Who Are the Real Insurrectionists?

[Rich2018]

That could happen. No one really knows what could happen.

No, no-one KNOWS the future

But I think that he will be the Republican nominee come November and he will lose to Joe Biden
I think Trump will be convicted in at least one and possibly all his criminal trials (the documents case in Florida is looking like a right wing judge will de-rail it), and that he will probably get a custodial sentence
But he'll serve no jail time before 2025.

 

[jaypatriot]

No, no-one KNOWS the future

But I think that he will be the Republican nominee come November and he will lose to Joe Biden
I think Trump will be convicted in at least one and possibly all his criminal trials (the documents case in Florida is looking like a right wing judge will de-rail it), and that he will probably get a custodial sentence
But he'll serve no jail time before 2025.

OK. Your opinion of the future is well noted.
Anything can happen.

 

[Ouroboros]

Except you have shown nothing of the sort.

Lie to yourself as you please.

Walrusing doesn't become you either.

That's OK that you don't know the term for what you were doing.

Because you confuse opinion with fact, thus muddying your replies.

I'm still not responsible for your failure to read my posts to you or your disinclination to use the back button and reference them. Your attempt to make me repeat information you can easily find is just a transparent gambit to be annoying, not any sort of quest for clarity.

You deliberately denigrated my education as "programming".

Same old hypocrisy. I didn't pretend to know anything about the processes by which you let yourself be brainwashed, whereas you claimed knowledge of my level of education; knowledge that even you know you do not possess. It's just more weaselly Mad Lib rhetoric: you can't refute me, so you attempt to insult some imagined group to which you CLAIM I belong. Sounds a lot like the Red Scare you supposedly decry, wherein people were condemned for being "fellow travelers."

They prove that Britain was subject to attacks by Soviet Intelligence, just as the UA was

I didn't say Britain was never attacked by the Soviets. You made an exaggerated claim for the British love of freedom and I showed that there could be at least one obvious reason that the Soviets weren't as pervasive there. Your irrelevant citation of Soviet operations in Britain in no way proves that Britons were more tolerant of Commies overall.

 

[Ouroboros]

Part 2--

And despite this, and despite the activities of communist leaning radical groups like CND, Britain never experienced the paranoia of a communist bogeyman - hence no political parties were banned*, no public investigations into "un-British" Activities, no cultural blacklist
This is absolutely proof that Britain cherishes freedom more than the USA does, and the US Bill of Rights is a pure sham.

(on a side note, Britain never even banned Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA, even through the period of Irish Republican terrorism).

No, you've oversimplified the historical situation in Britain to gin up some hate for American conservatives, when in fact there are accounts you choose to ignore about UK anti-communism.

Here's a thorough article about British McCarthyism.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1468-229X.13326

You will notice (or maybe not) that the concluding paragraph does not mention "the British love of freedom" as to why McCarthyism had fewer dramatic manifestations in the UK.

The fundamental roadblocks for British McCarthyism in not eliciting the hysteria that its Atlantic cousin garnered rested in the unitary form of parliamentary government, strict party discipline, the lack of investigative and a non-politicised civil service. By contrast, in America McCarthy was constitutionally permitted to engage in aggressive and intrusive investigations, which received national publicity and worldwide attention.

No, you did so though when you said:

Bragging that the UK suffered nothing like the espionage that the USA did
Well the UK did - as shown - but did not react in the same hysterical (and un-democratic) manner that the USA did.

I didn't "brag;" you did. And I'm still not hearing you condemn Russian spy activity in either nation, so that "proves" your endorsement of Soviet Russia as much as anything your side "proved" about the Trump regime as a whole.

Based on the utterings of Trump and other Republicans

Meet the pro-Putin Republicans and conservatives - Republican Accountability

Only 5 percent of Republicans support Russia over Ukraine, but the MAGA wing of the GOP has continually sided with Putin and against Ukraine. Current and former elected officials, candidates for office, and media figures who are popular with the MAGA base have a history of pro-Russia comments...

accountability.gop

And the blocking/delaying tactics of Republican members of Congress

And the shameful support from the likes of staunch Republican cheerleaders like Tucker Carlson.


Republicans are anything but pro-Ukraine, with some like MTG describing Ukraine as "Nazis" - straight out of Putin's rhetoric.

More dithering deflection, to conceal that your side utterly failed to find substantial collusion with Russia.

What is a tragedy, is that Republicans truly believe they hold this imagined moral high ground...

So what say you?
Should the USA keep delivering economic/military aid to the Ukraine, or are they indeed just a bunch of Nazis like the GOP darling says ?

