The United States(!) of A

Kinzinger and Cheney are Republicans so not just "Dems".
It is not a trial. They will come later.
Trump will get charged with obstructing the certification.
Others will also go on trial for that and other crimes.
Sypkan loves Donald.

"Kinzinger and Cheney are Republicans so not just "Dems"."

dude, two token never trumper republicans...

even better than "Dems"!

...for the cause...

c'mon you're smarter than that!

and, believe what you want...

but I really really do not want to see another 4 years of trump

I think we were so so incredibly lucky to make it through the last four...

That was a pretty epic rant. For someone who doesn’t give a shit, you certainly seem to give somewhat of a shit.

yeh I give a shit

about bullshit

But you still watch and quote Fox.

You do care, and that’s totally ok. You pick some strange hills to die on though.

"But you still watch and quote Fox."

...so 2015!

'the left' and its liberal press likes to 'believe' just because something appears on fox news it's bullshit...

when the last five years has proven the exact opposite to be true

I would be more than happy to be corrected if you can show anything in that vid that is actually bullshit

Fox as a bastion of unbiased truth…? That’s my issue. You’re so biased that you can’t even comprehend your own bias.

“dude, two token never trumper republicans..”

And, to quote you - that’s democracy at work. They’re elected officials. You belittle them as not ‘actually’ republicans? Same as Cheney, McCain real, because they don’t support the direction of the GOP under Trump and his ilk.

You’re such a hypocrite syppo. That’s actually my issue with your posts.

etarip wrote:

Fox as a bastion of unbiased truth…? That’s my issue. You’re so biased that you can’t even comprehend your own bias.

no it's not

but there opposition is even worse... as they unashamedly have entered the fox race to the bottom...

your cnn's, your nbc's, msnbc, npr etc...

I actually love npr, and listen to it nearly everyday... but geez, the slant they project!

and cnn... ffs if someone did a study on who presented more bias and spread more misinformation over the last five years, fox versus cnn - fark, i know who's won that challenge...

yet 'our' abc references them as though they are reputable news source or something...

shameful

etarip wrote:

“dude, two token never trumper republicans..”

And, to quote you - that’s democracy at work. They’re elected officials. You belittle them as not ‘actually’ republicans? Same as Cheney, McCain real, because they don’t support the direction of the GOP under Trump and his ilk.

You’re such a hypocrite syppo. That’s actually my issue with your posts.

omg!

says the guy that dismisses a whole swathe of the republican party!

I don't belittle them at all, just pointing out they are hardly representing anything trump side of the story...

quite the opposite actually - a woman scorned and at all that... cheney is more rabid and anti trump than half of the democrat party... hence being so valuable to the 'cause'

dude, if you haven't noticed, there's essentially 3 main parties in US atm... democrats, and two republican parties...

i don't support either republican wing

but I'm more than happy to watch anything unfold that challenges the legacies of the bush, cheney, reagan, neocon nutters...

and find it most interesting (and shameful) that the democrat party have sided with the neocon nutters...

geez, you can talk about the 'evil' of trump all you want...

but man... there's evil and then there's evil...

FWIW, I don’t have a TV and I don’t watch any of the channels online.

I definitely relate to your frustration with the media. Standards of journalistic rigour and integrity are at an all-time low. It beggars belief how much Australian media lifts stories, issues and attitudes verbatim from the US. Both sides.

As for representing Trump’s side of the story: whatever you think of the testimony provided in the Jan 6 HSC and the credibility of those giving it, they’re providing it under oath and there’s a degree of accountability associated with that. The reality is that DJT could offer his side on the stand whenever he wants. Instead he uses the media to try and discredit those testifying and does not offer an alternate explanation for those events. He can say whatever he wants in that forum. He’s unaccountable. And that’s how he likes it.

Do you personally believe in the stolen election narrative?

Truest thing ever:

You know how I know Trump wasn't on Ghislaine Maxwell's list? It wasn't leaked.

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) July 1, 2022

"Do you personally believe in the stolen election narrative?"

