace.
If Bill Clinton had used Janet Reno as basically his personal attorney and the DoJ as his in-house law firm, he would have been impeached and convicted in an entirely separate trial. Of course, even at the height of the Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky scandal, nothing like this EVER took place.
This is further proof of creeping, imminent authoritarianism. Trump is the State, and the State is Trump.
Bob Woodward has the scoop confirming what we all knew, straight from the horse's mouth. Trump knew how serious COVID-19 was, and LIED about it ON PURPOSE for over a month. That this man still has a better than puncher's chance of winning is a indictment of our entire society:
President Trump’s head popped up during his top-secret intelligence briefing in the Oval Office on Jan. 28 when the discussion turned to the novel coronavirus outbreak in China.
“This will be the biggest national security threat you face in your presidency,” national security adviser Robert O’Brien told Trump, according to a new book by Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward. “This is going to be the roughest thing you face.”
Matthew Pottinger, the deputy national security adviser, agreed. He told the president that after reaching contacts in China, it was evident that the world faced a health emergency on par with the flu pandemic of 1918, which killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide.
Ten days later, Trump called Woodward and revealed that he thought the situation was far more dire than what he had been saying publicly.
“You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed,” Trump said in a Feb. 7 call. “And so that’s a very tricky one. That’s a very delicate one. It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flu.”
“This is deadly stuff,” the president repeated for emphasis.
At that time, Trump was telling the nation that the virus was no worse than a seasonal flu, predicting it would soon disappear, and insisting that the U.S. government had it totally under control. It would be several weeks before he would publicly acknowledge that the virus was no ordinary flu and that it could be transmitted through the air.
Trump admitted to Woodward on March 19 that he deliberately minimized the danger. “I wanted to always play it down,” the president said.
The amount of people who died because of his use of the bully pulpit on this issue is immeasurable. The damage he did going forward in perpetuity by falsely presenting an altered reality of the virus to at least 35-40% of the population who trusts him is even more dire. Play it down. Unforgivable. But I forgive his Republican enablers and the people who still support him even less. Their callous disregard for the mass death we are seeing (often dismissed as "just old and sick people") is a reflection of their values. Trump is just their avatar. You got your death panels. And it was you who was ushering them in all along.
For the record, unlike the military story, Woodward has tapes (because of course he does). The sad thing is, that won't even matter. Yes, he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose an ounce of support. He could do much worse than that. Indeed, I believe he could do nearly anything at all and not move the needle at this point.
If this witness is describing events accurately, then it appears law enforcement officials went to confront the Portland suspect with the full intention of killing him rather than even attempting an arrest:
If this witness is describing events accurately, then it appears law enforcement officials went to confront the Portland suspect with the full intention of killing him rather than even attempting an arrest:
And this is why the States need SIUs. If I was Biden, I'd be pushing this right now. Screw the police unions, they are already backing Trump.
IMO, it was an ordered kill by the president. There is a tweet to back that claim up. Why federal agents were there in the first place is another mystery.
It also isn't surprising that the president and right wing media are labeling the protestors and vandals alike as Antifa at the same time attempting to get Antifa labelled as a terrorist group. It's just justification to murder them.
If this witness is describing events accurately, then it appears law enforcement officials went to confront the Portland suspect with the full intention of killing him rather than even attempting an arrest:
And this is why the States need SIUs. If I was Biden, I'd be pushing this right now. Screw the police unions, they are already backing Trump.
IMO, it was an ordered kill by the president. There is a tweet to back that claim up. Why federal agents were there in the first place is another mystery.
It also isn't surprising that the president and right wing media are labeling the protestors and vandals alike as Antifa at the same time attempting to get Antifa labelled as a terrorist group. It's just justification to murder them.
Based on the article, there may be an alternative explanation than a targeted assassination by the state of somebody of virtually no significance.
The Internet Archive, possibly the single most valuable resource on the internet, is being subjected to punitive lawsuits by some of the worst institutions in the country. If you have ever used them in any capacity, now would be a good time to donate if you can spare it.
I know I get a lot of use of them, because I love the 90's and early 2000's internet and the archive is the only way to see many sites as they once were.
Trump tweeted about the shooting that night. My off the cuff recollection is that it occurred AFTER all this had gone down, but I was only following Twitter passively that night.