You've still lost any moral high ground since you won't condemn Russian spying activities. As yet you have not even admitted to their activities in the US, because that would damage your narrative that McCarthyism was purely hysterical in nature.

Let's see this alleged quote from whatever "GOP darling" you've failed to name outright.

 

[Rich2018]

OK. Your opinion of the future is well noted.
Anything can happen.

Yes, but reasonable people temper that with the application of "likelihood".

 

[Rich2018]

Lie to yourself as you please.

Aspersions of dishonesty now. Quite the character assassin aren't we when it suits you ?
And to think you got all precious regarding the quality of your education.

That's OK that you don't know the term for what you were doing

I also forgive you for your walrusing.

I'm still not responsible for your failure to read my posts....

Or seemingly your ability to write clearly.

Same old hypocrisy.

That's OK that you don't know what hypocrisy is.

I didn't pretend to know anything about the processes by which you let yourself be brainwashed...

Now you level aspersions that my education was "brainwashing"
You're quite enamored with this personal abuse thing aren't you....not good but enamered.

I didn't say Britain was never attacked by the Soviets.

But you definitely derided the threat of Soviet espionage to the UK, when you said:

One reason the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period...is because they unlike the US wouldn't have had as many Soviet spies lurking around, trying to steal data on nuclear tech

 

[Rich2018]

....you've oversimplified the historical situation in Britain to gin up some hate for American conservatives, when in fact there are accounts you choose to ignore about UK anti-communism.

Oh we were burning the midnight oil trying to find examples of British anti-communism huh ?

But then that doesn't really gel with what you said earlier:

One reason the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period is because they unlike the US wouldn't have had as many Soviet spies lurking around, trying to steal data on nuclear tech

So which is it as you contradict yourself ?????

Fact is that there was no "anti-commie" (as you so sweetly put it), witch hunt in the UK
The Communist party wasn't banned
Communists still had the freedom of association
Communists could still publish literature/periodicals etc
There were no Parliamentary investigations into "Un-British" Activities
There was no cultural blacklist

A former foreign office secretary and an MP huh ? (not really the same as a House committee on "Un-American Activities was it ?
The Communist party must have been quaking in its boots....it's amazing that the Communist "Morning Star" newspaper ever got published
/s

America should take note and learn.

I didn't "brag;" you did....]

That quote again:

One reason the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period is because they unlike the US wouldn't have had as many Soviet spies lurking around, trying to steal data on nuclear tech

Certainly sounds like a brag to me. You were bragging that the all powerful USA was subject to a much great Soviet espionage threat than the tiny UK
Anyway, I glad to have corrected you on this with the UK espionage cases I've alluded to.

More dithering deflection, to conceal that your side utterly failed to find substantial collusion with Russia.

I said support not collusion. Learn the difference and how to read.

You've still lost any moral high ground....

Whereas you imagine that you still hold it.

 

[jaypatriot]

Yes, but reasonable people temper that with the application of "likelihood".

In all 'likelihood', you may be right.

 

[Rich2018]

In all 'likelihood', you may be right.

I think so. And so do many political commentators.

 

[Ouroboros]

Aspersions of dishonesty now. Quite the character assassin aren't we when it suits you ?
And to think you got all precious regarding the quality of your education.

I already know my education in debate exceeds yours because you've shown your total inability. That's a judgment on what you've said, not on what you are personally. And making direct imputations about a poster's personal background remains against Forum Rules. I can state all day long that your argument is dishonest; that's totally legit, and you're just flailing in desperation.

I also forgive you for your walrusing.

I'm just happy you've learned that you're no good at sealioning. Maybe in the course of this dialogue, you'll stumble across some debate tactic that works.

Or seemingly your ability to write clearly.

"Seemingly?" You mean you're backing off your claim already?

That's OK that you don't know what hypocrisy is.

I know the beam in your eye is bigger than any mote in mine.

Now you level aspersions that my education was "brainwashing"
You're quite enamored with this personal abuse thing aren't you....not good but enamered.

"Processes" is not the same as "education." If you learned your rap from sitting in front of CNN, as I suspect, that would not be "education."

But you definitely derided the threat of Soviet espionage to the UK, when you said:

"Not as many" is still not "none."

 

[Ouroboros]

Oh we were burning the midnight oil trying to find examples of British anti-communism huh ?

But then that doesn't really gel with what you said earlier:


So which is it as you contradict yourself ?????