I don't know what to 'believe'

and I think it is most interesting how that question is framed... not just by you, but everybody...

when one could sinpky just ask...

do you personally think think the election was stolen?

but no, it's always about 'believe'

there's a phd in politics / psychology / sociology and the hierachy of belief and understanding right there...

and that works both ways

I’m 100% of the belief that the Democrats would try to steal the election if they could. Whether they did or not is not something I would have any idea about. It would not surprise me in the least if they had.

what I do know is, the US election system is notoriously unreliable and open to manipulation, with both sides capitalising on this unreliability in the past, ...when it suits...

and I know, the media suspiciously all fell in line with the same 'narrative' a day or so following the election... so so much so... it was just weird...

including fox!

where no questions or negotiation was to be entered into whatsoever, with them all parroting the same lines...

I find this most interesting, due to the above, but also due to last minute changes to the election process that left it wide open to manipulation because of corona, amongst other things...

as I have been saying, at a time with trust levels so low... and the changes to the system so widespread... I think the least 'the establishment' (for want of a better term) could have possibly done was to investigate various claims extensively, and confirm, beyond reasonable doubt, that the election was indeed legitimate...

I honestly cannot understand why they didn't do it in such divided times... if they are so confident it was...

I think they owed that to the public at a minimum amidst such upheavel

but they didn't... they went full trigger happy the other way....

just sowing more dischord and distrust

another decision that truly beggars belief

DudeSweetDudeSweet wrote:

I’m 100% of the belief that the Democrats would try to steal the election if they could. Whether they did or not is not something I would have any idea about. It would not surprise me in the least if they had.

well looking at their outright fabrications over the last five years...

and control over the media

Been watching a great documentary series by Oliver Stone. The Untold History of the United States. It’s of history of American Imperialism which largely explains the how we got to this point in world affairs.

Another one that is relevant is Ukraine Burning. Released in 2019, also by Oliver Stone.

Currently at home with the Rona.
Boba Fett and Oliver Stone doco’s. And some trip planning/booked. Apart from a persistent cough a good week.

That’s a different question Syppo. There’s a narrative around the stolen election. Dead people, corrupted machines, lost ballot boxes. Do you believe it? There’s absolutely no proof of any of it. Been comprehensively debunked. By GOP state legislatures / electoral colleges no less.

You (and Blowie) believe that the Dems ‘would’ if they ‘could’ steal the election. Do you apply this belief to the GOP as well?

Why is the onus of proof on the ‘establishment’ proving that the election WASN’T ‘stolen’?

When the whole question is not based on fact, but on unfounded, hyperbolic accusations (since debunked)

That’s one of the most ridiculous things you’ve posted tbh.

Stolen is a too strong term to use, but there was still a lot of forces ensuring things went the way they did, but as incompetent as Biden is, its probably a good thing Trump didn't get reelected, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

There’s another example….

indo-dreaming wrote:

Stolen is a too strong term to use, but there was still a lot of forces ensuring things went the way they did, but as incompetent as Biden is, its probably a good thing Trump didn't get reelected, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Watch Ukraine Burning.

etarip wrote:

That’s a different question Syppo. There’s a narrative around the stolen election. Dead people, corrupted machines, lost ballot boxes. Do you believe it? There’s absolutely no proof of any of it. Been comprehensively debunked. By GOP state legislatures / electoral colleges no less.

You (and Blowie) believe that the Dems ‘would’ if they ‘could’ steal the election. Do you apply this belief to the GOP as well?

Of course the Republicans would do the same thing. There’s a trillion dollar controlling interest of the US imperial machine at stake. It’s the most powerful and profitable cabal (mafia!) humanity has ever known. These people will do anything to be the ones wielding the power.

Didn’t One of the Bush’s basically steal the election off Al Gore or someone back in the day?

We are talking about a nation that invaded the innocent nation of Iraq under false pretences just to make money. It didn’t matter to them that hundreds of thousands of innocent people were killed and their civilisation destroyed in the process. But we’re supposed to believe it’s all a genteel, above-board process to decide who gets to act as Face of The Empire for enough years to make themselves rich beyond comprehension?