If this guy pulled a gun on cops, then fine, I'm not losing sleep over it. I'm simply stipulating that if the witness who described things as I posted above IS relaying an accurate portrayal of the situation, then it's just another escalation. I don't know if I agree it was ordered from the top. I think cops do a fine job of killing people without getting orders to do so.
But I agree that I don't see what jurisdiction federal officers had here. If he killed someone in Portland, then that is matter for authorities in the state of Oregon. Incidentally, on the other side of the coin, the 17-year old shooter in Wisconsin WOULD have been a matter for federal authorities, since he crossed state lines in commission of the alleged crime.
Biden isn't going to touch this one, and I can't say I disagree. The campaign is finally back where it rightly should have been the whole time, which is a referendum on the federal response to COVID-19. Cops aren't going to change under a Biden Administration. The best you'll get is DoJ oversight over departments with clear track records of bias like they did under Obama. Which is a band-aid over a gushing head wound, but I guess better than nothing at all.
The Internet Archive, possibly the single most valuable resource on the internet, is being subjected to punitive lawsuits by some of the worst institutions in the country. If you have ever used them in any capacity, now would be a good time to donate if you can spare it.
I know I get a lot of use of them, because I love the 90's and early 2000's internet and the archive is the only way to see many sites as they once were.
There was a time when Lycos was my preferred search engine, and it used to take 5 minutes for a nude photo to load. Everything else in regards to 90s nostalgia is instantly available on the web (the TV shows, the movies, the music) but the one thing that really isn't is the actual first-gen websites. There are still a couple RPG websites I have bookmarked that are still active from the early-2000s, but every few months another one of them finally vanishes.
If this witness is describing events accurately, then it appears law enforcement officials went to confront the Portland suspect with the full intention of killing him rather than even attempting an arrest:
And this is why the States need SIUs. If I was Biden, I'd be pushing this right now. Screw the police unions, they are already backing Trump.
IMO, it was an ordered kill by the president. There is a tweet to back that claim up. Why federal agents were there in the first place is another mystery.
It also isn't surprising that the president and right wing media are labeling the protestors and vandals alike as Antifa at the same time attempting to get Antifa labelled as a terrorist group. It's just justification to murder them.
Based on the article, there may be an alternative explanation than a targeted assassination by the state of somebody of virtually no significance.
"The man got out of his vehicle and began to fire what they believe was an assault rifle at the SUVs. They said they heard 40 or 50 shots, then officers returned fire, hitting the man."
This was the tweet in question. When I first read it, I was "Portland Police can't do anything, he isn't in their jurisdiction at the moment" then I read the comments that the guy was dead. Reading a bit more however, I realize that the cops killed him at 7 p.m. and not after the Vice Interview aired at 11 p.m. which lines up with Trump's tweet. Timeline confusion on my part but mostly to do with a lot of the articles about the incident being published around 11 o'clock that evening.
On that note, since we always talk about the media being "liberal" (and, as I've mentioned a million times before, ignoring ALL of radio in the definition of "media") you can add Facebook to the list of massively influential media outlets that swing massively to the right yet are exempt from being labeled as such. So I have to ask, if AM radio is 95%+ conservative, if the highest-rated cable news channel is basically Pravda, and the most influential website in history (outside of maybe Youtube) is OBJECTIVELY right-wing by any measure, how is it not time to put this ridiculous narrative to bed?? It's only possible if you outright ignore certain mediums where the right has a near complete monopoly and/or massive slant.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
On that note, since we always talk about the media being "liberal" (and, as I've mentioned a million times before, ignoring ALL of radio in the definition of "media") you can add Facebook to the list of massively influential media outlets that swing massively to the right yet are exempt from being labeled as such. So I have to ask, if AM radio is 95%+ conservative, if the highest-rated cable news channel is basically Pravda, and the most influential website in history (outside of maybe Youtube) is OBJECTIVELY right-wing by any measure, how is it not time to put this ridiculous narrative to bed?? It's only possible if you outright ignore certain mediums where the right has a near complete monopoly and/or massive slant.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
Arguing with zealots rarely leads to anything productive...