There's no contradiction, because I phrased the first quote as a possibility, not an actuality. It only took a little research-- clearly more than you did-- to find out that you misrepresented the UK"s lack of an anti-Commie "witch hunt," and that you continue to do so. What the cited essay proves is that such anti Communist fervor existed and had real effects upon British society. The persecution (justified or not) simply didn't become a government policy, and the essay mentions that this was also partly because of the influence of the Labour Party. The most you can claim would be that British Liberals closed ranks against British Conservatives, whereas in the US the Libs joined the Cons in decrying Communist influence.

BTW I'm sure you were fascinated with the essay's estimation that Democrat Truman's anti-Communist executive order resulted in 560 job terminations or non-hirings, whereas the number the author attributed directly to Republican McCarthy's actions was about half that. I'm glad you went down this deflection hole; I may be able to use the true data in future, and might not have found it except for your nonsense argument.

Fact is that there was no "anti-commie" (as you so sweetly put it), witch hunt in the UK
The Communist party wasn't banned
Communists still had the freedom of association
Communists could still publish literature/periodicals etc
There were no Parliamentary investigations into "Un-British" Activities
There was no cultural blacklist

Answered above.

A former foreign office secretary and an MP huh ? (not really the same as a House committee on "Un-American Activities was it ?
The Communist party must have been quaking in its boots....it's amazing that the Communist "Morning Star" newspaper ever got published
/s

America should take note and learn.

Americans still had more to lose from Russian spies, and their spycraft had real effects that you still won't admit.

That quote again:


Certainly sounds like a brag to me. You were bragging that the all powerful USA was subject to a much great Soviet espionage threat than the tiny UK
Anyway, I glad to have corrected you on this with the UK espionage cases I've alluded to.

It's just a fact that the US had technology that Russia wanted to steal, and did steal. Britain did not have the bomb, so clearly the Soviets did not present the same threat-level. Happy to correct you on your misapprehension.

I said support not collusion. Learn the difference and how to read.

"Collusion" was the Dem narrative (however flawed it was in a legal sense) and that's the narrative being discussed.

Whereas you imagine that you still hold it.

I can't help but stand higher when you've descended so deeply.

 

[Rich2018]

I already know my education in debate exceeds yours...

Yes well experience shows that what you think you know is anything but:

Case in point:
"Education in debate" ?
Experience, even skill perhaps....but education in debate ?
You do love using your own private language

I'm just happy you've learned that you're no good at sealioning [SIC]. Maybe in the course of this dialogue, you'll stumble across some debate tactic that works.

Like you no good at "walrusing" ?

"Seemingly?" You mean you're backing off your claim already?

Another deficiency in your vocabulary
So much for your superior education huh ?

I know the beam in your eye is bigger than any mote in mine.

And perhaps you also know that your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees ?
At least in your own mind.

"Processes" is not the same as "education." If you learned your rap from sitting in front of CNN, as I suspect, that would not be "education."

So you've got something against CNN now ?

"Not as many" is still not "none."

Britain did not ban as many political parties as the USA did


In fact it didn't ban any.

 

[Rich2018]

There's no contradiction....

So now you're backtracking. First you say that:

...one reason the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period is because they unlike the US wouldn't have had as many Soviet spies...

Then after the stinging criticism of your beloved country, you burned the midnight oil to find evidence of anti-communism in the UK and said:

...when in fact there are accounts you choose to ignore about UK anti-communism

So when you were ignorant of the Soviet espionage, in the UK post-WWII, you claimed "the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period"
Then when your beloved country was criticized, you try to make out that the UK ***DID*** have an "anti-Commie period", and just as bad as the USA

Except it wasn't:
Britain suffered no "anti-commie" (as you so sweetly put it), witch hunt
The Communist party wasn't banned
Communists still had the freedom of association
Communists could still publish literature/periodicals etc
There were no Parliamentary investigations into "Un-British" Activities
There was no cultural blacklist

Sorry Ouroboros, you and the truth make strange bedfellows.

....Democrat Truman's anti-Communist executive order resulted in 560 job terminations or non-hirings...

So the Republicans were OK, because the Democrats were almost as bad
LOL, the psychology of the school yard.

Sorry Ouroboros, your beloved country isn't the paradigm of justice and freedom, that you'd like to believe
Then again, maybe it befits the country that founded itself on the only pro-slavery national constitution ever.

Americans still had more to lose from Russian spies, and their spycraft had real effects that you still won't admit.

There's that bragging again.

"Collusion" was the Dem narrative (however flawed it was in a legal sense) and that's the narrative being discussed.

Citation ?

I can't help but stand higher when you've descended so deeply.