I’m sure everyone forgets their evil , greedy ways and ugly ambition because they’re are so besotted with the romantic notion of pure democracy…..lol

sheeesh

just when i thougt we'd found a way to be civil... you drop that one...

I don't believe the more hyperbolic claims

but I have no doubt some in power could have manipulated the system, the mail in system in particular

I honestly cannot believe you think it is beyond the democrats and the various interests opposing trump to do this

seriously, the fbi were in on amplifying clinton's steele dossier, they must have known the whole thing was fake, the pee tapes... the russian loans... the computers... 'kompromat' in general..

they were also in on burying the hunter laptop story...

yet you have this naivete and undying faith around how far these forces would not go re. the election process...

cute

soggydog wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

Stolen is a too strong term to use, but there was still a lot of forces ensuring things went the way they did, but as incompetent as Biden is, its probably a good thing Trump didn't get reelected, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Watch Ukraine Burning.

No they say it wouldn't happen at all, because Trump is way too unpredictable in how he would react, hence Putin didn't invade Ukraine under Trump and waited for a change of power.

The last thing Trump would have wanted is to look weak, he could have started world war 3 by now by supporting Ukraine by air or he might have not gotten invloved at all and made some excuse even supported Russia nobody really knows.

Ironically that unpredictable aspect prevented Putin from invading Ukraine when Trump was in, while Biden is much more predictable and seen as weak, but in a way thats good for us as he isnt going to start world war 3.

Its like picking a fight, its easy to pick a fight with someone that you know won't react or isn't going to pull a knife on you etc. but you would never pick a fight with someone who doesn't care for consequences and would even stab you with no second thoughts.

I think the electoral process is manipulated. And all sides do it.

But it generally happens in much more prosaic ways. Gerrymandering, access to polling stations, voter regulation changes.

It’s the unheralded benefit of our AEC.

indo-dreaming wrote:

soggydog wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

Stolen is a too strong term to use, but there was still a lot of forces ensuring things went the way they did, but as incompetent as Biden is, its probably a good thing Trump didn't get reelected, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Watch Ukraine Burning.

No they say it wouldn't happen at all, because Trump is way too unpredictable in how he would react, hence Putin didn't invade Ukraine under Trump and waited for a change of power.

The last thing Trump would have wanted is to look weak, he could have started world war 3 by now by supporting Ukraine by air or he might have not gotten invloved at all and made some excuse even supported Russia nobody really knows.

Ironically that unpredictable aspect prevented Putin from invading Ukraine when Trump was in, while Biden is much more predictable and seen as weak, but in a way thats good for us as he isnt going to start world war 3.

Its like picking a fight, its easy to pick a fight with someone that you know won't react or isn't going to pull a knife on you etc. but you would never pick a fight with someone who doesn't care for consequences and would even stab you with no second thoughts.

Have you watched it, interviews with Putin and the ousted Ukraine President. In depth investigation prior to the Russia invasion post Made(?) protests/massacre.

soggydog wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

soggydog wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

Stolen is a too strong term to use, but there was still a lot of forces ensuring things went the way they did, but as incompetent as Biden is, its probably a good thing Trump didn't get reelected, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Watch Ukraine Burning.

No they say it wouldn't happen at all, because Trump is way too unpredictable in how he would react, hence Putin didn't invade Ukraine under Trump and waited for a change of power.

The last thing Trump would have wanted is to look weak, he could have started world war 3 by now by supporting Ukraine by air or he might have not gotten invloved at all and made some excuse even supported Russia nobody really knows.

Ironically that unpredictable aspect prevented Putin from invading Ukraine when Trump was in, while Biden is much more predictable and seen as weak, but in a way thats good for us as he isnt going to start world war 3.

Its like picking a fight, its easy to pick a fight with someone that you know won't react or isn't going to pull a knife on you etc. but you would never pick a fight with someone who doesn't care for consequences and would even stab you with no second thoughts.