On that note, since we always talk about the media being "liberal" (and, as I've mentioned a million times before, ignoring ALL of radio in the definition of "media") you can add Facebook to the list of massively influential media outlets that swing massively to the right yet are exempt from being labeled as such. So I have to ask, if AM radio is 95%+ conservative, if the highest-rated cable news channel is basically Pravda, and the most influential website in history (outside of maybe Youtube) is OBJECTIVELY right-wing by any measure, how is it not time to put this ridiculous narrative to bed?? It's only possible if you outright ignore certain mediums where the right has a near complete monopoly and/or massive slant.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
Arguing with zealots rarely leads to anything productive...
Speaking of which......I mean, this is just another version of blood libel. In fact, I don't even think it's another version, it just got a quick paint-job. Q isn't a novel conspiracy theory. It's the oldest conspiracy theory in the book that just happens to now be going viral because Boomers believe their Facebook feed is leading them to the location of the Ark of the Covenant:
This is almost identical to the "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s (which posters here should be intimately familiar with because of D&D getting cast into it). It wasn't a joke. Actual daycare providers had their lives destroyed because law enforcement officials coached children to admit to being used in satanic sex rituals in dark, underground chambers. It's the reason the West Memphis Three were in prison for over a decade despite absolutely no physical evidence linking them to the crime. I guess what I'm saying is that Q isn't even original. It's a shitty remake that is getting mass distribution.
On that note, since we always talk about the media being "liberal" (and, as I've mentioned a million times before, ignoring ALL of radio in the definition of "media") you can add Facebook to the list of massively influential media outlets that swing massively to the right yet are exempt from being labeled as such. So I have to ask, if AM radio is 95%+ conservative, if the highest-rated cable news channel is basically Pravda, and the most influential website in history (outside of maybe Youtube) is OBJECTIVELY right-wing by any measure, how is it not time to put this ridiculous narrative to bed?? It's only possible if you outright ignore certain mediums where the right has a near complete monopoly and/or massive slant.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
Arguing with zealots rarely leads to anything productive...
Speaking of which......I mean, this is just another version of blood libel. In fact, I don't even think it's another version, it just got a quick paint-job. Q isn't a novel conspiracy theory. It's the oldest conspiracy theory in the book that just happens to now be going viral because Boomers believe their Facebook feed is leading them to the location of the Ark of the Covenant:
This is almost identical to the "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s (which posters here should be intimately familiar with because of D&D getting cast into it). It wasn't a joke. Actual daycare providers had their lives destroyed because law enforcement officials coached children to admit to being used in satanic sex rituals in dark, underground chambers. It's the reason the West Memphis Three were in prison for over a decade despite absolutely no physical evidence linking them to the crime. I guess what I'm saying is that Q isn't even original. It's a shitty remake that is getting mass distribution.
Last line:
‘We’re living in an alternate reality.’
Ya think?
On that note, since we always talk about the media being "liberal" (and, as I've mentioned a million times before, ignoring ALL of radio in the definition of "media") you can add Facebook to the list of massively influential media outlets that swing massively to the right yet are exempt from being labeled as such. So I have to ask, if AM radio is 95%+ conservative, if the highest-rated cable news channel is basically Pravda, and the most influential website in history (outside of maybe Youtube) is OBJECTIVELY right-wing by any measure, how is it not time to put this ridiculous narrative to bed?? It's only possible if you outright ignore certain mediums where the right has a near complete monopoly and/or massive slant.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
Arguing with zealots rarely leads to anything productive...
Speaking of which......I mean, this is just another version of blood libel. In fact, I don't even think it's another version, it just got a quick paint-job. Q isn't a novel conspiracy theory. It's the oldest conspiracy theory in the book that just happens to now be going viral because Boomers believe their Facebook feed is leading them to the location of the Ark of the Covenant:
This is almost identical to the "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s (which posters here should be intimately familiar with because of D&D getting cast into it). It wasn't a joke. Actual daycare providers had their lives destroyed because law enforcement officials coached children to admit to being used in satanic sex rituals in dark, underground chambers. It's the reason the West Memphis Three were in prison for over a decade despite absolutely no physical evidence linking them to the crime. I guess what I'm saying is that Q isn't even original. It's a shitty remake that is getting mass distribution.
Last line:
‘We’re living in an alternate reality.’
Ya think?
I mean, imagine thinking a Joe Biden victory is so apocalyptic that you would consider ritualistic suicide of your entire family by carbon monoxide poisoning.