This up/down thing is must be so confusing when the moral compass is absent.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yes well experience shows that what you think you know is anything but:

Case in point:
"Education in debate" ?
Experience, even skill perhaps....but education in debate ?
You do love using your own private language

Ah, this is a cry for help. You can't find books that might educate you in the rigors of debate. I shall take pity on you this time.

Rules, Forms & Manuals | National Speech & Debate Association

[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”Header – General Page” fullwidth=”on” custom_padding_last_edited=”on|desktop” _builder_version=”3.0.47″ background_color=”#00aae7″ background_image=”https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/2016-GFX-Blue-Header-Bar.png”...

www.speechanddebate.org

Like you no good at "walrusing" ?

You no good at verbs either? Or did you learn English from Bizarro?

Another deficiency in your vocabulary
So much for your superior education huh ?

"Seemingly" means you're not sure. So much for your vaunted certitude.

And perhaps you also know that your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees ?
At least in your own mind.

No-- that interpretation is in YOUR mind.

So you've got something against CNN now ?

A catalog of CNN's faults is not germane to the thread.

Britain did not ban as many political parties as the USA did

And the only thing this could possibly prove is that Democrats of the fifties were as implicated as Republicans in whatever illegitimate banning occurred.

In fact it didn't ban any.

See above.

 

[Ouroboros]

So now you're backtracking. First you say that:

Then after the stinging criticism of your beloved country, you burned the midnight oil to find evidence of anti-communism in the UK and said:


So when you were ignorant of the Soviet espionage, in the UK post-WWII, you claimed "the UK might not have had an anti-Commie period"
Then when your beloved country was criticized, you try to make out that the UK ***DID*** have an "anti-Commie period", and just as bad as the USA

Except it wasn't:
Britain suffered no "anti-commie" (as you so sweetly put it), witch hunt
The Communist party wasn't banned
Communists still had the freedom of association
Communists could still publish literature/periodicals etc
There were no Parliamentary investigations into "Un-British" Activities
There was no cultural blacklist

Sorry Ouroboros, you and the truth make strange bedfellows.

There's no backtracking because my first statement was speculative, not declarative like yours. I did not pretend knowledge of a minor historical subject that didn't interest me, so that's not "ignorance." "Ignorance" lies at your door after claiming knowledge of that minor historical subject, and having it proven, by my cited essay, that you did not have such knowledge.

So the Republicans were OK, because the Democrats were almost as bad
LOL, the psychology of the school yard.

Nope, school yard psychology is the essence of your "neener neener, my side is utterly pure and your side is poopy"

Sorry Ouroboros, your beloved country isn't the paradigm of justice and freedom, that you'd like to believe
Then again, maybe it befits the country that founded itself on the only pro-slavery national constitution ever.

Do you nurture even a slight recollection of the original topic of this thread?

There's that bragging again.

Mad Libs often like to think of statements of fact as bragging.

Citation ?

Read a newspaper.

This up/down thing is must be so confusing when the moral compass is absent.

I'm here to help you through your confusion.

 

[Sandokan]

Unlike the violent riots that swept the country in the summer of 2020 that caused around $2 billion in property damage and claimed more than 20 lives, the January 6 protest at the Capitol that lasted a few hours, caused minimal damage, and the only person directly killed was an unarmed female who was shot by a Capitol Police officer. The January 6 prosecution’s cases are falling apart. Most of those who have been arrested are being charged with trespassing, no one with insurrection.

 

[Fledermaus]

Unlike the violent riots that swept the country in the summer of 2020 that caused around $2 billion in property damage and claimed more than 20 lives, the January 6 protest at the Capitol that lasted a few hours, caused minimal damage, and the only person directly killed was an unarmed female who was shot by a Capitol Police officer. The January 6 prosecution’s cases are falling apart. Most of those who have been arrested are being charged with trespassing, no one with insurrection.

An armed insurrection against our country. The intent was to block the confirmation of our legally elected president.

Very Banana Republic.....

And a national disgrace.

 

[eohrnberger]

Unlike the violent riots that swept the country in the summer of 2020 that caused around $2 billion in property damage and claimed more than 20 lives, the January 6 protest at the Capitol that lasted a few hours, caused minimal damage, and the only person directly killed was an unarmed female who was shot by a Capitol Police officer. The January 6 prosecution’s cases are falling apart. Most of those who have been arrested are being charged with trespassing, no one with insurrection.

1/6 is blown totally out of any sense of reasonable proportions by those left of center because of their use of 1/6 for political advantage, and others who only parrot what those people say and post, which includes the DNC political propagandist lamestream media.