Have you watched it, interviews with Putin and the ousted Ukraine President. In depth investigation prior to the Russia invasion post Made(?) protests/massacre.

It also covers the Biden’s interest in Ukraine natural gas, so I think that puts paid to your assertion that Biden is weak.

Worth a watch for a broader insight. I’ve got a lot of admiration for Oliver Stone as a Historian and Documentarian.

indo-dreaming wrote:

, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Which experts Indo? Got any sources for it?

I’ve seen partisan punditry espousing that, but not a lot of expert analysis.

(FWIW, I think foreign policy was Biden’s biggest flaw as VP. Still not convinced that he’s nailing that element as President)

"FWIW, I think foreign policy was Biden’s biggest flaw as VP. Still not convinced that he’s nailing that element as President) "
Well they predicted Ukraine when even Zelensky didn't believe Putin would do it, and they were ready. Put NATO back together bigger than ever after Trump tried to destroy it.
Had Trump been in power neither of those things would have happened, Zelensky, and his family and Government would be dead now and a Russian puppet would be running Ukraine. Trump would have let Ukraine suffer for not backing his bullshit on Biden during the election, and left NATO at risk of further Russian expansion. Biden is doing ok.

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/video/2022/03/ukraine-on-fire-an-oliver-st...

Check this out for a bit of pre conflict context

adam12 wrote:

"FWIW, I think foreign policy was Biden’s biggest flaw as VP. Still not convinced that he’s nailing that element as President) "
Well they predicted Ukraine when even Zelensky didn't believe Putin would do it, and they were ready. Put NATO back together bigger than ever after Trump tried to destroy it.
Had Trump been in power neither of those things would have happened, Zelensky, and his family and Government would be dead now and a Russian puppet would be running Ukraine. Trump would have let Ukraine suffer for not backing his bullshit on Biden during the election, and left NATO at risk of further Russian expansion. Biden is doing ok.

You’re right. It’s chalk and cheese between the last administration and this one. I hope Biden learned from his VP mistakes, particularly Iraq c2011. He’s not failing, but I’m not giving him an A either.

Pelosi picked 8 members of the cmte. 7 Democrats and 1 Republican. McCarthy had 5 picks. 2 of his picks are individuals who may well be indicted in the future for their participation. Having those two members would've destroyed the integrity of the investigation. Ya don't don't let the potential criminals participate in the investigation. So, she refused those two. Told McCarthy he could find 2 different ones to get his 5. His response was to pull all of his picks. He played a game of political chicken and lost. Nearly all of the witnesses have come from Trump's orbit. His people. His family. The people who most want to defend Trump, and were there and have info have plead the 5th. They have had their chance and have decided to throw it away. Now, Trump is calling it a "witch hunt" and saying basically what Sypkan has been saying here. He could've participated in it and told his side. He can now. But, he prefers to talk through friendly media, where he can control the info/narrative. I took Critical Thinking in high school, and again in college. I need none of those skills to see all this for what it is. Innocent people don't plead the 5th. Innocent people don't don't cry witch hunt. Innocent people don't ask for pardons. I would ask some people to pull their heads outta asses (both here and my orbit), but they would do some version of putting their hands on their ears and screaming "la, la, la." Feverish people aren't reasonable people. And zealots don't seek truth. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

sypkan wrote:

sheeesh

just when i thougt we'd found a way to be civil... you drop that one...

I don't believe the more hyperbolic claims

but I have no doubt some in power could have manipulated the system, the mail in system in particular

I honestly cannot believe you think it is beyond the democrats and the various interests opposing trump to do this

seriously, the fbi were in on amplifying clinton's steele dossier, they must have known the whole thing was fake, the pee tapes... the russian loans... the computers... 'kompromat' in general..

they were also in on burying the hunter laptop story...

yet you have this naivete and undying faith around how far these forces would not go re. the election process...

cute

You don't believe the more hyperbolic claims? Yet here you are spouting nonsense about how Nancy Pelosi needs to answer 'questions' about the national guard response.