I mean, let's say Trump wins. My first thoughts would not immediately turn to a warm bath and a razor, nevermind dragging loved ones along with you. The 30% immovable Trump base is a death cult. And at this point, I don't much care if they want to drink the Kool-Aid. They've been told over and over it is laced with poison. But they are insisting on not only drinking it, but dumping it into the public water supply.
I guess what I'm saying is that Q isn't even original. It's a shitty remake that is getting mass distribution.
Satanic Panic: Enhanced Edition
There is a full episode of Geraldo from back in the day about the subject on YouTube and it's absolutely bonkers what people just assumed was taking place as a matter of general knowledge.
Comments
I don't necessarily believe this guy's self-defense claim anymore than I do Rittenhouse. People taking guns to volatile protests are, in my mind, actively seeking a reason to use them. 99% of people aren't carrying them. And there is a big difference between smashed windows and blowing someone's head off.
That said, I have no doubt the cops were looking for any pretext to take this guy out as quickly as possible. They will freak out over an autistic kid walking home from a grocery store and call medics to inject him with a ketamine dosage that eventually kills him. What chance does someone like this have of getting out alive??
I'd argue that since a US President is able to move troops in the armed forces anywhere he pleases at any time, the fact that he views them as gullible, worthless meatbags is indeed a grave policy concern.
It reveals how he views humanity in general. He believes at his core if you play by the rules and don't cheat to get ahead, you are, to him, a sucker and a loser. So I'd ask supporters to think long and hard about how he views THEM, because it's the EXACT same way. Howard Stern had it 100% right when he said Trump wouldn't let any of his rally-goers within 100 yards of one of his resort properties.
Although the UK has formally left the EU, the existing rules and regulations continue to apply until the end of the transition period at the end of December - so effectively Brexit has made no difference thus far. There will though be differences from January, particularly if no ongoing deal is agreed.
The general view has been that a deal needs to be agreed by the end of October, in order to have time for all countries to ratify it before the end of the year. However, the UK is now ratcheting up the pressure by saying a deal should be agreed by 15th October. In addition, it now appears that the UK will introduce its own legislation to remove some key aspects of the deal already made to leave the EU. This is described as a fallback position in the event no trade deal is agreed, but even if that's true it's pretty inflammatory. I'm not sure how the UK can really expect other countries to believe they are now negotiating in good faith, while saying that they are preparing to breach a previous agreement if a new one is not signed. I've been very critical of this sort of tactic from the US in recent years and I hate it that the UK is going down the same route.
Remember also that there is no mandate for leaving without a deal. All of the discussion leading up to the referendum result was that a new deal would be done and, while it remains too close to call whether people still support Brexit in principle, there has always been a clear majority against leaving without a deal.
No one can rival the US and UK in thinking they can dictate their terms to the rest of the world. Both countries were sold a fraudulent bill of goods by way of right-wing populism, and they both (to different degrees) have gotten the same result. Disastrous responses to the virus, and leaders who are a laughingstock on the world stage who no one with any sense trusts as far as they can throw them. I can't imagine why anyone would have ever believed Boris Johnson was operating in "good faith", or that Brexit itself was sold in any way that resembles the actual truth.
The last two conservative governments have proven themselves absolutely incapable of making said deal. Because maybe (just maybe) they know the actual consequences as well as the opponents do, and they want the issue in the abstract, not the reality of owning what would actually happen if it went all the way. Continue to beat the nationalist drum and rage against the EU in perpetuity, while still enjoying all the functional benefits of being a member without having to SAY you are a member.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/09/07/superfund-activists-donald-trump-minden-wv-400921
That's why he was chosen. It's like in Breaking Bad when Walt was looking for a criminal lawyer, not just a defense attorney you know what I mean.
DeJoy was picked because he was a scumbag. You can say that GOP does not getting on the slimeballs they keep infecting the government but they obviously do research these guys. They scrape the bottom of the barrel and find the guys who are crooked as hell. They keep doing that as long as we key them.
The latest twist is that the Department of Justice has said that Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he denied the allegations. The relevance of that is that the federal government cannot be sued for defamation, so if Trump was deemed to be acting in his official capacity that would end the current case.
I found this article giving a bit of information about precedents. I think he has enough of an argument that, if Trump gets a friendly judge, they will go along with it. Even if that doesn't happen though, Trump should be able to string the case out long enough to avoid having to comply with the requirement to provide DNA before November.