 

[Callen]

1/6 is blown totally out of any sense of reasonable proportions by those left of center because of their use of 1/6 for political advantage, and others who only parrot what those people say and post, which includes the DNC political propagandist lamestream media.

You can deny and deflect from what we all saw all you want but you can't change the fact that the President and CiC refused to take action as he watched the rioters breach the Capitol. He knew that his VP and every elected federal Congess persons were inside with little protection and did nothing to protect them.

He sat for three hours watching and did nothing even though he had the power, opportunity and authority.......and did nothing. Apparently you are OK with that,
.

 

[Ouroboros]

You can deny and deflect from what we all saw all you want but you can't change the fact that the President and CiC refused to take action as he watched the rioters breach the Capitol. He knew that his VP and every elected federal Congess persons were inside with little protection and did nothing to protect them.

He sat for three hours watching and did nothing even though he had the power, opportunity and authority.......and did nothing. Apparently you are OK with that,
.

And apparently you choose to take the Jan 6 Select Committee at its word. Recently they have been shown to be liars.

Chairman Loudermilk Publishes Never-Before Released Anthony Ornato Transcribed Interview

U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration

cha.house.gov

 

[Callen]

And apparently you choose to take the Jan 6 Select Committee at its word. Recently they have been shown to be liars.

Chairman Loudermilk Publishes Never-Before Released Anthony Ornato Transcribed Interview

U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration

cha.house.gov

Didn't have to take anyone's word for it. We all saw it in real time. Trump did NOT call the NG to protect the Capitol that day as he saw the riots infod. It was Pence who convinced the Secretary of Defense to finally do so . Trump betrayed his oath of office and refused to protect and defend the Capitol. Instead he watched. Own the truth....own the facts....own the President who failed to act.

 

[Rich2018]

Ah, this is a cry for help....

No it's meaningless drivel from you.

You no good at verbs either? Or did you learn English from Bizarro?

More abuse from you over education....

....that interpretation is in YOUR mind.

In your opinion....generated by your own mind.

A catalog of CNN's faults is not germane to the thread.

But illuminating your prejudice against CNN
I wonder how you'd characterize Fox News' "catalog of faults" ?

And the only thing this could possibly prove is that Democrats of the fifties were as implicated as Republicans in whatever illegitimate banning occurred.

Nope, I think you'll find the the worst events of the anti-communist with hunt was at the hands of the Republicans:

The Communist party being banned
Communists denied the freedom of association
Communists literature/periodicals being banned
Congressional inquiries into "Un-American" Activities
The cultural blacklist

None of which happened in the UK Btw.

There's no backtracking because my first statement was speculative...

Now you're backtracking again:
First you say that Britain didn't have an McCarthy like anti-communist with-hunts....because it didn't suffer the same level of Soviet espionage
Then you say that the UK ***DID*** an McCarthy like anti-communist with-hunts - as highlighted by the utterings of a former member of the British government and a solitary MP.

...school yard psychology is the essence of your "neener neener, my side is utterly pure and your side is poopy"

Or:
Why are you punishing me...Johnny is just as bad...?"
"Republicans should not be blamed as the Democrats were just as bad....except they weren't. The worst results of the post WWII anti-communist with-hunts came at the hands of the Republicans.

Do you nurture even a slight recollection of the original topic of this thread?

Are you bragging that your level of nurturing is superior ?

Mad Libs often like to think of statements of fact as bragging.

Or mad conservatives delude themselves into thinking that what the brag about are indeed "statements of fact".

Read a newspaper.

Like Pravda right ?

I'm here to help you through your confusion.

Or you seek to sow confusion with your litany of lies, brags and bigotry.

 

[American]

Joe Biden administration policies on the economy, energy, international policy, the border, and covid have been rejected by the majority of the public. It has not required that illegal immigrants be tested or vaccinated against covid. But U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are dismissed if they do not get vaccinated. Millions of illegal immigrants are protected by sanctuary cities after illegally entering the United States.

 

[American]

Joe Biden did not seek to overthrow the US government. Eat your horse paste

You right, he's not seeking it, he's doing it.

 

[Ouroboros]

Didn't have to take anyone's word for it. We all saw it in real time. Trump did NOT call the NG to protect the Capitol that day as he saw the riots infod. It was Pence who convinced the Secretary of Defense to finally do so . Trump betrayed his oath of office and refused to protect and defend the Capitol. Instead he watched. Own the truth....own the facts....own the President who failed to act.