She doesn't have the power to control the national guard response, if you actually looked into some of the things you believe, this would quickly be revealed to you.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-national-guard-capitol/

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jun/13/sean-hannity/no-eviden...

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-235651652542

Bit rich for you to spout off about narratives, naivete and undying faith when you swallow this conspiracy theorist nonsense. Given how much you harp on about narratives media manipulation etc, you should be pretty embarrassed by how easily you are led astray. I guess you are just that desperate for these hearings to be ineffectual, for your narrative to be sustained.

Also, civility requires some acceptance of a common reality, it's not really possible when you're running on alternative facts.

I’m going to go back to what I said. I think it was civil - and squarely aimed at what you said, not who you are:

You wrote (in part):
“I think the least 'the establishment' (for want of a better term) could have possibly done was to investigate various claims extensively, and confirm, beyond reasonable doubt, that the election was indeed legitimate...“

To which I replied:
“ Why is the onus of proof on the ‘establishment’ proving that the election WASN’T ‘stolen’?
When the whole question is not based on fact, but on unfounded, hyperbolic accusations (since debunked)
That’s one of the most ridiculous things you’ve posted tbh.”

Didn’t mean to be discourteous or uncivil. I still think it’s a ridiculous proposition, especially when the claim is largely based on Trump’s butthurtedness and soundly rejected across the board.

I’ve certainly got no beef with you personally, and I’m sure over a beer we’d have a great yarn. That’s honestly how i feel about most people on this forum. You’re interested and engaged. I don’t agree with some of your points / perspectives but you don’t usually play the man either.

etarip wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

, although a lot of experts suggest Ukraine wouldn't have happened under Trump

I guess we will never know.

Which experts Indo? Got any sources for it?

I’ve seen partisan punditry espousing that, but not a lot of expert analysis.

(FWIW, I think foreign policy was Biden’s biggest flaw as VP. Still not convinced that he’s nailing that element as President)

It was mentioned in articles and podcast around the time it all started, and not just by people with a recent interest in it all, one of the best podcast/interviews was on triggernentry podcast (there was a few though)

Of course these days you always get oposing views on anything from so called expert's especially as some people like to paint Trump as always bad no matter what, you see that here too.

End of the day we don't know what would have happened if Trump was reelected, but we do know it didnt happen under Trump but did under Biden.

People can over analysis things but really much of it is basic and simple common sense, both Trump and Putin are loose and unpredictable and would do anything to avoid being made to look weak they are cut from the same cloth and hence kind of respected each others unpredictable nature and ironically it kept peace for a while.

Meanwhile for Putin, Biden was a complete gift a very predictable weak old bumbling man.

What's more of a surprise is that Putin didn't act sooner.

a few people getting bees in bonnet here...

just to be clear, I started this little conversation about the secret service 'story', ...where trump is alleged to have lunged at the steering wheel of the 'limo' driver, and attacked a secret service guy

aside from the physicalities of the story not adding up... ie. trump actually being in an SUV; do you really believe he lunged at the steering wheel from the back back presidential seat of whatever vehicle?; do you really think he put his hands at the throat of a secret service dude?; etc...

the person who allegedly 'told' this story, denies it...

and secret service dudes have supposedly denied it happened too...

now, I wouldn't have taken such issue with this story if it was presented by media with the usual careful language qualifiers such as '...it is alleged...'

...but it wasn't... it was presented with a breathless enthusiasm off the charts as fact, without even a hint of balance or qualifier... including by 'our abc'...

and still is to this moment... when other sources are saying the substance of the story evaporated within 24 hours...

reeks of misinformation 101 to me...

I guess we will see

or not...

against my better judgement I'll engage wax24... who 'went low' staight off the bat...

some points;

the whole show trial is framed around a supposed organised coup by trump and co.

i find this hard to believe from the footage of the day, where the agglomoration of various nutty groups appeared if they literally couldn't believe their luck when they actually breached the capitol...

inside the capitol, it resembled a tour group, as participants took selfies, sought souvineers, and walked around aimlessly... so so aimlessly...

if it was an orgsnised 'coup de tat' ...it was a very very very poorly organised one!!