What amazes me is how very many things he will one day have to answer for when he is no longer president. He has a pile stacked so high that if he doesn’t win the election I don’t see how he will ever crawl out from underneath it. I want to see that day with all my heart.
Not why I am posting though or what this is about. I fear that this last four years has changed things irrevocably in the government, and not for the better. He has changed things and set precedents that will have a lasting effect. How much has this childish megalomaniac changed my country? What will the next despot do?
The party of "family values" ladies and gentlemen. Broke the "Law" and Trump "Orders" a pardon.
What a scummy national disgrace.
If Bill Clinton had used Janet Reno as basically his personal attorney and the DoJ as his in-house law firm, he would have been impeached and convicted in an entirely separate trial. Of course, even at the height of the Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky scandal, nothing like this EVER took place.
This is further proof of creeping, imminent authoritarianism. Trump is the State, and the State is Trump.
President Trump’s head popped up during his top-secret intelligence briefing in the Oval Office on Jan. 28 when the discussion turned to the novel coronavirus outbreak in China.
“This will be the biggest national security threat you face in your presidency,” national security adviser Robert O’Brien told Trump, according to a new book by Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward. “This is going to be the roughest thing you face.”
Matthew Pottinger, the deputy national security adviser, agreed. He told the president that after reaching contacts in China, it was evident that the world faced a health emergency on par with the flu pandemic of 1918, which killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide.
Ten days later, Trump called Woodward and revealed that he thought the situation was far more dire than what he had been saying publicly.
“You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed,” Trump said in a Feb. 7 call. “And so that’s a very tricky one. That’s a very delicate one. It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flu.”
“This is deadly stuff,” the president repeated for emphasis.
At that time, Trump was telling the nation that the virus was no worse than a seasonal flu, predicting it would soon disappear, and insisting that the U.S. government had it totally under control. It would be several weeks before he would publicly acknowledge that the virus was no ordinary flu and that it could be transmitted through the air.
Trump admitted to Woodward on March 19 that he deliberately minimized the danger. “I wanted to always play it down,” the president said.
The amount of people who died because of his use of the bully pulpit on this issue is immeasurable. The damage he did going forward in perpetuity by falsely presenting an altered reality of the virus to at least 35-40% of the population who trusts him is even more dire. Play it down. Unforgivable. But I forgive his Republican enablers and the people who still support him even less. Their callous disregard for the mass death we are seeing (often dismissed as "just old and sick people") is a reflection of their values. Trump is just their avatar. You got your death panels. And it was you who was ushering them in all along.
For the record, unlike the military story, Woodward has tapes (because of course he does). The sad thing is, that won't even matter. Yes, he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose an ounce of support. He could do much worse than that. Indeed, I believe he could do nearly anything at all and not move the needle at this point.
And this is why the States need SIUs. If I was Biden, I'd be pushing this right now. Screw the police unions, they are already backing Trump.
IMO, it was an ordered kill by the president. There is a tweet to back that claim up. Why federal agents were there in the first place is another mystery.
It also isn't surprising that the president and right wing media are labeling the protestors and vandals alike as Antifa at the same time attempting to get Antifa labelled as a terrorist group. It's just justification to murder them.
Based on the article, there may be an alternative explanation than a targeted assassination by the state of somebody of virtually no significance.
I know I get a lot of use of them, because I love the 90's and early 2000's internet and the archive is the only way to see many sites as they once were.
Trump tweeted about the shooting that night. My off the cuff recollection is that it occurred AFTER all this had gone down, but I was only following Twitter passively that night.
If this guy pulled a gun on cops, then fine, I'm not losing sleep over it. I'm simply stipulating that if the witness who described things as I posted above IS relaying an accurate portrayal of the situation, then it's just another escalation. I don't know if I agree it was ordered from the top. I think cops do a fine job of killing people without getting orders to do so.
But I agree that I don't see what jurisdiction federal officers had here. If he killed someone in Portland, then that is matter for authorities in the state of Oregon. Incidentally, on the other side of the coin, the 17-year old shooter in Wisconsin WOULD have been a matter for federal authorities, since he crossed state lines in commission of the alleged crime.