...from trump, a guy who - for whatever his faults - has proven he really can at least organise a root in a brothel...

"...Pelosi picked 8 members of the cmte. 7 Democrats and 1 Republican. McCarthy had 5 picks. 2 of his picks are individuals who may well be indicted in the future for their participation. Having those two members would've destroyed the integrity of the investigation. Ya don't don't let the potential criminals participate in the investigation. So, she refused those two. Told McCarthy he could find 2 different ones to get his 5. His response was to pull all of his picks. He played a game of political chicken and lost..."

this sounded quite reasonable... and I agreed for a minute... then my non trained critical thinking skills kicked in...

this assumes their was an organised coup... making theso called 'criminals' guilty before the trial is even held... which we don't tend to do... hopefully!

granted mccarthy played chicken and lost... but it seems neither side has played this wisely or fairly... where i read even an npr article conceding it is a bit of an own goal for the pelosi team to bar the republicans...

"...Nearly all of the witnesses have come from Trump's orbit. His people. His family. The people who most want to defend Trump, and were there and have info have plead the 5th. They have had their chance and have decided to throw it away. Now, Trump is calling it a "witch hunt" and saying basically what Sypkan has been saying here. He could've participated in it and told his side. He can now. But, he prefers to talk through friendly media, where he can control the info/narrative. I took Critical Thinking in high school, and again in college. I need none of those skills to see all this for what it is. Innocent people don't plead the 5th. Innocent people don't don't cry witch hunt. Innocent people don't ask for pardons
..."

mate, I don't blame any of them for not cooperating... the russia russia russia stuff... the 'collusion' stuff...the impeachment 1 and 11...have all come up pretty short... the russia stuff panned out to be most definitely a witch hunt...

tell me, if some one had been fabricating allegations against you for five years ...allegations that proved it was actually the other side guilty of unscrupulous behaviour when brought before the 'justice' system... would you cooperate on their ump-teenth attenpt?

impeachment 1 and 11...

there may well have been something there... but even with the whole state / political / intelligence apparatus working to convict him... they came up short...

now, democrats like to present this as some kind of win... saying stuff like.. '...a dispicable president that has been impeached twice... blah blah blah...'

well, Im sure from their 'perspective' this means something... but for a non partisan person, this generally means a failed imprachment... which equals failure... which doesn't mean innocent... but most certainly doesn't mean guilty...

democrats seem totally hung up on - and addicted to - anything at all they percieve as doing political damage to trump... anything at all! ...no matter how questionable..

and it seems this show trial is just another trip down that road

maybe they wholeheatedly believe it was a fully organised coup... and is all legit. ...as many did with the russia stuff (well their none the wiser minions anyway...) ...ffs, I believed half the russia stuff... and expected him to go down...

but he didn't...

it largely, all just turned out to be fabricated... political smear... bullshit basically...

but no doubt clinton inc. knew they could get political mileage out of it, regardless of outcome...

this little show trial just reeks of the same old play book... hype, fabrication, and smear... leveraging trump's reputation, language, and loose behaviour for all its worth... for as long as possible...

yeh there's definitely rogue, rude, and reprehensible behaviour there... but is it actually what the democrats are presenting?

we will see...

"...I would ask some people to pull their heads outta asses (both here and my orbit), but they would do some version of putting their hands on their ears and screaming "la, la, la." Feverish people aren't reasonable people. And zealots don't seek truth. And the wheels on the bus go round and round..."

'feverish...' 'zealots...'

...right back at ya champ!

JQ wrote:

sypkan wrote:

sheeesh

just when i thougt we'd found a way to be civil... you drop that one...

I don't believe the more hyperbolic claims

but I have no doubt some in power could have manipulated the system, the mail in system in particular

I honestly cannot believe you think it is beyond the democrats and the various interests opposing trump to do this

seriously, the fbi were in on amplifying clinton's steele dossier, they must have known the whole thing was fake, the pee tapes... the russian loans... the computers... 'kompromat' in general..

they were also in on burying the hunter laptop story...

yet you have this naivete and undying faith around how far these forces would not go re. the election process...

cute

You don't believe the more hyperbolic claims? Yet here you are spouting nonsense about how Nancy Pelosi needs to answer 'questions' about the national guard response.

She doesn't have the power to control the national guard response, if you actually looked into some of the things you believe, this would quickly be revealed to you.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-national-guard-capitol/

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jun/13/sean-hannity/no-eviden...

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-235651652542

Bit rich for you to spout off about narratives, naivete and undying faith when you swallow this conspiracy theorist nonsense. Given how much you harp on about narratives media manipulation etc, you should be pretty embarrassed by how easily you are led astray. I guess you are just that desperate for these hearings to be ineffectual, for your narrative to be sustained.

Also, civility requires some acceptance of a common reality, it's not really possible when you're running on alternative facts.

mate, I'd say the biggest question from that day is, why was the capitol so under prepared and easily overcome?

this is especially so considering the machine acknowledges they had extensive intelligence warning them of trouble...

fuck, any idiot would have bolsteted security that day if it was their responsibility

it doesn't have to be about 'conspiracy'

...but morons just keep a plugging away at this well worn out desperate catch all..

it could be just a result of break down of communication and chain of command due to a dysfuntional government situation...

which is pretty much what your own links suggest - if you could put away the prejudice, judgement and vitriol for a moment...

even with such a dysfuntional government situation... it beggars belief that no one prepared for the oh so obvious onslaught...

it also beggars belief that all these supposed 'fact checkers' cannot narrow down who was responsible for such an outrageous oversight

still!!!

And there's Sypkan. Putting his hands on on his ears and screaming "la, la, la." As i had forecast. Boring.

And, BTW... count how many times you have posted on this or any thread. Pick any timeframe. Then, count mine. "Right back at ya, champ," you said. Completely unaware of yourself. Keep screaming "la, la, la," because i like where it gets you. And you don't matter to me.

nah, you're pretty good etarip

I was trying to inject a little humour, as we were going so well... then you got a little snide... (from my perspective)

my point was the onus is on the establishment, because we were in such 'unprecednted' waters...

trump generally

corona virus

mail in votes

dubious media coverage

coming off the back of clinton questioning the legitimacy of the last election

yet this run, no such questioning was tolerated whatsoever...

all comes across as very biased and hypocrtical

very very much so, for anyone who doesn't share your perspective

people don't like hypocrisy!!

(even if they don't necessarily share the view of the seemingly unfairly treated)

I know posting the federalist won't win me any cred.

but Im a big believer in you must at least give your opponents a run - a coutesy totally lost in the modern age...

this article makes some good points about what is 'in' and what is 'out'

what (who and what) is targeted... what is up for discussion... and what is not...

the framing of the whole thing

ie. an organised 'coup' about 'election fraud' and 'the big lie'

and what is deemed irrelevant...

like how the hell the capitol wasn't prepared for what was so bloody obvious!

'fraud' is such a strong and exclusionary term... and there's no doubt plenty of observers in the middle who have questions, without buying into the more fanciful arguments from either side...

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/01/heres-what-the-jan-6-show-trials-ar...

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/01/the-j6-show-trial-is-lying-about-el...

micromangement at its best

wax24 wrote:

And there's Sypkan. Putting his hands on on his ears and screaming "la, la, la." As i had forecast. Boring.

right back at ya again...

champ

Such a great comeback. Deserved a double dip. Next time, spice it up a bit, like, "I know you are, but what am I?" Maybe after you've had your graham crackers, milk, and nap.

dude, at least i engaged in your comment...

you're just throwing bombs

but carry on... whatever floats your boat

the butthurtedness is palpable

Wait
………..

Wait - (extra filler content.)

…….::

Is butthurt the new sandy vagina?

(Multiple edits to try and keep this off the front page. Sorry TB)

You can thank me later.