Biden isn't going to touch this one, and I can't say I disagree. The campaign is finally back where it rightly should have been the whole time, which is a referendum on the federal response to COVID-19. Cops aren't going to change under a Biden Administration. The best you'll get is DoJ oversight over departments with clear track records of bias like they did under Obama. Which is a band-aid over a gushing head wound, but I guess better than nothing at all.
There was a time when Lycos was my preferred search engine, and it used to take 5 minutes for a nude photo to load. Everything else in regards to 90s nostalgia is instantly available on the web (the TV shows, the movies, the music) but the one thing that really isn't is the actual first-gen websites. There are still a couple RPG websites I have bookmarked that are still active from the early-2000s, but every few months another one of them finally vanishes.
Yep. And those witnesses are full of it.
https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/state/washington/article245487235.html
"The man got out of his vehicle and began to fire what they believe was an assault rifle at the SUVs. They said they heard 40 or 50 shots, then officers returned fire, hitting the man."
Yet only a hand gun was recovered and cops would not confirm if it had been fired or not.
https://nypost.com/2020/09/04/alleged-portland-shooter-michael-reinoehl-had-gun-when-killed-cops/
I am not a gun expert, but a handgun does not hold 40 bullets.
The story the cops and media have been telling about this incident have been falling apart from the beginning.
This was the tweet in question. When I first read it, I was "Portland Police can't do anything, he isn't in their jurisdiction at the moment" then I read the comments that the guy was dead. Reading a bit more however, I realize that the cops killed him at 7 p.m. and not after the Vice Interview aired at 11 p.m. which lines up with Trump's tweet. Timeline confusion on my part but mostly to do with a lot of the articles about the incident being published around 11 o'clock that evening.
The definition of the "media" as it is currently portrayed basically amounts to "CNN, the NYT, and The Washington Post". I mean, let's get serious for a minute here. Most people do not read those two newspapers. Everyone gets in their car. Almost everyone (besides me and others who abandoned the cesspit long ago) logs onto Facebook multiple times a day. We need to stop pretending two newspapers and CNN are the only thing that deserve to be categorized with this definition. Of course, this is done on purpose to serve the overriding narrative. But the narrative is bullshit:
Why did I leave Facebook?? It was about 2 or 3 days after the Sandy Hook shooting. I was arguing with the friends of a friend about my very simple position that while you CAN kill people with things other than a gun, and gun makes it infinitely easier to kill people, kill more people, and kill those people fast. The counter-argument being presented to me was that if Adam Lanza had not had a gun, he would have still found a way to kill two dozen children. So I called them out and asked them how, by hitting them all over the head individually with a mallet or poisoning the snack tray?? They still wouldn't budge. This was damn near a decade ago at this point. I logged out, deactivated the account, and have never gone back. This was brewing for a LONG time.
Arguing with zealots rarely leads to anything productive...
Speaking of which......I mean, this is just another version of blood libel. In fact, I don't even think it's another version, it just got a quick paint-job. Q isn't a novel conspiracy theory. It's the oldest conspiracy theory in the book that just happens to now be going viral because Boomers believe their Facebook feed is leading them to the location of the Ark of the Covenant:
This is almost identical to the "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s (which posters here should be intimately familiar with because of D&D getting cast into it). It wasn't a joke. Actual daycare providers had their lives destroyed because law enforcement officials coached children to admit to being used in satanic sex rituals in dark, underground chambers. It's the reason the West Memphis Three were in prison for over a decade despite absolutely no physical evidence linking them to the crime. I guess what I'm saying is that Q isn't even original. It's a shitty remake that is getting mass distribution.
Last line:
‘We’re living in an alternate reality.’
Ya think?
I mean, imagine thinking a Joe Biden victory is so apocalyptic that you would consider ritualistic suicide of your entire family by carbon monoxide poisoning.
I mean, let's say Trump wins. My first thoughts would not immediately turn to a warm bath and a razor, nevermind dragging loved ones along with you. The 30% immovable Trump base is a death cult. And at this point, I don't much care if they want to drink the Kool-Aid. They've been told over and over it is laced with poison. But they are insisting on not only drinking it, but dumping it into the public water supply.
Satanic Panic: Enhanced Edition
There is a full episode of Geraldo from back in the day about the subject on YouTube and it's absolutely bonkers what people just assumed was taking place as a matter of general knowledge.